Usury: Banks Have No Money, They Lend Debt

The practice of charging interest on debts is called “usury”.

The Ancient Greeks executed usurers. Every religious text says usury is an evil practice. Why? Because using money to make money produces nothing. It is social paracitism.

The entire financial system, Banking in particular, is based on usury.

Banks don’t have any money based on assets. They create money based on debts and interest on debts.  Where do you think the word insurance comes from: usurance.

This makes banking a legalized ponzi scheme where all the money and the security ultimately goes to the financeers.

This creates an exponential economic model where the collapse of the system is continually on the horizon.

The stock market is a massive usury market and creates an unsustainable growth model that is consuming everything.

The Ancients were right. Usury is the path to hell for all of humanity.

Returning to an economy limited to trading commodities and eliminating usury would free humanity and save the environment.

In a healthy system money circulates because commodities perish.  In an unhealthy system money circulates to perpetuate the ponzi scheme.

All those trillions of dollars are the figment of a banker’s imagination.

Advertisements

Dan Ariely: Cheating

dan-ariely

Social Psychologist Dan Ariely experiments with assumptions about pain and cheating.  A lot of people cheat a little always.  Click on the image to see the TED.com video.

Link:

Lyrics: Where Have All The Dollars Gone

dollars

based on words and music by Pete Seeger

Where have all the dollars gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the dollars gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the dollars gone?
Gone for spending every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where has all the spending gone?
Long time passing
Where has all the spending gone?
Long time ago
Where has all the spending gone?
Gone to yuan every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where have all the yuan gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the yuan gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the yuan gone?
Gone for savings every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where have all the savings gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the savings gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the savings gone?
Gone to treasuries every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where have all the treasuries gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the treasuries gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the treasuries gone?
Gone for dollars every one
When will we ever learn?
When will we ever learn?

Bureaucracy: Legalism versus Integrity

canadapassport

I discovered a great deal about identity today.

I went to the passport office to renew my Canadian passport.

I was treated very politely and given the necessary form.

I filled it out accurately and completely. Went to the passport officer and presented form, new photos and current passport. She opens the passport and looks at the photo page and says, “This passport is invalid.”

I reply, “I worked in the United States for one year using that passport, the TN1 visa is still inside.”

She says, “You didn’t sign the passport. It’s invalid.”

I think to myself, “I could take the passport outside, sign it and come back in.  In fact, I could take the passport and sign it right in front of her.  There was never a requirement for a witness; it could have been signed by anyone. This policy is retarded.”

She asks me for additional identification. I don’t have a driver’s license because I sold my car and decided I would use public transit. I offer my Social Insurance Card, but the signature has been rubbed off. I offer my birth certificate, but it has no signature. I offer my provincial health card, but it has no signature. I offer my credit card, my debit card and my library card.  I consider my Movie Village card because the signature is laminated.

She takes everything to her manager. She comes back and gives me a slip of paper. “This is the address of the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission. They are on the far side of the city. Have them provide you with a photo ID with your signature and fax me a copy.”

I tell her, “I don’t drink.”

She replies, “You don’t have to.”

I jump on a bus and I go across town. I give the MLCC all the same ID that I gave the passport officer. They have me sign a form and in five minutes I have a photo ID with my signature.  Because the signature pad is electronic and does not provide visual feedback as I am writing I find the first name and last name of my signature overlap.  Maybe it is designed to emulate your signature when you are blind drunk.  I’m over 40 and for the first time I have a card that explicitly states I can legally drink alcohol.

I travel all the way back across town to the passport office. I explain that the passport officer required me to provide another piece of identification. I am directed to a special officer. She makes a photocopy of the MLCC photo ID with signature and says, “Thank you, that’s it.”

Can you explain to me what was achieved by my going to the MLCC which cost me an additional $25 when you include bus fare, which couldn’t have been achieved by me simply signing my passport?

I protected one bureaucrat’s legalism by exploiting another bureaucrat’s legalism.  And the bureaucracy doubled its money.

I will have a renewed passport in two weeks.

They call themselves “public servants”, so why is the public required to jump through mindless hoops to make them appear vigilant?

We do these unnecessary and costly things bureaucrats tell us because we are not willing to sacrifice the greater cost of preserving our integrity and the integrity of policy.

Consequently, the bureaucrat keeps her job, politicians maintain the illusion of governance and we all lose.  Time, money, value.

Will my passport protect me and the global community?  Yes.

Did I also perform a mindless ritual?  Yes.

I believe that a healthy society is regulated by public servants.  However mindless observance of regulations by public servants fails both the public and the policy makers.

Anyone who tells you to violate your integrity to preserve theirs has none.  All they are doing is seeking a bigger piece of the pie at your expense.  It’s a measure of bargaining not morality.

Databases: Structured Associative Model

oraclesentences

For years now I have been struggling with Relational DBMS technology and Associative DBMS technology attempting to get them to do what I want.  In my first efforts, Relational models were structurally restrictive, Dimensional models were unable to grow organically, EAV models are incompatible with relational architecture.  I came upon Simon Williams Associative Model of Data and although enthralled with its potential I found it too had limitations.  It was semi-structured and allowed for too much flexibility.  25 years in Information Technology had taught me that there was a single standard classification system for setting up databases not a plethora of ontologies.  I was determined to find the theoretical structure and was not concerned with hardware limitations, database architecture, abilties of current query languages or any other constraints.

The Associative Model of Data had made the difference in liberating me from Relational and Dimensional thinking.  A traditional ERD of the Associative Model of Data I at first thought would look like the following:

amdschema

Basically what you have is a Schema composed of Nodes with Node Associations through Verbs and Associations with Nodes Attributions through Verbs. The range of Node Entities, Verb Entities, Association Entities and Attribution Entities are endless.  As well the population of the Schema has an unlimited dataset of natural key values.  I have been challenged by Relational database specialists and SQL experts regarding the viability of this model within current limitations, however their arguments are irrelevant.  What is important is the logical validity of the model, not the physical validity.

After receiving the criticism I decided to revisit the model in order to simplify it.  I went over Simon William’s explanations of his model and its application and found I could reduce it to the following:

amdschema02

This was profoundly simpler and better reflected the Associative Model of Data’s Architecture.  But even with this simpler architecture I was not satisfied.  I felt that the Associatve Model although giving the benefit of explicitly defining the associations was a tabula rasa.  Research has shown that tabula rasa’s are contrary to the behavior of the finite physical universe.  There is an intermediate level of nature and nuture.  And this is what I sought to model.

zachman

When I first encountered the Zachman Framework, something about it struck me in a very profound way.  I could see there was something fundamental in its description of systems, however I felt that the metaphors that John Zachman used were wrong because they themselves lacked a fundamental simplicity.  The consequences of this were that those who studied under Zachman ultimately could not agree on what he was talking about.  Also the “disciplines” that Zachman’s Framework generated were continually reinventing the wheel.  Zachman had created a world of vertical and horizontal stovepipes.  To further the confusion Zachman refused to conceive of a methodology based upon his framework.  Consequently, there was no way to determine what the priorities were in creating a system.  I call this the Zachman Clusterfuck.

Zachman’s work spawned years of work for me.  I could see that systems had a fundamental structure, but I could not agree with Zachman.  Focuses and Perspectives were useless terms.  The construction metaphor was useless.  I read anything I could get my hands on dealing with systems, methodologies, modeling, networks and a broad range of other literature across the disciplines.  Out of this came a set of conclusions:

  1. There were a fundamental set of Noun Entities
  2. There were a fundamental set of Verb Entities
  3. There were a fundamental set of Association Entities
  4. There was a clear order in which the Nouns were addressed
  5. There was a clear order in which the Verbs were executed
  6. The structure was fractal
  7. The content was a scale-free network

I made some attempts at creating the vocabulary and experimented with this new Structured Thinking Language.  However, the real break came when I worked with John Boyd’s OODA Loop:

theboydpyramid

The OODA Loop revealed a governing structure for the methodology and guided my way into the following hybrid relational/dimensional/associational model I call the Structured Associative Model of Data:

samd

One of the key things this model demonstrates is the sequence followed by the OODA Loop.  Starting from the top, each dimension set spawns the next.  Choices are created from the dimensions.  There is no centrism to this model which is an inherent flaw in Service Oriented Architecture (SOA), Event based architecture, Data centric architecture, Goal-Directed Design, Rule based systems among others.  The stove pipes of Focuses and Pespectives disappear by reasserting a clear order of priorities and dependencies for achieving success.  The model also supports bottom up inductive as well as top down deductive sequencing.  This will make the system able to reconfigure to handle exceptions.

Some of the things I have learned in designing this model include the realization that unit defines datatype and that all measures are variable character string text.  This is because any displayed value is only a symbolic representation of the actual quantity.  If operations are to be performed on measures they are converted to the correct type as part of the operation.  I also recognized that Unit was necessary to define the scale and scalability of the system.  Further, it became apparent that analog calculations should not be practiced.  Every value should be treated as discrete and aggregated.

Another aspect of this system is the inclusion of currency and amount.  I have been critical of Zachman and academics for their hypocrisy regarding the economics of systems.  All systems have a cost and a benefit and they are measurable in currency.  Contrary to the reasoning of the majority, every decision is ultimately economic.

Tim Brown of IDEO has coined the term “Design Thinking” and has been toying with the concept for some time.  Many designers dwell on the two dimensional concept of divergence and convergence as modes of thought.  If we look at my model, divergence is the creation of choice while convergence is selection of choice.  There is no alteration or deletion of choice in my model as history is preserved.

Now what you have is a unencumbered framework with a clear methodological sequence.

czerepakcognitary

Welcome to the Cognitary Universe.

Chanakya: Eliminate Debts, Enemies and Disease

chanakya

Chanakya was the Chief Minster of Chandragupta Maurya between 323 B.C. and 298 B.C.  Prior to Chandragupta’s reign Alexander the Great’s legacy had left much of the Indian region under corrupt foreign rule.  Chandragupta with Chanakya’s guidance was able to raise an army and eventually seize control of much of what is now known as India and reign over it for the betterment of the people for 25 years.  This achievement is considered legendary to this day.

V. K. Subramanian has compiled a collection of The Maxims of Chanakya with both the original Sanskrit and the English translation.  Chanakya has been referred to as the “Machiavelli of India”, but I do not regard that as a fair parallel.  Chanakya was a pragmatist believing that wealth was both the goal and the cornerstone of the state, however he also believed that wealth should be used to cultivate the best in rulers and the kingdom.  Chanakya believed:

Nothing should be allowed to remain of debts, enemies and disease.

But he did not believe in direct confrontation if it could be avoided.  He always felt it better to “win over” these three evils than waste the resources of the state.  The method was “other people’s money” pitting one opponent against another instead of pitting oneself against either.

The American people consider “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” as fundamental rights.  Is not life the elimination of disease?  Is not liberty the elimination of enemies?  Is not happiness the elimination of debt?  Perhaps if the United States and every nation made providing disease eliminating healthcare, enforcing inequality eliminating laws and observing debt eliminating economics the only goals of the government, business and people we would all be “healthy, wealthy and wise”.

Chanakya’s only failing was to not have the wisdom to see his legacy preserved beyond his own lifetime.