Reality versus Past False Promises 

The Birth of A New Financial Services Industry

By Marc Gauvin

Copyright ©22/5/2014

Reproduction expressly granted provided  attribution is given and original link is provided.

Michel Bauwens said something very valuable on a thread at the P2P facebook page, he set the problem of the current money system in terms of "those who still (emphasis added) have some savings,  want something that is more than just a measure of value."  The key points being "stlll have",  "want more than a measure of value".  He also said that  "barring a revolution it (money as a measure only) is a utopia". 

I think that depending on how one defines revolution we could say anyone proposing important changes to money are proposing a revolution.  And as for still having,  the only solution is to see how we can each benefit from a solution to the current mayhem.   Today's "savings" and in the context of the current money paradigm,  are losing value as we speak.  So the quest¡on is how do we preserve our present value? 

I think speculation is the only answer but speculation on how we spend our energy and creativity towards enabling the creation of real value or wealth not on how to manipulate artificial representations of real value as is the case in the current failed paradigm?   It all boils down to a change in money the de facto universal standard for value representation, with the consequence of a new and wiser distribution of wealth and resources and a liberation of everyone's potential to do things for themselves and others,  which the current paradigm is suppressing.

What we are really doing when we endeavour to create a new system of value representation, is we are speculating that the resources we spend on building a new money system is going to bring us stable returns directly or indirectly.  What will kill us,  is if we let the false promises of our current relationship with the current paradigm govern our behaviour such that we become paralysed by it like a snake's prey.  

In this regard, if logic dictates that stable representation of value is what is required and that seems indisputable, we must resist past promises for multiplying value for us,  instead we must concentrate our energies in achieving a sure footing for everyone.   We need to buy time for ourselves and stability does just that, it buys us all more time to catch our breath, trust one another and continue creating value.

What if the requirements for stability dictate that money's function as a measure must subordinate all other functions money could perform if indeed those really exist beyond a commonly assumed illusion?

Remember, a stable unit will preserve records of value so in that sense all retain a means of "saving" the value of past wealth in contrast with today's paradigm where the value of savings are indisputably unstable because the unit value can be eroded.  So either way,  whether savings is simply a record of past value or it is an active investment, the very instability of the current system provides no sure foothold for anyone.   I think that we don't have the option to chose the requirements for stability I think we have to come to grips with whether we really want it or not and go for it.

The next question is why not build a new industry around providing such a solution? Why not teach investors the science of stability in money and what it means for the future? Why not show people investors included,  how they can use science to protect themselves from the ravages of the current system? Why not build a movement that reasons rather than condemns, assures rather than threatens and includes rather than marginalises. Frankly, I see no better investment given our current shared circumstances and I don't see any more rational out for the 1% either,  so why would they not want to invest in this too? What do they have to lose?  They can't lose control because they don't have it, Fukushima and other nuclear waste pile up,  massive unrest across the planet,  bubble after bubble are clear examples of a complete lack out of humanity's control.  So maybe they will invest after all in real control one founded in real science,  if we show them a stable path in which they are not threatened and that preserves their value and provides them a path to migrate to better options.

All this is possible if we submit to the science rather than to competing dogma,  I think that our future survival will be marked by our ability to submit to reason rather than to arbitrary belief systems.


Additional information