European Tribune

Display:
Thanks melo.


my gut feeling is that this has to be worldwide, and who's going to design such an overhaul of international banking?

i suspect it'll be a last resort after trying and failing everything else, and if we're there, why not give chris cook's LLP thing more of a chance too?

seems about as radical a rethink as any in the history of 'property rights', aka 'who gets what and how long they keep it'..

The overhaul will not come from the debtors, so the necessary Bretton Woods II must originate from the creditors.

If nationalisation is the solution, then, frankly, we are not asking the right question.

As a transitional measure, there is no reason whatever why Banks should not engage with the State within a partnership framework - no legislation is needed for such a consensual solution.

The State puts in the necessary Capital, and shares in agreed proportions in the gross revenues (before management costs etc) with those using the Capital - ie the people who are the management costs.

Canadian and Australian "Income Trusts" operated in exactly such a "pre-distributive" way on Corporate revenues, but the tax-man eventually put a stop to them.

Such a partnership model transcends the "Principal/ Agency" problem which is that the management's interests always diverge from the owners' interests, whether ownership is "Public"= "owned by the State" or "Private" = "owned by a Corporation".

It essentially creates a new form of continuous

Open Capital

of indefinite duration - ie for as long as you use it, you share the revenues or production it enables - which transcends the discontinuity between the absolutes of conventional:

(a) Equity - "Permanent" Capital of infinite duration; and

(b) Debt - temporary capital of finite duration.

As you will see if you look at the site, I use the Mobius strip as a metaphor for the continuity of such "Open" Capital - as compared to the "two sided" and therefore discontinuous conventional "Closed" forms of financial capital and property.

All good stuff: I don't do "abstract", of course.... ;-)

Back to the Real World.

I'm off to Teheran for ten days on Friday, to make a presentation at a major conference re "PetroTrusts" ie the "Unitisation" and thence monetisation of energy generally, starting with carbon-based energy.

I'll also be seeing ministers, parliamentarians, virtually the entire financial services industry (I'm told) and even the clerics in the holy city of Qom to discuss the Islamic aspects of financing systems.

I will be posting my paper and presentation on my web-site from Sunday 12th October for anyone interested. In the meantime I am posting as a Diary the "outline" article which is appearing shortly in the Iranian press - don't worry, it's not the Farsi version...!

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Wed Oct 8th, 2008 at 05:27:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm off to Teheran for ten days on Friday, to make a presentation at a major conference re "PetroTrusts" ie the "Unitisation" and thence monetisation of energy generally, starting with carbon-based energy.

I'll also be seeing ministers, parliamentarians, virtually the entire financial services industry (I'm told) and even the clerics in the holy city of Qom to discuss the Islamic aspects of financing systems.


To the extent that a new view of capital can supplant the existing view in an evolutionary, step-wise basis that is entered into voluntarily and flourishes on its merits, based on its benefits to the many, rather than by state edict in the interests of the few, it is to be welcomed.

May you meet with receptive minds.  Fare thee well.  

If sanity be culturally normative, then by the norms of this culture I claim insanity.

by ARGeezer (argeezer a in a circle yahoo dot com) on Wed Oct 8th, 2008 at 10:46:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I checked your site, and think I understood two things better: 1) the concept of open capital and 2) why I often find your writing hard to understand.

The 2 might interest you (as feedback for better communication). The paged you linked to was to me easier to understand because my flow of reading was not there stumped by quotes around individual words, which apparently makes me stop and figure that you are using the terms in different ways then the normal convention. So when you write:

As you will see if you look at the site, I use the Mobius strip as a metaphor for the continuity of such "Open" Capital - as compared to the "two sided" and therefore discontinuous conventional "Closed" forms of financial capital and property.

I figure that you mark "Open", "two sided" and "Closed" as having a different meaning then Open, two sided and Closed. So for me it is much easier if you write:

As you will see if you look at the site, I use the Mobius strip as a metaphor for the continuity of such Open Capital - as compared to the two sided and therefore discontinuous conventional closed forms of financial capital and property.

Before then I assume that all words are used in their conventional way and go for the meaning of the sentence rather then individual words.

I do not want to presume that this is a general experience, but as you are communicating to an audience, some might share this experience. Take it as feedback, and use it (or not).

And good luck in Teheran!

by A swedish kind of death on Wed Oct 8th, 2008 at 11:12:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks. Very helpful feedback...

I will attempt to ration my use of quotes in the future.....!

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Wed Oct 8th, 2008 at 11:32:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It was originally a form of protection against PNing. By putting words in quotes, it's like writing f*ck - you can't be picked on for using an obscene word, but everyone thinks they know what you mean ;-)

But I agree, too much is too much - a stylistic blunder.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Wed Oct 8th, 2008 at 11:40:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Obviously you mean fack - the short version of the swedish word fackförening (labor union). Though as this is the ET and not the FT it is not a dirty word ;-)
by A swedish kind of death on Wed Oct 8th, 2008 at 11:45:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Too facking right ;-)

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Wed Oct 8th, 2008 at 11:46:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
Early Friday Photography Blog No. 62
by LEP - Nov 20
20 comments

The Puritan Edge
by rg - Nov 20
76 comments

Help oppose Sarko's three strike nonsense
by nicta - Nov 20
6 comments

So I met Bill McKibben
by SacredCowTipper - Nov 20
2 comments

The Purpose of Education
by rdf - Nov 20
1 comment

LQD: Geoengineering Ranked
by nanne - Nov 19
18 comments

LQD: The real orgasmic Puritans
by Ted Welch - Nov 20
2 comments

Trains in Moravia
by DoDo - Nov 16
72 comments

Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series