NOW... much smarter than NWO (Last Update: 27th December 2012)

New section Added (Examples)

"The definition of insanity
is doing the same thing over and over again
and expecting different results."
Albert Einstein
Well I hope you all had a Merry Christmas and are preparing for the New Year festivities. Whilst trawling through some old bits n pieces I came up with my first real attempt at explaining NOW. A lot of this site is based on what was written 11 months to the day and in the near future I hope to rewrite much of the site content. It will be along the same lines, but hopefully with more revolving and up to date content. I'm looking forwards to viewing the issues of "today" through the eyes of NOW, real world application if you like. Anyway, 11 months ago:

Albert Einstein once said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". 1. Money is plucked out of thin air. It does not grow on trees. It is manufactured. It does not need form i.e. paper or gold etc... Its creation is authorised by some body somewhere. We didn't just find a stash of money and start passing it out. Currently we use the fractional reserve banking system to justify the creation of money. Make no mistake though, money is plucked out of thin air.

2. The planet has a finite amount of resource. These resources don't cost anything unless some body somewhere says that they do... aaaand they have decided that they shouldn't be free! Therefore even though the resources are there to be used, if you don't have the money, you can't use them.

This means that we have the ability to "print" money, or at least some body somewhere authorises the "printing" of money... and if money is the common denominator in regards to most of our societal issues, why haven't we printed enough money to address the issues? Why the need for war, famine, oppression, poverty, international mistrust, terrorism, "legalised" terrorism, misuse of resource etc...?

So why don't we just print more money then? Apparently it plays merry hell with interest and inflation rates and can make or break economies according the bankers, economists and politicians etc... They are the people in the know and the people we trust to look after all things economic so that our money isn't devalued or inflated to the point where a loaf costs a gazillion dollars.

So we can't print more money, because that new money could devalue the existing money, which would require the need for more money to be printed or some other economic measure to offset the devaluation, rinse and repeat.

Unemployment is a good one. To keep the interest v inflation rate "balanced" a ratio of the population needs to be unemployed. Hang on, that would mean that the country can't afford unemployment, which would mean that we can't have a job for every person in the country. So in order to make sure that the majority don't suffer the stress of having their assets and money devalued, a percentage of the population has to be on the dole. Isn't unemployment linked to poverty, crime, stress etc...? Does that mean that there would be dole "bludgers" even if everyone in the country wanted to work? That seems a tad unfair given the "reputation" the unemployed receive. They should be paid more as they're doing the country a great financial service.

So we can't have full employment or print money either?

So money is not only the solution, but also the problem. The many failures of the financial system are well documented and are splashed on the TV on a regular basis. Yet we persist in using a financial value based system to "manage" society.

It would seem that we have proven Einstein's Theory of Insanity.

I guess if we can't have full employment and we can't print money that we're stuck with a finite amount of money. Short of exporting more and importing less. Although I would imagine our trade partners wouldn't be too happy about that. That would mean that we have to run the country to a budget. Ahhhh that would explain a few things.

Healthcare for instance. A few people I know have been turned down for corrective surgery because their injury was considered a pre-existing condition or wear and tear. Irrespective that these people are in discomfort or pain and are earning a decent salary and have paid their ACC levies for the whole of their adult lives, they've been told no. I guess that's one way to save money, but a bit extreme considering ACC make profits in the billions some years. There were also those women who weren't to receive the funding for the full course of herceptin. I see that this policy has changed for the better. Someone mentioned to me that it may not necessarily be a good thing. I was a little surprised at this, but when I asked why it made perfect sense. Lose one or two people to an expensive drug so that you can buy other cheaper medicines to keep 5 or 6 people alive. There's a finite amount of budget for medicine.

Education. Once upon a time education was pretty much free. Students trained, joined the workforce and paid their fees back via taxation. Now we have students leaving Uni with masses of debt and some university's pulling back on the number of new enrolments due to budget constraint. So education isn't there for everyone either and education is certainly a lot less affordable for those who train for jobs that aren't valued by society and aren't paid well in regards to the cost of living when they join the workforce. I was watching the telly and they were talking to workers at a school that was dealing with "troubled" kids. They had an excellent success rate, yet the Minister of Education popped up saying that their funding was being cut. Another budget trade off I guess.

Why do the govt restructure departments? It saves money, or at least allows the departmental budget to be met. Unfortunately this leaves less people to provide the services that we pay for. That's a lot of experience being lost. It also puts undue stress on those left behind as we will expect the same level of service.

Every department in govt is constrained by budget. That budget, or lack of depending on where the govt of the day decide to set their priorities has some very serious societal repercussions. Can you happily sit there and accept that as collateral damage?

Budget constraint is a killer. No more so than in Christchurch. After that first big quake why wasn't every single building in Christchurch checked for structural integrity? In fact why did "modern" buildings fall down at all. Probably because they were built to the budget of the day. That thinking killed people. They've had a horrible time down there. Whilst the tidy up and reconstruction needs to be done, it will only ever get done to a budget, irrespective of the fact that EVERY resource required to rebuild Christchurch is available in the country, there is a finite pot of cash. The designers/builders/workers etc... are here. The materials are here. Unfortunately, it seems that the money, or enough money, isn't available. In some cases the money is still a promise and hasn't actually arrived yet. When the money does appear, how much will have been burned after planning and administration costs, or the running of CERA? We will only be able to build to the budget available, which will never be enough, and with the compliance costs of building to higher standards, the increased cost of bureaucracy, cleanup costs, materials and resources becoming more and more expensive etc... is there going to be enough left to actually re-build to a high standard? People are still trying to rebuild their lives over a year later and the big problem is? Getting their hands on money and getting access to insurance. Between insurance companies and the red tape brigade things are dragging on and thousands of peoples lives are in limbo. As mentioned earlier, We have all of the resources we need to rebuild Christchurch available. What's slowing us down? Budget! And adding insult to injury there were those who went about their criminal business and took what belonged to others.

I wonder what percentage of crime is financially related. I would imagine it's up there in the 90%+ region. People scamming/stealing to feed a habit, booze, gambling, drugs, to pay for food, to pay the electricity bill, to pay transport costs etc... an almost endless list. Something that we deal with by locking criminals up. It's supposed to cost 60k per year to keep a prisoner. Pretty stunning given that the average salary is 50k and entire families survive on that amount of money. Seems like an excessive amount of money to spend on "criminals".

Where would we be in regards to technological advancement had we not had budget constraint? Current technology is released and used to make profit. This not only wastes precious resources, but it also stagnates the release of new technology. For instance we have had 5 iphone releases in the last 4 years, each with a new feature. Why isn't the technology upgradeable? It hasn't been designed to be. Why not? Primarily because they're disposable items for the fad crazy amongst us. We should be on the equivalent of the iphone 20 by now, without having been through 20 revisions of the same phone but with 1 new feature. The technology has always been there, or at least on the drawing board, but instead of releasing a set of useful features, we end up with a meaningless stream of same old same old gadgets with next to nothing new. The same can be said for anything these days.

Cancer research, in fact any medical research is hamstrung by budget and when they "cure" becomes available it costs a small fortune to cover the considerable development costs. Where could we be if budget constraint hadn't been there? We could have considerably more scientists collaborating instead of competing in secret. Let's face it, if the cure is valued in terms of $$$ then you're probably going to keep your research to yourself so that you can reap the financial rewards. We have patents and trademarks to prevent people from using someone else's drug design. Absolute insanity given that the end game is to save peoples lives.

How many billions are spent on weapons? To sell to who for what purpose? And they say that War drives technology? I think not. The desire to fill a need using technology drives the direction of technology. Where's the point in developing technology to destroy ourselves more efficiently? How much does it cost to throw satellites into space? Billions upon billions of $$$ wasted. How many people could you save with that amount of money added to a more socially focussed budget?

The flow of money is controlled by central banks. Recessions are caused when the flow of money is interrupted. It seems pretty straight forwards to me that the banks cause recessions. Pushing up interest rates on borrowings to balance inflation will expose any "entities" that have overstretched their budget and that leads to failures that threaten thousands if not millions of jobs. Is anyone actually watching what people are spending their money on, or indeed how the money is flowing through the system, or are they just raking it in and waiting for the cycle of boom and bust to run its natural accepted economic course?

We could be here forever. Dissecting societies problems and highlighting the issues... but I don't think we really need to look too much further. I give you the culprit: Money and the associated value system. There is more to life than money, isn't there? I won't accept human nature as the culprit. Human beings change and we react given our circumstances. Would we react differently if there was a different system in place? I believe we would. Occupy is proof of this.

I doubt Occupy exists solely to be a spanner in the works. I believe we want change? As Occupy is global, we must be seeking global change? As Occupy has no concrete goals, we must be seeking massive "system" change to deal with the numerous issues that Occupy believe need addressing. The media have decided that the 99% want corruption and greed dealt with. I believe that greed and corruption are the tip of the iceberg. We each have our own priority list of issues that we'd like dealt with and in some cases we each have our own solutions. How do we get to implement our solutions? We either come into vast sums of money, or claw our way through the political ranks hoping that the party you are a member of shares your views in regards to changing the system etc... for some unknown reason, people who want real change have not made it to the places that they need to be to affect that change, irrespective of their best intentions.

So it would seem that we can't cloth, feed and look after any population because of the finite amount of money available in any given country. Greed and corruption are symptoms of this and difficult decisions have to be made in regards to budget allocation. Someone will just have to lose!

EVERYTHING we do is hindered by a budget. How much money is available. As far as I can tell, in terms of Occupy, we're raising awareness over its allocation/distribution in regards to social issues. No doubt it's seen as a trivial squabble in higher places. The 1% don't have to listen. I'm under no illusion of that fact. Occupy has an international voice that can grow or struggle on. It just needs a message, an idea that makes sense for everyone.

Anyways, enough of proving Einstein's theory of insanity.

An idea. It's not a new one by any means, but it is needed more in this day and age than has ever been needed before and it gives us something to aim for.

How's about a free local New Zealand Economy? Every New Zealand resource is to be free. That includes the workforce, food, water, electricity, ideas, there will be no patents, free healthcare, free education, no household financial stresses and the concept of material "value" cannot exist (bit of a stretch that one, but that's just part of the state of mind), no need for teens to get pregnant so they can get a flat and money off the state. One job will not be rewarded over another job, each job is essential. I'm not talking about equality, as I don't truly believe in equality, but I am definitely advocating equity. Everything available to anyone living in New Zealand at any given point of their life

No money eh (and no value system). What would NZ get in return?

No poverty. Nearly no crime. Top quality everything. People doing jobs because they want to, not because it's well paid and they're the friend of the nephew of the CEO of mega corp. People doing jobs they hate because they know that they need to be done. Shorter working hours would definitely be a possibility so we would get more time. Export revenue will rise dramatically (no overheads if "local" labor and materials are free). Imagine how you could re-build Christchurch, construction in general would be to a higher quality. We could get the maximum benefit out of the technology available. NO BUDGET CONSTRAINT! so we can do things the way they need to be done, not because you only have X $$$ available to complete a particular task. The list is endless and I'll leave that to your imagination. Take any story from the media and remove the financial influence. Take any subject or issue that perturbs you and remove money from the equation. A national community? Given that kids have no concept of money, the next generation that comes through would happily embrace a free local economy if their basic needs are catered for. A little education goes a long way.

For those thinking communism, socialism, nirvana etc... I would ask that you rethink your stance. Communism and socialism still required individual financial responsibility and those thinking nirvana are just taking the piss... people will still dislike each other and we will still carry out intolerances, prejudices etc... A society for the people by the people.

I see the above as a Silver Bullet, or as close to one as you can get. Money isn't looking after us is it? We've had a few millennia to get it right and as far as I can see, more people are dying in the poorer nations than before, income disparity is only travelling in one direction, the environment takes a back seat to profitability etc... Remember Einstein's theory of Insanity.

So how do we do this whilst still being part of a global financial economy.

What are our main imports? Fuel? Medicine? Either way, find the total $ value required for importing the necessities and earn that revenue, plus enough for as many wants as possible.

Our exports will leap in value. We're working for free with free resources, yet we'll still be selling our "produce" at the current market rates.

Holidays in NZ will be all inclusive... where NZ will charge a "fee" per tourist.

We have a free workforce. Invite companies to setup their head offices in New Zealand by tendering for the use of our highly educated free workforce. Granted we would not be a completely free workforce as we would need to charge a fee for using the workforce.

Most things we import are expensive because of the taxation that is added on top. We won't have taxes and we will be buying in bulk, which should see prices of imports drop dramatically...

The above simple side affects of a free local economy should see us generate the revenue we need.

I'm sure the more knowledgeable minds in the country could come up with many many more ideas to generate enough money for the necessities and wants of New Zealand. I'm sure the more knowledgeable minds in the country to draft policy to fit the direction we would like to take NZ. I'm sure the more knowledgeable minds of the world would help out, if not come to "teach"/work here. Who knows.

No financial system has ever worked. Therefore use no financial system.

I'm not trying to be rude, but protesting greed and corruption will only ever be ignored by the 1%, I think we all realise this, we are easily placated and if things go as they have in other parts of the world where the status quo of greed and corruption have been challenged, it will likely have a bloody end and I would dearly like to avoid blood in the streets.

We want global change. Think globally, act locally. I'm just guy that's fed up with the status quo and see a gloomy future for the generations that follow us... but I also see a way to fix most of the issues we suffer today. Insanity is persisting with the financial system and believing that it can bring peace, justice, tolerance, and equity to all of us. It can be done and I would ask that each of you get behind the idea and promote it. After all, until people are made aware of a viable alternative, we will carry on in exactly the same vein as we are.

It's time for common sense to reign and for us all to do for each other instead of for the 1%.

I believe we need a different direction and I believe that that direction should be along the lines of the above idea. Anything else is just a tinkering of finances which hasn't worked to this day. The more people that understand how bad money is for human beings, the planet and future generations, the more of chance we have of changing the system to something a little more equitable... something which is overdue.

Everyone in New Zealand needs to be made aware of what is trying to be achieved. Everyone in New Zealand will have a Vote for the system they would prefer, even so called kids 13+ potentially.

I am just a "normal" guy with some additions to an existing idea. I believe the time is right for that idea to be given to the people as a viable alternative for moving society forwards. Where money is involved, nothing will change, this has been proven over millenia. Think globally, act locally.

Ready to do thing properly for a change?

A "Begging" Letter.

Everything takes money. Raising awareness is no different. To that end, if you have excess funds and you would like to invest in a project with the potential to change the world, then come and say hi.

The above may sound like madness or the ramblings of a person suffering from delusions of grandeur, but I assure you that I am quite serious. Someone has to be about the future. I have a plan. It may not be a good plan, but that is for you to decide. Come to my house, drink wine and let me offer you a vision and a plan of how we get there. You will be an integral part of NOW helping to shape our future. If nothing else, you will have had a wasted journey and I will have less wine.

Change happening by itself is too slow. It needs a helping hand.

We do not need to be stuck with Einstein's theory of insanity! There is a Silver Bullet! and it is EASY to change our society quickly and with next to no consequences, in fact the positives by far outweigh the negatives!

A wee challenge for you. Can you think of a single reason why our financial system is better than a NOW approach for humanity. Be honest and open minded, but I think you'll find out that there isn't. NOW (or variations of) is/are required NOW more than ever. We live in a finite world, why continue to waste it?

"There is no Silver Bullet". I've heard that from professionals, experts, leaders etc... NOW they're either really really wrong or they're lying through their teeth. Again, take a look around you and ask if this is the best we can do?

I disagree with those professionals, experts and leaders who say that there is no silver Bullet and I'll make 3 very bold statements that would have them laughing in the aisles:
  • There is a Silver Bullet!
  • It is EASY to solve many of the major issues that the world faces!
  • NOW offers positives that our current societal and economic models can't even come close to offering!

With the above 3 very bold statements in mind, I give you NOW

Old Home Pages: