Banking and money

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 19 Jul 2015, 18:59

UndercoverElephant wrote:Why not? Do you think PositiveMoney are a bunch of crazies? They are not. This has been debated in the the House of Commons, and almost no MPs turned up because the overwhelming majority of them do not understand how banks create money, just like you don't. If they understood, they'd have attended the debate. If you actually believed what I am telling, wouldn't you have attended it?

In the 2010-2015 parliament I was on a number of select committees including the one that agreed to have that debate (the Back Bench Business Committee). I was, however, much more under time pressure than I am now and it was not a priority for me to attend this debate.

I have explained to you how it actually works. I have some difficulty working out why you think I don't understand how it works. I may disagree with you, but that does not mean I am wrong.

peaceful_life · Post by **peaceful_life** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:01

Tarrel wrote:
peaceful_life wrote:
Tarrel wrote: I've given up trying to answer that one. Now just pursuing a life-strategy around trying to need as little of it as possible (whatever "it" is!)
Based on the irony that you've now afforded yourself the head-space to feel so indifferent to it, temporarily.

Breath brother....and think a while, people and planet are suffering for this shit.

Did you test the nitrogen levels from the gorse decomposition btw?
Not feeling indifferent to money; more threatened by it. The more often I hear the words "billions" and "trillions" in the news, and the more I read about debt levels, the less stable I feel our monetary system is and the less I want to be part of it. Granted, money has enabled me to purchase some hard assets which are now giving me the freedom to be less money-dependent, but it's no free lunch. Personal time and labour now go into producing stuff to use rather than earning money to buy stuff to use.

How'd you know about our gorse? Did I mention it previously?

Granted, it never was, nor will be, stable, not for s long as it accumulates itself via interest and is based on a growth metric of consumption.

Money, just like everything else within our biosphere, must degrade and hold some correlation of entropy to what ever it is we're trading and end this idiotic notion that it, an idea, can somehow refute and usurp the laws of physics. All that has caused enough untold damage, now we need metrics based on repair. It saddens me greatly, but here we are..all 7+ billion of us wrapped up and ensconced in it, it needs sorted.

Yep, we spoke about utilising the gorse as a tree nursery, it's true niche, and releasing it's nitrogen. I guess you know you can eat the flowers too.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:02

Entropy in the aggregate system cannot be reduced.

peaceful_life · Post by **peaceful_life** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:07

johnhemming2 wrote:Entropy in the aggregate system cannot be reduced.

Go on, enlighten me with some expansion, please.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:14

Second law of thermodynamics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_la ... modynamics

(1850s onwards)

peaceful_life · Post by **peaceful_life** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:21

johnhemming2 wrote:Second law of thermodynamics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_la ... modynamics

(1850s onwards)

Lovely.

Now if you could just give a bit more clarity and detail, maybe even an example(?), of what you meant by..

'Entropy in the aggregate system cannot be reduced'

....that'd be great.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:24

Max Planck wrote:Every process occurring in nature proceeds in the sense in which the sum of the entropies of all bodies taking part in the process is increased. In the limit, i.e. for reversible processes, the sum of the entropies remains unchanged.

peaceful_life · Post by **peaceful_life** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:54

johnhemming2 wrote:
Max Plank wrote:Every process occurring in nature proceeds in the sense in which the sum of the entropies of all bodies taking part in the process is increased. In the limit, i.e. for reversible processes, the sum of the entropies remains unchanged.

It would of been nice if you'd given me an example of your own, no matter.

Energy flows as a constant, that wasn't disputed, neither did I mention reducing entropy, only that money must correlate to it and replicate the degradation of everything else within our biosphere, however we can divert and harness entropy by staggering energy via trees and plants, reservoirs are still part of the hydrological cycle only temporarily contained and harnessed. It's probably not a great idea to try and pin the metrics of money to cosmological entropic rip.

You've seen the work on the Loess Plateau?....that's entropy harnessing.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 19 Jul 2015, 19:59

I am not sure myself how you can "harness" entropy.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 19 Jul 2015, 20:02

Tarrel. I am going to run the risk of banning here, but I am well and truly past giving a shit because I have just about heard enough from this peddler of obfuscatory, misdirectional bullshit. He either doesn't know what the F--k he is on about or he does, but wishes to create a veneer of bullshit over his posts. Thus, clarifying those post would be counter-productive to him so you should not expect him to.

Entropy in the aggregate system cannot be reduced.

Entropy = the tendency of all things to collapse to the lowest energy state.

Aggregate system = the total energy contained in the system

2nd law of thermodynamics = the state of entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time. The second law also states that the changes in the entropy in the universe can never be negative

In other words, at the aggregate systemic level, entropy goes in only one direction over time. It increases.

However:

It is possible, in local contexts, to decrease entropy in that local context. But, only at the expense of increased entropy elsewhere. Thus, the second law is not violated.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 19 Jul 2015, 20:03

At least we can agree on part of this - even if you cannot avoid being abusive within the context of agreeing.

I don't agree on your definition of entropy, but most of the rest is OK
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

Furthermore at times Entropy can be constant within a closed system.

Additionally if I give a link to a definition of something I see no reason why I should cut and past the whole of that rather long definition.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 19 Jul 2015, 20:10

Little John wrote:You really are a wanker of the highest order John Hemming. Nevertheless, if you are in any way indicative of the psychology of the political class in this country, then your "contributions" have been immensely instructive to everyone on here, including myself.

QED.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 19 Jul 2015, 20:12

johnhemming2 wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:Why not? Do you think PositiveMoney are a bunch of crazies? They are not. This has been debated in the the House of Commons, and almost no MPs turned up because the overwhelming majority of them do not understand how banks create money, just like you don't. If they understood, they'd have attended the debate. If you actually believed what I am telling, wouldn't you have attended it?
In the 2010-2015 parliament I was on a number of select committees including the one that agreed to have that debate (the Back Bench Business Committee). I was, however, much more under time pressure than I am now and it was not a priority for me to attend this debate.

I have explained to you how it actually works.

How what works? CHAPS?

I have some difficulty working out why you think I don't understand how it works. I may disagree with you, but that does not mean I am wrong.

You also disagree with PositiveMoney, the Financial Times and the Bank of England.

Tarrel · Post by **Tarrel** » 19 Jul 2015, 20:29

Little John wrote:Tarrel. I am going to run the risk of banning here, but I am well and truly past giving a shit because I have just about heard enough from this peddler of obfuscatory, misdirectional bullshit. He either doesn't know what the **** he is on about or he does, but wishes to create a veneer of bullshit over his posts. Thus, clarifying those post would be counter-productive to him so you should not expect him to.

Entropy in the aggregate system cannot be reduced.

Entropy = the tendency of all things to collapse to the lowest energy state.

Aggregate system = the total energy contained in the system

2nd law of thermodynamics = the state of entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time. The second law also states that the changes in the entropy in the universe can never be negative

In other words, entropy goes in only one direction over time. It increases.

However:

It is possible, in local contexts, to decrease entropy in that local context. But, only at the expense of increased entropy elsewhere. Thus, the second law is not violated.

I suspect your comment was directed to Peaceful Life, LJ. I was just prattling on about not wanting to be involved in money anymore!

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 19 Jul 2015, 20:32

Ah yes...sorry Tarrel