There is practical stuff about. Everything I've looked at has the same problems we might find in an IPO prospectus' positive spin. Microfinance is the classic - looks good, seems practical and yet probably has overall negative effects and alarming corruption - http://wer.worldeconomicsassociation.org/papers/microfinance-and-the-illusion-of-development-from-hubris-to-nemesis-in-thirty-years/
Andrew has just emailed me to say 'bickering' has prevented him posting something on Bitcoin. Combinations of virtual currencies (I know of more than 80) and crowd sourcing have their temptations - though the recent South Park episode 'Go Fund Yourself' should not be ignored. We've had timebanks and local economic transfer schemes (LETS) - some quite big like the Swiss Wir - and communes of one kind or another. The main issue is our ignorance on money - perhaps even our idea of investment and interest. Nothing seems safe - my Cooperative Bank being "ethically run" by a drug-crazed, prostitute-using Methodist with no relevant qualifications. I'll try to explain, but it's chocolate biscuit comfort time here. On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:35:23 AM UTC, Molly wrote: > > You mentioned previously, Neil that there are answers. I took it to mean > alternate economies for the globe. I would love to be able to do things > differently and don't see a place to invest or even put money where it > isn't grabbed (negative interest coming soon to a theater near you.) What > are the alternatives available to an average schmo like me? > > On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 9:34:20 AM UTC-5, archytas wrote: >> >> Enigmatic can mean any of mysterious, puzzling, hard to understand, >> mystifying, inexplicable, baffling, perplexing, bewildering, confusing, >> impenetrable, inscrutable, incomprehensible, unexplainable, unfathomable, >> indecipherable, Delphic, oracular; ambiguous, equivocal, paradoxical, >> sibylline, unaccountable, insoluble, obscure, elliptical, oblique; arcane, >> abstruse, recondite, secret, esoteric, occult, cryptic; informal - as clear >> as mud >> >> The enigmatic is seen by some as rude, None of this is how I think of >> Gabby, though she can touch a few bases. Mutual understanding is not a bad >> context - though a long way from nodding donkey consensus. >> >> On Tuesday, 4 November 2014 14:24:59 UTC, archytas wrote: >>> >>> Context is difficult with you Gabby, partly on enigmatic grounds (I mean >>> the term nicely) on your expression. I'm broadly probing the >>> legitimation crisis. We have reached a point when politicians promising >>> change need to be greeted with shouts of 'apple juice'. We lack public >>> context on economic matters even though technology could give us an >>> economics we could use as we use washing machines or drive cars. Instead >>> of this we have perverse resource allocation and devolved budgets to ration >>> services that revictimise victims through the false promise of help, which >>> is really going to be the denial of the complaint and exposure of >>> complainants to more harm. Meanwhile the problems grow under the pretence >>> we are dealing with them. We might learn about data and evidence in an >>> examination of this. We don't seem prepared to do so. >>> >>> On Tuesday, 4 November 2014 06:07:33 UTC, Gabby wrote: >>>> >>>> Ah ja? I'm not so sure. >>>> Am 04.11.2014 01:49 schrieb "archytas" <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Needless to say. >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, November 3, 2014 9:18:32 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Again your interpretation. I meant to have politely replied: What is >>>>>> your context? >>>>>> >>>>>> 2014-11-03 20:41 GMT+01:00 archytas <[email protected]>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Gabby makes some important points - seem to remember the 81 paper >>>>>>> but there were many, Dictionaries don't really help here - nor the >>>>>>> hermeneutics of 'finding the original copy' - German sin is exemplified >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> the Jewish Numbers 31 and so on across genocides and the concentration >>>>>>> camp >>>>>>> as a business tactic in such as 'red rubber'. Primitive societies tell >>>>>>> us >>>>>>> their wars are based on revenge - though they always involve resource >>>>>>> grabs >>>>>>> (land, hunting, women, children). We seem to have merely >>>>>>> managerialised >>>>>>> this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The demand for social services and welfare is much greater than we >>>>>>> admit, extending into such issues as why we have been so stupid to >>>>>>> expand >>>>>>> the human population in tripling it in my lifetime, global warming, >>>>>>> pollution and the crass failures of "education". One might think one >>>>>>> could >>>>>>> at least focus on 'the abuse next door' - but I have to say when this >>>>>>> came >>>>>>> along in my life Sue and I failed and found the agencies and >>>>>>> politicians >>>>>>> much worse than useless. The ultimate standard of morality would have >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> to shoot the parents and do the time - had one been able to rely on the >>>>>>> agencies looking after the kids rather than doing a worse job. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The resource issues are not insurmountable though they are within >>>>>>> our stupid economic system. Even to talk of this is more or less >>>>>>> heresy - >>>>>>> and look what we prefer to do - speak of young kids preferring a >>>>>>> 'prostitute lifestyle' and hear politicians talking about the few cases >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> which abused children hit the care jackpot. The ages of consent across >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> West were often created in response to child prostitution. The first >>>>>>> law >>>>>>> of innocents I know of comes from Dark Age Scotland and I am by no >>>>>>> means >>>>>>> sure what the improvements since have been. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The specific social services resource issue was discussed in the >>>>>>> 1950's in terms of concentric circles - one could only focus on a small >>>>>>> number of the worst cases in a much wider circle of need. Only 10% of >>>>>>> kids >>>>>>> killed by parents in the UK are actually known to social services in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> sense of being subject to a care order. The costs of admitting a >>>>>>> problem >>>>>>> soon spiral and following the money one soon realises little actually >>>>>>> gets >>>>>>> spent on the kids. Gabby raises the issue that it is cruel to promise >>>>>>> solution when we have no intent of funding what's needed. In terms of >>>>>>> sufficient numbers of people to do most of what is needed there is no >>>>>>> problem - we just create a system which prevents money-resourcing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have, of course, pumped trillions into subsidy of manufacturing >>>>>>> and banks over the years - these areas supposedly thrusting >>>>>>> self-reliant >>>>>>> genius competitors - and very little into what we call welfare - we >>>>>>> 'police' Afghanistan and Iraq making things much worse but do almost >>>>>>> nothing for our own victims. There are answers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 8:46:36 PM UTC, Molly wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I befriended one of the LaCasa employees that worked with children >>>>>>>> in groups and took disclosures. She eventually became a police >>>>>>>> officer, >>>>>>>> hoping it would be less stressful. I think it probably was.If the >>>>>>>> network >>>>>>>> is large enough, no one burns out. Trouble is, it is rarely large >>>>>>>> enough. >>>>>>>> I think people have the need to look away from this problem more than >>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>> other. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 2:59:57 PM UTC-5, Allan Heretic wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ah, pedophiles they have been in the news including one for >>>>>>>>> soliciting an underage computer image. Personally I am glad to see >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> aggressive prosecution, I am very proud of the enforcement effort. >>>>>>>>> I wish I could say it would an honor to be part of the team thing >>>>>>>>> on pedophile but truth is I think it would destroy me. I do give them >>>>>>>>> my >>>>>>>>> full support, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: Molly <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> Sent: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 8:26 PM >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Who can we tell? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *It is important to agree on terms when conversing. This from the >>>>>>>>> Free Dictionary:* >>>>>>>>> *em·power·ment** n.* >>>>>>>>> *Usage Note: *Although it is a contemporary buzzword, the word >>>>>>>>> *empower* is not new, having arisen in the mid-17th century with >>>>>>>>> thelegalistic meaning "to invest with authority, authorize." >>>>>>>>> Shortly thereafter it began to be used with an infinitive in a >>>>>>>>> more general waymeaning "to enable or permit." Both of these uses >>>>>>>>> survive today but have been overpowered by the word's use in >>>>>>>>> politics and poppsychology. Its modern use originated in the civil >>>>>>>>> rights movement, which sought political *empowerment* for its >>>>>>>>> followers. The wordwas then taken up by the women's movement, and >>>>>>>>> its appeal has not flagged. Since people of all political pers >>>>>>>>> uasions have a need fora word that makes their constituents feel >>>>>>>>> that they are or are about to become more in control of their >>>>>>>>> destinies, *empower* has been adopted by conservatives as well as >>>>>>>>> social reformers. It has even migrated out of the political arena >>>>>>>>> into other fields. · The UsagePanel has some misgivings about this >>>>>>>>> recent broadening of usage. For the Panelists, the acceptability >>>>>>>>> of the verb *empower* depends on the context. Eighty percent ap >>>>>>>>> prove of the example *We want to empower ordinary citizens.* But >>>>>>>>> in contexts that are not political the Panel is markedly less >>>>>>>>> enthusiastic. The sentence >>>>>>>>> *Hunger and greed and then sexual zeal are felt by some to be stages >>>>>>>>> of experiencethat empower the individual* >>>>>>>>> garners approval from only 33 percent of the Panelists. The Panel >>>>>>>>> may frown on this kind of psychological empowering because it r >>>>>>>>> esonates of the self-help movement, which is notorious for trendy >>>>>>>>> coinages. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've never been interested in talking politics, and although I've >>>>>>>>> had occasion to work with some, never really affiliated with any >>>>>>>>> party. I >>>>>>>>> will leave any tendency to interpret what I say as an affiliation >>>>>>>>> with a >>>>>>>>> political party up to you. I really don't have one. I will be >>>>>>>>> excited to >>>>>>>>> see Dave Bing next week when he comes to my place of employment. for >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> photo shoot, the Democrat who restored integrity to the office of >>>>>>>>> Mayor of >>>>>>>>> Detroit. He took a lot of heat and it took guts to devout the years >>>>>>>>> of his >>>>>>>>> life that he did to turning the city around like a freighter on the >>>>>>>>> river. >>>>>>>>> Like skin color, religion or citizenship, I don't don't hold many >>>>>>>>> preconceived notions to a persons political persuasion when relating >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> them, so really can't speak to your comment about republicans and >>>>>>>>> democrats. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nice to know pedophiles are prosecuted somewhere. >>>>>>>>> Congratulations! A system working! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 1:28:13 PM UTC-5, Gabby wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The big picture, that you draw, is very much a U.S. American >>>>>>>>>> Republican's view. I know quite a number of people whose >>>>>>>>>> aggressivenes gets >>>>>>>>>> triggerd by this deliberate choice of imagery. (I'm sure the relief >>>>>>>>>> barking >>>>>>>>>> will set in later) >>>>>>>>>> Let's see if we can find a common ground for the word >>>>>>>>>> "empowerment". The root is English, that's correct, but the modern >>>>>>>>>> popularity and usage goes back to the American Julian Rappaport: In >>>>>>>>>> praise >>>>>>>>>> of paradox. A social policy of empowerment over prevention, in: >>>>>>>>>> American >>>>>>>>>> Journal of Community Psychology, 9/1981, 1-25 (13), saying: „Having >>>>>>>>>> rights >>>>>>>>>> but no resources and no services available is a cruel joke.“ I think >>>>>>>>>> we can >>>>>>>>>> all agree if we don't take a closer look at our rights, but assume >>>>>>>>>> we have >>>>>>>>>> them. >>>>>>>>>> As for moving, if you cannot protect innocent children - this >>>>>>>>>> would still be a taboo in our German context, even if we wanted to >>>>>>>>>> do the >>>>>>>>>> same. We have left innocent Jews to the apparatus, we have no excuse >>>>>>>>>> left. >>>>>>>>>> It is the alledged pedophiles who have to be protected in our >>>>>>>>>> communities, >>>>>>>>>> or they have to move elsewhere, no laws and law enforcement could do >>>>>>>>>> something about that. >>>>>>>>>> But you know what, I believe your call for a kid's survival >>>>>>>>>> training is more of an anti-Democrat, Republican demagogy than a >>>>>>>>>> real call! >>>>>>>>>> :) Am I right? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in >>>>>>> the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>>>>>> topic/minds-eye/QYatNwqDgp8/unsubscribe. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>>>>> [email protected]. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/QYatNwqDgp8/unsubscribe. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>>> [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
