Devaluation

“Demand and supply don’t equilibrate themselves. There is someone running the bridge of contracts in between, and that One is a Salesperson.”

“The most significant of mindset differences at work lies between the mentality of striving to do just the bare minimum – to stop at a predefined maximum – and a mentality of striving to achieve at least a certain minimum level of output. It is literally the difference between a mind seeking to stop and a mind seeking to start, and it will ultimately be the defining factor between those whose career progression stops and those whose career progression starts.”

A Real Work of Nature: in Finland we say talousjärjestelmä, housing system

There is generally discussed the devaluation of a currency as a means of cheapening the Currency-National offering: allowing a Currency-Nation to sell faster outwards and buy slower inwards. At the National-level of thought a positive value of a devaluation (why it can be a good thing) is that it allows other Nations to get more acquainted with a new source of value (the newness creates the positive value) at a cheaper price (because of the devaluation you are in a new price bracket for work: it costs less for Others from elsewhere to buy, who might not have been able to before). 

I believe in this. The value of newness, the newness of Europe to People from far and wide.

Personally, I wouldn’t see it as a bad thing to devalue the Euro as a way of re-engaging interest in the Old Continent, so that many other Nations who are still behind in well-being could have a better chance in affording our high-quality help, built over our centuries of shared progress. It should also motivate a generation of Europeans to work: devaluing the European economy would make us cheaper, create more work, and ample opportunity to invest into long-term value creators such as Education, Defence, and Infrastructure at a lower cost-factor. As long as the moral base of the European economy is solid, making it a trustworthy partner for emerging economies such as China & India (also diplomatically assumed to be aiming for solidity), then a devaluation should help in many ways. Domestic consumer goods would become cheaper assuming raw materials come from domestic sources, driving positive labour growth through a relocalisation of the economy. In turn, larger international trading projects would be more price-friendly for emerging economies looking for help in getting ahead.

If we devalue, our Leaders might have a better shot at getting their time sold on the global market for meetings to be had. Instead of aiming to be an unobtainable price point to highlight our unparalleled greatness (pun intended), we should aim to be obtainable: it’s a much better way to sell.

Trust me.

As an action by the Euroed Europeans, devaluation should help drive relocalised consumer economies helping Everyone in Member States – Farmers and up. Local goods would be more competitive, and there would be more work in creating them. Devaluation should also drive a global, niche-specialised professional economy, helping those Europeans at the cutting-edge of technology and trade distribute their advancement to the world at a more cost-competitive rate. Devaluation allows more local communities to focus on their meeting their demands closer to home, and more international communities to focus on their capacity to supply towards places away from it.

With Eurozone devaluation, Everyone wins.


“The thing about digitalisation is that its broader possibilities have only just arrived on the table for tools available to be used. Given that practically no representatives of the People wielding National power have any idea about how digital products are built, then the fact that the tools are available does not mean that they will be used. Even if they are used, then they are likely to not be used well. The mindset shift required from a decision-maker regarding the understanding of the implementation of digitalisation at a broader scale is so substantial that there is simply no way that decision-makers of Old will have any chance whatsoever in leading the People through the transformational shift that lies ahead of us, waiting to provide us all with the value that there is to be had from increased economic efficiency and a better Citizen experience. The Leaders that are capable of lifting entire societal systems into the digital age will be from our Generation – us who grew up through the Internet. Those of us born in the 1970s and 1980s, who remember the times before the digital age, must be at the forefront, for there is a lot of pre-digital age knowledge that must be preserved in the reconstruction of the societal system. We are the intergenerational balance that is needed to be had.”

Chocolate Stew

For those so inclined
To try something new
Herefinds they Instructions
for a chocolatey-stew:

Into a cup:

Put cocoa powder, plenty
Put farin sugar, plenty
Put butter, enough, but not too much

Microwave, not too long, max 45 sec., mass-dependent

You’ve got yourself:

Chocolate Stew
YUM.


Keittiössäni mukana:

“Industry is a system that builds houses: Talousjärjestelmä rakentaa taloja”.

“Value is always, at minimum, created in the interchange of learnings from any given exchange. Learnings provide ground upon which to build from to progress further, so exchanges are – more often than not – worth it.”

“Inside of ourselves we have a much larger thing going on than outside of ourselves: those of us, who naturally think towards the future. The moment around us is the starting platform for the journey towards the point ahead where, after our travels across space and time, we aspire to be, gotten to with work and intelligence, and usually a desire to do good: the source of most power, in my opinion, and we need power, in order to go forward, which is what we must do, if we want to meet ourselves in the future, which already imagining (projecting energy towards), we are.”

I believe most of Smartphone Humankind is pretty much horny for all types of quality experiences, now that they’ve spent a few years on Instagram looking at all the luxury stuff. What a great source of motivation for the continued creation of money: the wanting to do stuff at a higher-and-higher level that powers the whole machine for all of us. Ultimately: it’s our desires that drive history forward: through the economy that, as of by itself, emerges from the Earth, that we then live off of. Our desires for something better, knowing of its being, is the flame that keeps-on ignitin’ the machine: the motivation, that makes the money.

“Maapallo: kaikkiemme elämänmedia matkallamme Auringon ympäri. Kannattaa huoltaa ja käyttää hyvin, jatkuvan hyvinvoinnin takaamiseksi!”

“Jos on niin kuin minä ja tykkää makaamisesta, yleisesti, ja etenkin sen ajattelusta ja tuntemisesta kuinka painovoima painaa kohti ihanaa patjaa, niin voi välillä mietityttää miltä tuntuu olla esimerkiksi sonni, jonka tonnien elinpaino painautuu kohti täydellistä pellonpoukamaa jonain juuri sopivanlämpöisenä kesäpäivänä, tai vaikkapa kala, joka jotenkin vain kelluu täydellisesti pintavedessä, elämästään nauttien ennen ruoaksituloamme.”

“What I learned from the mathematical theory of communications is that if a message of high-quality content is delivered through good-quality code, it will be deciphered on the other end by something even better: a great experience of all the emotions attached to the message, sending feedback of such back to the source.”

“Maanomistus on silleen hienoa, että siinä todellisesti näkee vallan rajat ja niiden kytkökset maan suurmassoihin. Mikä on omaa ja muokattavissa, mikä on maisemaa ja itselleen koskematonta. Kun lisää historiannäkemyksellistä syvyyttä, huomaa kuinka nuo rajat ovat häilyviä sen myötä, että niiden käytännön muodostumiseen vaikuttaa kaikki lainsäädännölliset tekijät. Mielikuvituksen todellistamisen rajat ovat lainsäätäjien asettamia, vallan rakenteita mielikuvituksemme näkymättömyyttä aiheuttamassa: monilta osin tämä on myös hyvä asia, pitäen esimerkiksi yhteiset maisemat siisteinä kokonaisuuksina, mitä se missä minkäkin maiseman kohdalla sitten ikinä milloinkin tarkoittaakaan.

Mielestäni tällaisia ajatuksia vallan rajoista on aina loppupeleissä hyvä syventää kysymällä missä näkyy Jumalan ja Itsensä rajat? Muokkaamisessa ja muokkaamisen estämisessä, loppupeleissä, eikö niin? Joka johtaa ainakin minut kysymyksiin siitä missä määrin edes haluan ohjata asioita, verraten ohjattujen asioiden seuraamiseen elämässäni?

Yksityiselämäni haluaisin rahan voitelemaksi, sujuvuutta tuodakseen – öljyä koneessa, niin sanotusti: kestäviä palvelusopimuksia joihin sulautumiseen voin luottaa elämänmitalla, sillä tietyt kysyntäni ovat pysyviä: haen kontrollinvapautusta, palvelusopimusteni kautta: luottamukseni tulevaisuuteen kiteytyy kykyyni maksaa laskuni.

Työn arjessa vallan kysymys esiintyy Alaisen ja Johtajan välisessä suhteessa työpaikalla, ja omassa suhteessa tähän suhteeseen: sijainnistaan AJ-suhteen sisällä omalla työpaikallaan ja fiiliksiin siitä. Haenko enempää kontrollia, vai olenko täälläkin tyytyväinen ajallani ostamaan Johtajani tarjoamia johtamispalveluita Organisaationi työn toteuttamiseen?

Nykyhetken pohtimisen lisäksi vallan rajojen hahmotteleminen avaa katseen tulevaisuuteen. Kun on määrittänyt oman lokaationsa Organisaatiossa ja siihen liittyvät tunteensa, voi paremmin lähtökohdin arvioida omaa jatkosuuntaansa: ilman määrittelyä, lähtökohtaa ei olisi, ylipäänsä, joten tässä myös todistetaan laiskimmankin yrityksen potentiaalisesti ääretön arvo, lähtökohtien määrittelystä puhuessa. Toisin sanoen, kun määrittelee jonkun lähtökohdan, ei periaatteessa ikinä tiedä kuinka kauas voi nähdä, eikä ikinä tiedä mitä oppii hetken tutkimisesta – ennen kuin koittaa, siis. Näitä yrittämiseltä saatuja hetkiä voi pitää pääomana, kokemuksina joiden avulla paremmin ohjata omaa suuntaansa jatkossa, omalla tavallaan määritellen äärettömän potentiaalin kehityksen, sillä kokemukset tuovat entistä parempaa ohjauskykyä: ja ainakin sitä mukaa kun kokemuksista ehtii oppia, niin parempikin voi parantua, ja kun paras, paranee edellen, niin äärettömän potentiaalin olemassaolo nousee todellistumisen kautta todeksi.”

Valuation

Balancing the Quantum Moments
The Eye of the Needle, building history
Like A Bridge

“Equality begins with You. What are your thoughts when your gaze meets another Person, another People?”

“Fusion of matter for electricity creation, as being built at ITER in France, uses the salt water of the Ocean as fuel. Fusion of mind for idea creation, I propose, uses the fresh water of the Lake as fuel: creating an objective, physical evidence for the requirement of hydration for intelligence-creation. So, based on this proposed evidence, should every school student of any age get a water bottle, just like they get a laptop in many places these days? I think yes. I predict good times ahead for all Industries feeding the creation of the Pot, and emptying it.”

“As an Entrepreneur, I believe we must all remember that an idea is like a seed: it is potential life, a path of navigation into the future.”

“As an Entrepreneur, I breathe ideas in through the work of my continued studies into the state of human life, and breathe out the process of selling those ideas to someone: connecting them to a human. Then I breathe in the successful leads, and breathe out the work of making the ideas reality. Basically I’m like a four-stroke internal combustion engine that makes the economy as a whole begin to form from the idea-out.”

The brand-new Oodi Library: yet another reason to love Helsinki.

Valuation is the most objective core of the human mind, the closest-in that we can get whilst remaining in the realm of objectivity: where lies the potential for certainty in agreement between People.

Valuation is what connects us as humans to the world around us, it is what connects us as humans between us, and it is what connects us as humans to our Selves. Valuation guides our perception in the moment: between tasks, between objects, between alternative investment cases of our usage of the time we have as equity in our lives: between whatever and everything: between not caring at all and caring as much as is possible to care.

Valuation is the deepest objective core of thought for – past the conceptual space of valuation where we define our relationships – we enter the realm of the emotions had that create the basis for the existence of the valuation of said emotions, and that is where everyone has their own experience of being, defining the ultimate beginning of the edge of the private sector: the border between our Selves and the outside world. The edge of subjectivity. Valuation, as a conceptual space of thought existent at the very edge of certainty, is objective because we can always talk amongst each other about our relationship with life, which is what valuation – in our subjective use of it – is.

Every day we walk around, we are at least subconsciously valuating our environment. We valuate a green light as we cross the street as the right to cross it safely, and a red light as danger. We valuate a beautiful building that we walk by as the right to feel good about the city that we live in. We valuate the choices we have for lunch and capitalise upon the one we choose to have. Valuation, followed by capitalisation – the taking into use of a valuated “thought result” – leads us into operation, experience, and remembrance: the everlasting process of life itself, enfolding into us with the forces that the world projects out at us and unfolding out of us with the forces the we project unto it.

Whilst psychology looks at human subjects from the outside-in and thus deduces their behaviour from external data, then valuation objectively looks at the world around us from the inside-out and induces our behaviour based on what we perceive. As humans, we are a balance of the community around us and the Self within us. The act of valuation builds a bridge between us and a something, allowing us to discuss our relationship with the something.

Valuation is what allows us to ask the question: “Why?”

Psychology is a classical science in that it looks at humans outside of the observing psychologist in an objective data-based manner and compares them between each other (comparing a particle of data with the whole set), keeping the psychologists themselves out of the equation for the maintenance of scientific objectivity.

Valuation, on the other hand, is what allows for the other side of the mirror to speak: for the individual human object, the Self that a psychologist is studying, to let the psychologist know what they are thinking and why. Valuation comes from within the Self, and then psychology looks at the aggregate human behavioural results, drawing upon aggregate data to create scientifically justifiable conclusions that can be used to help individuals in their lives – fed back to the Self. Thought of in a way, this is a bit like the relationship between market participant and macroeconomist: data-source to data analyst, creating a discussion about where life stands in the moment that is being had, as viewed by those having the discussion.

The bridge between the observer and the observed can be built directly, human-to-human, or indirectly through the data, human-to-statistics-to-human.


Classical and Quantum Natures

There is an inherent classical and quantum nature to valuation. By classical I posit a needs-based mindset, such as the valuation of water: there isn’t much subjectivity in the valuation of water, since either you drink enough of it at regular intervals or you die. Every force has an equal and opposite reaction: thirst will move you towards water, the body will take control. At the margin of absolute necessities the human becomes comparable to an animal: purely predictable in its behaviour, thanks to the infinite power of the will of life to live.

By quantum, which in latin means how much, I mean a wants-based mindset, such as the valuation of a car: how much added value does a car bring to my mobility requirements in life, as opposed to relying on public transport or walking around the city? In classical arenas of thought there are objectively correct answers, whereas subjectivity enters the frame once we step on to the quantum side of the consideration of value: when we are not pushed into the margin. The objective value of water is life, the subjective value of a car is convenience: two completely different areas of reasoning, requiring completely different toolsets of thought.

If we think at the margin, we will push ourselves into it. We need to master the understanding of the value of the thinking of the quantum, for then we can rise towards it.

Learning to valuate one’s surroundings is an acquired skill based on the potential for overcoming the experience of living with just necessities. A body and mind that seeks to survive day-in, day-out, doesn’t waste energy on considering what it cannot have: thus the capacity to have hope and dream is what moves such a body and mind forward, whereas the lack of hope is what maintains us in a protective state of holding on to what we’ve got: not valuating the future, but maintaining the present-past.

Hope is what lifts us towards higher value realms of being.

Should a star of hope merge to allow for it – an idea, a dream – then once this dream-born hope starts to latch on to a potential for operation – a human being, an anchor for the realisation of an idea – a mind begins to acquire the capacity to navigate towards the light of the star. This is where it must begin learning the skill of sales: the skill of explaining why the effort of progress towards the star is worthy, why there is value in capitalising on a valuated potential that is deemed to exist. Why the risks of failure are worth bearing.

Thus, the first lesson of valuation is understanding the value of valuation itself: the potential it brings for creating the forward-driving motion that the skill of sales, of hope creation, brings into life.

The success of work is dependent on the capacity to valuate between the choices available in different situations, for example in being able to choose the correct tools required to perform a task, or to see an existent opportunity as it serendipitously comes into view. In life, we navigate with valuation, in all its different forms across all the different manners of life that there are. Learning how to understand our surroundings is directly correlated with our ability to operate them, and once we get down to the matter of what counts, then it’s the story that we’re telling, the story that we’re selling, as we get to work, that moves us forward.

The story that’s always built on some form of valuation.


The teaching of valuation

At its cleanest level – at its most objective – valuation is learned with the very basic mathematics of classical finance. The values of time and money are combined by discount rates (assumptions of opportunity cost), and different valuation targets are consequently given a numerical price based on some logical premise, such as comparable investment options, the practical definitions of opportunity cost. At its most objective – as valuation is being taught now – the numbers of time, money, and interest rates lead the way in determining what is worthy and what isn’t.

Objectivity is maintained purely by the supremacy of the number.

Where the teaching of valuation lacks is that it remains in the classical mindset of needs, where the supremacy of the number can be justified. Overall, in the realm of needs, money and time need to grow – there is no question about that – since that is a sign of the continuous birth of the needs-based economy and tells of the fact that needs are being met.

What the teaching of valuation requires next is the introduction of the subjective, wants-based quantum mindset, where we value targets of desire and determine how much we are willing to work for them. In this realm of thought, we can assume that fiscal losses can be argued as worthy: we can spend €100,000,000 extra on a building, if we wish to make it more beautiful and high-end, for example. We can positively valuate the artistic value of architecture, and the positive value of creating challenging work for the Craftspeople that build it. Past the needs-based Classical mindset, the wants-based Quantum mindset allows us to incept an infinite amount more emotion into the workings of the economy.

The Quantum mindset allows us to make the economy so much better. So much better that I simply lack the hyperbolic expletives to convey the full emotion of understanding its value to us as a civilisation. It allows us to begin truly mastering the growth of value, by understanding what value can mean, in the first place.


To Conclude

To recall the basics of everything quantum, we must remember the simple, Physics-proven reality that two states can exist at once within one thing. That there are two sides to every coin. A euro is a euro for everyone, meaning it is objective in number, but how much it is worth in terms of value is inherently subjective, dependent on who’s talking.

To put it another way, in order to reinforce the point being made above, the nature of money and time are quantum because, whilst they share an objective outer shell, they simultaneously hold within the subjective valuation of what that means for whoever is doing the considering of the objective outer shell in question: whatever it whenever and wherever is. A euro is a euro for everyone, just as a second is a second for everyone, but what meaning or what value we attribute to those objective units of money and time – that is up to each of us as individuals, and we must talk to each other to understand that. Not through Microsoft Excel, but with actual People, directly.

The calculation of the growth of the number is a skeleton, but we must breathe a deeper understanding of value unto it for the birth of the meat around the bones.

Quantum valuation is all about the teaching of the individual to think for themselves about what they value in life in the moment and across time, so that they may hold the skill of navigating for themselves, instead of being wholly dependent on others: so, in practice, we are considering the progression of Children becoming Adults, capable of thinking for themselves. Aside being a way to understand the nature of individual human beings for the value-creative purposes of business, it is a path for us to understand our Selves and, thus, reinforce our identities and be more comfortable with who we are: to learn to sell our Selves, to our Selves, so that we can function better as part of organisations, where many Selves gather – the better they function together, the better the quality of the value created. We can educate ourselves to be better consumers that serve ourselves, not the economic machine.

Ultimately, valuation is where the border between classical and quantum thought lies, and it – the border itself – belongs in the Academic realm of the Market Sciences. We must own this border, for it is what our science is based upon, and it is where we excel, for it is what we have been doing, all along, anyway.

When we valuate, we set the direction.

In the Market Sciences, we are navigators.

Some banter follows:

The Quantum Mechanics: We the Salespeople, who make it happen!

The Valuation Slogan: “It’s up to You!”

Pretty much the Aggregate Children-Parents Negotiation?

“From Me through You, on to the Table – the Contract Stew – creating value for the Many, as operated by the Few.”

An idea, now a memory: equity has arrived.
An idea, now a memory: equity has arrived.
Because it is You.

“I’d most like the experience of speaking to Leonardo DiCaprio about the possibility that intertemporal dream-world travel might actually be completely real, and of value. Maybe Elon Musk would be interested in joining that Ring, so that I might understand how that simulation stuff makes sense to Him, and whether or not He would like to come out of it, or not, and whichever way he decides, I’d like to understand his reasoning, nonetheless. Sounds like a great Pot of Idea, maybe worth One party haha”

Liikkellepanijan liikkeiden valuaatiomarkkina huudettu – Ken perustaa? Vai meneekö yli Johtajan yksityisyydensuojan rajojen, laittaa webcamit päälle? 😀

“One of my favourite views of Nature would definitely have to be the Moon expunging itself into its Fullest Form, from the pillowy darkness of the night and nightier sky. It is a stirling romance of massive and immassive physical forces, because it could also be looked as the night letting go of a pearl: strong enough to have held something so valuable within, but even stronger in letting it go (knowing it gets to start eating the Moon’s Perfection right away again, after its Full moment of starlight & glory has passed and moved on, beginning to form the next one to be had, in about or exactly a month or so from now, whenever that is).”

“By calculating where the most probable last-place-on-Earth would be for there to be clean water at, and when this last-water event-time should most probably occur, scientists of the Earth could create a really true-to-Earth valuation map for the ultra-long term real-estate investors out there. I’d buy in to the value of that Map, and its guidance in making fiscal decisions.”

“In Tinder you’re valuating immense mass at swipe-speed. It’s good to realise that every swipe carries the weight of a potential life, and that can mean a lot of things, so preparation on motivationals – before going into the app – is important. Past that, it’s a matter of agreement between individual human beings that is completely natural. If the motivations match, so will the vibes. For safety’s sake, in the future when I myself have kids exploring such ecosystems, I’d prefer there to be a version of the app where log-in and thus ID security – including location – is maintained by a State-level official. If there were cleverness in the State Machine, then they would realise at State-level Leadership that packaging data security services through the creation of an ID object for a Citizen, that is then sold on to for use to different app providers that require a Citizen to log into their services, would be a good Natural business to get into. States should create ID objects to be sold-for-use by service providers. It is my belief that, ultimately, the State should own the market for ID creation & maintenance, and that that is its core function, when looked at purely from the Money-level. I prefer to associate highest levels of trust, required at the core function-level, to State Flags. As a money-operant, I like that sense of stability in a base of Grounded Trust that the State provides, which is what it does when it is providing ID-distribution services.”

Objects, best tools, at the end of the day
Objects: Best tools, at the end of the day
How to Modern Party: Share It Later
Lighter breathing, more beautying
I think that is fair enough to be considered as a positive way that Nature works.
Really depends on the Crowd-type One hangs out with.
It would always be my Primary Pricing Base:
how deep do I go into the debt pool, for the view
But dropping the Baby is something that scares me.
Olisiko tämä sisäsotilaallinen teko, alivoimaisuustunteet ulospäin muille projisoiden? Kun se on tehty kotimaisilla kielillä, kotimaisilla palvelimilla tarjoiltuna ja kotimaan alueelta kirjoitettuna, kunnioittaako se muiden valtioiden naamansäilytyksellisoikeudellista suvereniteettiä? Vai olisiko (vaativan) kielellisen käännöstyövaateen myötä todettava olevan niin, että ainoa tapa miten ulkomainen toimija voisi tästä loukkaantua olisi se, että Hänen olisi tarkkailtava Jensin liikkeitä ja olla todennut Hänen sisältönsä mielenkiintoiseksi, motivoiden (vaativan) kielenkäännöksellisen työn, motivaation olemassaolon todisteeksi sen samalla synnyttäen. Mikäli on osoittanut Näin Paljon työtä seuratakseen Jensin kirjoituksia niin pitäisi ulkomaisten toimijoiden viimeistään tässä vaiheessa tajuta, että tämä on Läppää ja Sen Juurta: kasvamassa keskenään
Pohjolassa: myös vitusti kaikennäkösii ongelmia, ei pelkkää hevenii.”
Building Cities, pretty awesome stuff if you’re into long-term imagination-work, which in Sales: we do.

“Vähintään Ihmisen tulisi olla nähtynä kysynnän Tekijänä. Vähintään.

Some Finnish policy (in Finnish)

“Selittelemmekö me itsellemme kehollisten impulssiemme syytä vai selitteleekö kehomme meille miksi niistä ei olisi syytä piitata? Tasapaino tuntuu olevan tärkein tekijä moraalirauhan säilyttämisessä, ja kehonhallinnallinen koulutus pitäisi järjestää Suomessa asuville ja tänne saapuville. Kansallinen joogasubventio voisi tehdä erinomaista terää, myös osana maahanmuuttajien kotoutusta: jooga on ihanan puolueeton ihmisiä yhdistävänä voimana ja tekee yhdistävää (vähintään Itseensä) työtä sekä kehon että mielen tasoilla.”

“Suomessa spesifisti, koulutustarinamme kautta nähtynä, on se vaikea sukupolvienvälinen crowding-out ongelma taloudessa meneillään, että vuosikymmenet ollaan koulutettu nuoria älykköjä mutta kun sitten tulisi aika väistyä Vanhana pois tieltä ja myöntää, että olemme itse rakentaneet (koulutuksen ja teknologian myötä) nopeammin kiihtyneet seuraajamme jotka haluavat nyt ohi, niin sitten pelottaa jäädä eläkkeelle ja vapauttaa sitä rajallista johtajuuspinta-alaresurssia nousevien sukupolvien käytölle, joilla olisi kasvupotentiaalia käytettävissään nuoremman iän myötä enemmän kuin Vanhoilla, ja ajankohtaisempi asia- ja ihmistuntemus käytössään korkeamman arvopotentiaalin tuottajiksi ja realisoijiksi. On kuin oltaisiin ladattu nuorisomme kiitotielle lentokoneeseen joka tarvitsee kolmannesta pitemmän kiitotien noustaakseen turvallisesti: ruuma täynnä tietoa mutta ei väylää minkä kautta sen arvoa työnteon myötä rahaksi voisi muuttaa. Pitää muistaa, että isompaa muutosta johtava verkostovalta ei muutu digitaalisessa silmänräpäyksessä: se ikään kuin kasvaa läpi kansallistasoisten ihmisjuurten yli ajan, tehden verkostovallasta rajallisen resurssin, monellakin eri tapaa arvioituna. Jos tämä rajallinen resurssi on elänyt liian kauan sukupolvensiirrosvastaisuuden kahlitsemana, niin liiallisen määritelmänä se on alkanut tuhota arvoa sekä hetkessä että potentiaali-demotivaation tuoman menetyksen kautta. Loppupeleissä sukupolvien välillä vallitseva kahlitsevaisuusaste on määriteltävissä vain organisaation sisällä, sitä kokevien henkilöiden toimesta. Suomen kohdalla, viime vuosikymmenten kehityksen saattamana, merkittävän koulutusaste- ja samanaikaisen talouden nousukiitokehityksen myötä voi mielestäni sanoa niin, että sukupolvien välisessä kahlitsevuusasteessa on jotain systeemisempää meneillään, tällä hetkellä.

Sukupolvienväliset allokaatiot kansan jokavuotisissa rahavirroissa – eli kuinka paljon jokavuotisesta käteisvirrasta pysähtyy minkäkin sukupolven edustajan tilille – olisi hyvä olla kohdennettuja siten, että varhais-Aikuisuuden panos-tuotto suhde olisi hetkessä arvioituna liioitellumpi: nuoremmille maksettaisiin enemmän palkkaa aikaansa vastaan kuin mikä heidän työn suora vaikutus on taloudelle, sillä sijoitusperusteluolettamalla, että tämä olisi toimenpide joka vahvistaisi heidän elintasollista asemaansa ja siten vakauttaisi elämän peruspilarit sellaisiin rakenteellisiin muotteihin jonka varassa kasvaa vakaat kodit (joka puolestaan ennaltaehkäisee tulevaisuuden kuluja, eräänlaisena kilven projisointina). Perinteiseen hitaaseen palkkanousuun, joka maaduttaa kokonaisia työelämiä turhaan paikalleen tai estää niitä alkamasta lainkaan – masentaen kustannusloukuissa eläviä ihmisiä – niin ehdottaisin itse työelämäosapuolille suunniteltavaksi sellaista järjestelmää joka toisi nopeata nousua kärkeen suoraan koulusta ulostautuessa ja siitä rauhallisesti hidastuvaa palkkakehitystahtia läpi työelämän, kuin auton kiihtyvyyskaaren muotoinen polku. Tämä nopea kiihdytys olisi velanotto nuoremmalta sukupolvelta itselleen, että raha todella ratkaisisi monen ongelman kodin sisältä ulospäin, ja vaatisi kuria aiennetun korkeamman elintason hallitsemisessa: Suomen nuoremmat sukupolvet saisivat eräällä tavalla ajateltuna tehokkaamman auton ajettavakseen, ja voimankohotusta olisi syytä kunnioittaa. Oikein työkaluin – esimerkiksi eläkerahastoja lainavakuutena Pankeille käyttäen – voisi Suomen työelämä toteuttaa nuorempien, unohdettujen sukupolvien uudelleennousemuksen. Jos heihin – koulutettuihimpiimme – sijoitetaan nyt uskon voimalla lainaa, niin heidän vastineeksi tekemän työn pitäisi kyetä maksamaan kyseiset lainat takaisin: korkoineen. Kaikki tämä olisi loppupeleissä mahdollista, mikäli Suomen Myyntivoimat ovat korkeimmalla tasollaan huippukunnossa: lisärahan tekeminen redusoituu aina korkeamman tason myyntitaitoon, voimanhallinnalliseen kykyyn pyytää suurempia numeroita. Vaikka se hieman vitsikkäämmin ajateltuna kuulostaa aika härskiltä, niin meidän tosiasiallisesti pitää laittaa nuoremmat, unohdetuksi tulevat sukupolvemme “myyntikuntoon”. Jotta saamme heidät myytyä korkeamman tason parempipalkkaisiin hommiin jossa he tuottavat korkeamman tason ainesta myytäväksi niin he ansaitsevat kaiken odottelun jälkeen etupainotteista korvausta, luottamuksen osoituksena: myös sen takia, että palkka tutkitusti lisää itseluottamusta, joka vahvistaa myyntiaineksen laatua entisestään. Mutta tässä Myyntivoimien pitää kyetä myymään Suomessa tehdyn työn arvoa: ei kyvyssään hinnoitella tehokkuustaipumustemme myötä itseämme halpapeluriksi, vaan itsekunnioituksessamme nähdä osaamisemme hyvinvointia luova arvo ja asettaa numeromme riittävän korkealle, kunnioitusasteemme mukaisesti.


Tämä on iso ajattelumuutos, talouden strategisena käännetekijänä. Myydä etupainotteisesti, henkisellä velkavivulla: itseluottamuksella myös laadun korkeammasta eikä pelkästään hinnan matalammasta arvosta tarinaa vääntäen, jonkun muun saaden siihen rahallaan uskomaan (ja tässä lopussa, hyvät Akateemikot, näemme kuinka sitä mystistä ‘arvoa’ voi olla monenlaisen jakauman välillä samanaikaisesti: korkeamman ja matalamman, isomman ja pienemmän, ja niin edelleen. Tästä moninapaisesta samanaikaisuudesta me Myyjät keksimme kaikki juttumme kuin luonnostamme, näkien kuinka asioita voi eri määrin lähestyä eri näkökulmista, siten keksien myyntiargumentteja jonkin puolesta tai sitä vastaan).”

“Olisi myös tärkeätä nähdä kuinka suomalainen työkulttuuri on näyttänyt tuloksia parantavia vaikutuksiaan etenkin ICT-alalla, niin kaukanakin kotoa kuin Lähi-Idässä ja Piilaaksossa. Osaamisen johtamisen taidolla – With the Leadership of Skill, Finland shall prevail & prosper – Suomi menee vielä pitkälle hyvinvoinnin kehityksessä tulevien sukupolvien aikana. Siitä olen varma, että matkamme on vasta alkanut, että our journey has just begun. Teen töitä sen edestä, joskus myös viikonloppuisin ja näen, kuinka hemmetisti sitä on edessä kunnes voin edes harkita eläköitymistä. Mutta vanhempia – the Older, they would be – Heitä olisi, jotka voisivat jo harkita – that could give a pinch of a thought, just a little droplet’s worth.”

“Arvonkasvatuskysymyksen ei pitäisi ikinä olla maata vai mieltä, vaan se miten tehdään molempia: oikeissa määrin? Yksi Yrittäjyyden äärisuunta on maahan pureutuminen Suomeen turvaan tutustuakseen, toinen on maailmalla lentäminen Suomen ajattelua viedäkseen. Avaruuden ajat, sitten joskus, avaavatkin sitten kolmannen ulottuvuuden talousjärjestelmään: siellä viedään, loppupeleissä, maailmaa kokonaisuutena. Sen syntyminen, avaruuden laajamittaisesti-toiminnallisen taloudellisen ulottuvuuden, vaatii vielä paljon sopimusteknisiä järjestelyjä ja käytännön toimeenpanoja. Mutta kyllä uskon ihmiskunnan sen ulottuvuuden synnyttävän, kun se näkee avaruuden käytännössä rajattoman myyntipotentiaalin.”

“Ehdotan täten, kiinnostuksen avaruutta kohtaan ylläpidettäväksi, että Lappiin rakennetaan mahdollisimman kalliilla hyper-eksklusiivinen avaruusteleskooppi matkailukohteeksi. Avaruuskokemuksen kuvanlaadun erinomaisuus-todennäköisyyden maksimoinniksi kohde pitäisi rakentaa mahdollisimman kauas Luontoon. Sinne pitäisi voida saapua korkeimman luksuksen kuljetuksella tai metsäreitin läpi moniöisesti patikoiden: ihan miten kukin oman eeppisyytensä koskaan sitten hinnoitteleekaan. Itse teleskooppi- ja yöpymiskokemus olisi korkeimman arvoluokan kokemus: hotellin palvelutaso olisi Monarkeille sopivaa, vähintään, mutta toivottavasti muunkaltaisillekin Tähdille kuten Jay Z:lle ja Beyoncélle tai Obamojen perheelle. Nautinnollisen avaruudenkatselukokemuksen jokainen yksityiskohta olisi erittäin tarkasti suunniteltu, Lapin ääriolosuhteiden kaikkien vuodenaikojen erikoisuuksien laatuvaikutannolliset yksityiskohdat suunnittelussa huomioiden, ulkomainen vieraspotentiaali aktiivisesti tiedostaen. Jännittävyystasoa laskettaisiin korkeimmalla mahdollisella laatutasolla koska ne suomalaisten avaruusprofessorien tarinat sen avaruuden suuruudesta voi olla välillä jopa hieman pelottavia: joten ruoan pitää maistua, ja sen takia tarvitaan korkeimman laatuluokan ammattikokkeja mukaan tähän toteutusoperaatioon: koska ruoalla unohtuu avaruus, ja muistuu täyttymys. Arvon kasvatus olisi varmasti taattua sillä matkojen tuotoksia ne niin sanotut diilit usein ovat: ja kun liikutetaan isoja rahoja, niin luottamusta kannattaa rakentaa isoilla rahoilla. Tälleen Kansat saavat parhaansa esille. Yksi tärkeä yksityiskohta olisi, että osana kokemusta rakennuskompleksissa olisi herätyskelloja vain varatuille teleskooppi- ja ruokailuajoille: ei mitään sänkyyn liittyvää. Täten Suomi viestisi kauniin objektiivisesti, että Suomessa: nouskohon, Ken haluaa ja laskeutukoot Siihen kun tahtoo.

“Sitten – heti perään – haluaisin, että vastaavan visualiikan laatutason omaavia keskuksia voisi rakentaa kolme enemmän: jokainen omana arkkitehtonisena taideteoksenaan, aina siis riittävän kauas Luontoon, ettei visualiikan laatutaso kärsi. Jokainen avaruuskatselukeskus olisi astetta matalampi laatutasossa matkailukohteena, Prima Donnasta alaspäin verraten, ja se perusastetason keskus olisi opetuslaitoksen omistuksessa, varmistaakseen sen, että jokainen suomalaista koulua käyvä lapsi näkisi vähintään kerran alakouluikäisenä avaruuteen (eli jos sää pilaa yhden matkan, järjestetään toinen: aina). Sitten olisi myös yksi salainen keskus joka olisi Akatemian yksityisessä käytössä ja omistuksessa, tutkimusta ja hallinnollista yksityisyyttä varten. Täten ennustan rakennusalalle valtavaa buumia lähivuosille tai vuosikymmenille – todennäköisesti vuosikymmenille, sillä en usko, että valtiolta ihan hetkessä näitä masseja heruu: mutta askel kerrallaan. Hyvää myyden, hyvää tulossa.”

“Aalto-yliopisto on Rauhanajan Suomen merkittävin pelinavaus globaalilla kartalla. Sen tulevaisuuden kyky synnyttää Markkinatieteiden huippuosaajia, jotka ovat yhteiskielikykyisiä taiteiden sekä tieteiden ajattelusuuntien kanssa, nostaa Suomen rahanteollista potentiaalia merkittävästi. Loppupeleissä näistä ajattelutavoista koostuva ihmisymmärrystaito on juuri se voima mitä nykypäivässä markkinoilla tarvitaan.

Exemplar use of Time Perception: “Finland can think as a sovereign, for that is what we are. I do not consider Finland as part of a warring construct of history between East and West, which destroys significant amounts of potential value that is available to be had for the benefit of all; value that can begin to be created through the construction of the proper international contracts and the subsequent intergenerational deployment of the required operative skill practiced at the highest levels of responsibility and remuneration. I paid attention in geography class, I paid attention in history class. I love both subjects deeply: they form the base of understanding the Market Sciences, which is what I’m all about. Finland is North: Far North, to be precise. The People that live here came from all over the place and have spent the past 11,000 years negotiating with Frost itself. We can carry our own weight. We don’t need Others to scare us – Nature does that for us all on its own.”

About Time

Welcome to the Academic School of Sales

Know Your Relativities, Priors-to-Äction

Some of my finest moments in lecture: to be had below.

At the end of the day, the relationship – the understanding of the Relativity, whatever it whenever is built by and wherever and by Whomever it is being carried – is defined by the quantity and quality of invested time and money into the continued formation of the Relativity, as had in the experience of the moment, by all involved: where the decision of value, is made, creating the reason for the Relativity to be had, in the First Place.

“What truly trickles down across Age and Wealth is behaviour, as People will generally strive – on some level, at least – to follow the example of the Money, because that’s just the best way to gain the trust needed to have it off them who already have it, isn’t it?”

“When People are kept living on the margin, as the outcome of the infinite regress of policy based purely on cost reduction, then it is no surprise that there will be positive mass reactions to less costs – less taxes, for example, or a fear of debt – that affirm the predisposed sentiments of those setting policies, creating a false sense of security. The People cannot imagine the creation of more money, they cannot understand the proposal of taking out a €500 billion loan on to the National balance sheet, because the magnitude of the system and their capacity to have an understanding of debt via practice goes far beyond their comprehension. Most Everyday Citizens know how to earn a wage and save, for that is what being a worker is in living the free life, which is what the immense majority of people are. The fiscal environment that Leaders live in is vastly different, so they need to really work at remembering what Everyday Life is all about. But so, in considering the History of Scarcity that results in the cost-reductive mindset of yore – not the continued investment mentality of fore – then we can see that when systemic fiscal pressure increases to a point where saving isn’t possible anymore for the worker and cash flow risks going into the negative, then the fists of revolution are set for flight, and then the policy-setting class can simply wave a finger of no-no at them and take the moral high ground. Effectively, based on the thinking of Old Economics that drives us into this margin of constant fear, we self-create the reproductive loop of civil disorder and war, especially now that we’re hitting hard barriers on technological development as considered from the perspective of increasing human efficiency: the next step is robotisation, which reduces the human to zero. So, it’s literally the absolute end of the line for a train of thought based on getting more for less out of a human being, and what we need now is a science that actually studies the creation of well-being from its objective starting points, and that is what the foundation of the Market Sciences is all about: to bring a more wholesome, operative view to the economic machine, from the bottom-up, to its research and teaching for the generations to come. To give us the tools to build some structure into it fitting for the quality-requirements of the modern age. It’s all in the math, and which direction it pushes our societies in: the constant whip of increasing pressure, or the attempt to build something more sustainable, more living, based on constant investments into the future instead of an intense holding-onto of the past. All these things said: I’m not projecting hatred or blame in any direction, I’m just observing what’s going on and why History was as it was – we were in Nature, it was scarce by definition! Looking forward, for my part, I see the pressurized economy of History as being a completely logical part of societal evolution, in bringing humans to where we are now from the monkeys we were in the past, in that the infinite reduction of costs brought us the lightspeed-world of the Internet and the Smartphone, like the birth of diamonds under pressure. I mean – obviously this is where Nature would push us, in getting ourselves out of its womb. It is only with these tools of infinitely fast communication that we’ve been able to accelerate ourselves through the technological singularity, which I believe the past decade or so has been all about – the final step out of living directly within Nature into a time where I can imagine a global CEO working from Home thanks to the quality of the tools available. It’s just that we’re only beginning to realise that the singularity-surpassing technology isn’t the technology we hold in our hand – it is us ourselves as well, using it, communicating at light-speed, turning into a higher-evolved version of human being. The whole package we’re being born into creates the singularity and the coming out of it. Seeing these things, in my opinion, now we just need to bring modern society in for a smooth landing from past to future, help those left behind catch up, and we’re practically in “relative Heaven” compared to the technology-free “relative Hell” of yore, where so many things were so much worse than they are now. Where there was a lot more fear, for lack of medicines, of content, of love – the lack of so many things, because we lived in scarcity: Scar City – where we the martyrs infinitely lick their wounds! But we’re not there yet, out of Scar City, in the Abundant Age of the Future, where our wounds of growth have healed and a new age of human life starts: not until the structures of the economy are rebuilt to make the lash of the whip less heavy for the many people. There will still be some whip, obviously, for it is dumb to try and imagine a work-free world in my opinion, since nothing has any earned value, which is where the oomph of love comes from, at least for People like myself: the fore-running racers, the constant developers who live off of the energy of allowing others to do less, who enjoy the enjoyment of others as reward for their work: as the source of its meaning. However, I believe – I know – that it is the combination of actually beginning to study and affirm our understandings of the Natural nature of money and what we can do with it, given modern technology, that will start that revolution into a completely new level of human existence that we couldn’t even have imagined until quite recently – we didn’t have the technology! I see it as a given that this is the path we will take, as long as we the Quantum Thinkers keep working day-in, day-out, given that the path we see is that of least resistance that energy naturally tends to follow – like a lightning bolt – and I believe in the invisible winds of the forces of Physics, the study of which I was essentially brought up around throughout my life. Finding the Physics in the Money, by way of the Quantum, is the most natural closing of the loop of growing into adulthood for myself, and I’m really excited about times to come where we get to start teaching this stuff to everyone: where Money isn’t seen as this horrid whip-force of the past, but Nature’s creative tool of the peace of the future.”

“What I’m essentially saying is that, when considering the formation of the informational attitude of the world as it stands, then we must realise the significant danger of The School missing the A.S.S., which we must remember feeds working life with what should be considered as knowledge. If the A.S.S. is not maintained well, Academia might feed the working world some real, unfiltered and self-serving crap, such as some of the Old Economics that borders on religion (because the economists themselves ardently abide by their own rules of thought, and then propagate them further by guiding policy at the highest levels). I believe the A.S.S. should serve all of Academia, for sales skills are truly what maintain the credibility of the Institution, as part of society.”

“Truly, the key thing to notice is that what makes the Market Sciences an actual science  is the existence of the A.S.S., because it is only through the testing of a market hypothesis, with the stated intent of value creation, as objectively proven (or not) by financial receipt, that we can obtain absolute justification for our scientific being through the maintenance of what is most important in Academia: the scientific method and its requirement for falsifiability. Because – I promise you this – when trying to sell something in the actual markets of reality, then because in the laboratory of Nature you do not control your test subjects in any way whatsoever (you can only control what you present to them: yourself), your hypothesis will mostly be proven false and, even if that is the part of sales that sucks the hardest of nuts, then at least the integrity of science was preserved. Right now a lot of Economics rests on unfalsifiable assumptions, and that simply isn’t sustainable in any way. All I have to do is walk out into politics, sell an opposite world-view or introduce a basic income and many economic truths of the past simply disappear, because I’ve sold the turning of the tide to the People. We must have the A.S.S. as the core part of the Market Sciences, going forward, because it is the ultimate measuring device that we fundamentally need, for without it there would be no market to study. In our directly human-facing realm of Academia we should also be orienting ourselves around the question ‘is this what the People want?’ because our Institutional power in guiding the way humankind thinks is significant: again, we need the A.S.S. to accomplish this. If we are living in a mindset of just ‘this is what the people need to think’ then our science is on a dangerous course, because that is not the scientific way of thought – that is something else. “

“Sales research: the measurement of what time it is, as in ‘what’re people buyin’ and who’s sellin’ it?'”

Post-truth, we are all subjective to it, with the meanings that we whenever give it.

“At this body-busting kegger last weekend my friends taught me (thanks, Guys) that time is the ultimate commodity, and then I agreed. If you are there to realise it, then you already have it, which makes it freer than free, since you don’t even have to go anywhere to pick it up, meaning it literally comes with zero cost attached, practically making it of infinite value: thus, the ultimate commodity. Now that I think about it, I really love infinite value: the ultimate commodity, that’s always there.”

“Ultimately, Market Power would be condensed into getting You to come to Me, instead of Me running to You. As Market Practitioners, that is always the truest definition of The Win.”

Trust is Deep Value: Built On Time, Sourced From Promises (Promises are Surface Value, built by hope and necessity in the moment); A relationship is Deep Valued by commitment (to terms made, acceptances of risk involved, outcomes created)

What time is it, One may ask? 
Well, at all times, it’s meat time. 
Because it is in the meat 
within which I am, 
in every now 
that I shall partake in,
for that is ultimately
what being alive,
at its core,
is.

Kultatimanttii.


“When you’re born, in that instant there is only future. After that, you begin to have an accumulating past and, at some point, you turn over and learn to look at your past in various ways. It’s like the data catches up to you by its nature of gathering mass as time goes along, making it harder to leave unnoticed. Learning to analyze the complexity of life’s enfolded and unfolding patterns simultaneously increases our potential to build new patterns into the future, because we’ll be creating the skills to see gaps that we are then able to perceive as opportunity, based on the skills we learn in valuation. First skill learned in valuation class? I value emojis in my whatsapp-chats, so let me see the love: Woman. Second skill learned? Think about the value Medical Doctors place on the moment they observe for themselves that the patient they are treating is feeling better because of the help they are providing, and think about the scale of the range of emotions within which that moment can occur: anything from a life-or-death emergency to an everyday blood sample.”

Water really speaks to me. It has the power to move me towards itself and make me consume it. Water clearly knows how to negotiate with the meat. To truly feel at home, you need to be comfortable within your own body. Water is a good way to start connecting with it. Always buy quality-secured water. Easiest way to securely buy water? Taxes: so that everyone gets it at the best price.

“When you sit somewhere behind the wheel of the immense vehicle that is a flag representing a Nation flying around the Sun then you suddenly think to yourself ‘shit this is where you really notice the impacts of your own behaviour on others – I really wanna know what I’m doing’ and then that becomes the moment where you wake up.”

“Paljon puhuttu myyjän taito on ihmisen kuuntelu, ja tottahan se on: pitää kuunnella ihmisiä jotta voi tietää mitä heille myydä. Ja nyt sattui sitten niin, että kaiken paskanjauhannan läpi havaitsin: jonkun pitää myydä myyntiä, ja sen lupasin naiselleni tehdä, rahanmetsästysreissuillani ollessa.”

“Mitä tärkeintä myynnissä on tietää oikeat mittarit, aivan kuten lentokoneen kapteenille tai F1-kuskille, sillä mittaristosta löytää myös suorituskyvyn rajat, jotka on syytä ymmärtää ja joita on syytä noudattaa. On hyvä tietää, mikä on tärkein palaute. Esimerkiksi itselleni ei ole sen tärkeämpää palautetta kun kuulla naiselta kotona, että hänellä on kanssani turvallinen olo: mielellään kokonaisturvallinen. Eli sen lisäksi että luonnostaan vauhdikas operatiivinen moodini on käytöksellisesti hyväksyttävällä tasolla, luoden turvallisen olon hetkessä, niin kokonaisturvallisessa olotilassa myös ajassa laajemmin esiintyvät asiat kuten tulovarmuus ja kasvatuskyky tuntuvat olevan kohdillaan, luoden naiselle kokonaisturvallisen olotilan. Palkinnot kokonaisturvallisuudesta ovat taattuja! Kokonaisturvallisuuskin tarvitsee mittarinsa tullakseen havaituksi. On siis syytä muistaa, että ihmisten välisten mittareiden luonti vaatii luonnostaan aina aikaa, sillä vain ajan kanssa kyetään muodostamaan ymmärrystä mittareiden tilannearviointiperusteista – mitä ne ovat, miten ne muodostuvat, miksi ne ovat tärkeitä – ja tämän ymmärryksen myötä muodostuu luottamusta niiden asettamien rajojen ylivoimaisuuteen ohitse oman harkintakykymme hetkessä, jolloin saattaisimme muuten taipua vauhdin huumalle. Rajat siis vahvistavat meitä, eivätkä suinkaan heikennä, sillä rajat muodostavat mahdollisuuden luoda mittareita joita seuraamalla voimme tietää onnistuvamme sen sijaan, että elämme pelkkien uskojemme varassa. Loppukaneetiksi todettakoon, että mielestäni on merkittävästi parempi tietää menneet ja uskoa tuleviin: se on oma tapani luottaa kokonaisturvallisuuden tunteeseeni.”

Päätöksenteon Voima, Herra Kirjuri
Elämänlaskentaa, tilastoilla trallallaa!

“I don’t like to talk about Death – such a nasty subject, isn’t it? – but it is important in a number of ways. First of all, it gives the time we have value by creating its inherent scarcity. I also think it is wise to note that Death is by the definition of its opposite also the Life Machine, in that its being affirms the being of its opposite. It’s smart to see why it is there.”

Lawyers & Salespeople: it’s what we do.

Objectivity at its hardest core: where objects are created.
Game Practice, my kind of GP. Always remember the SG-split diagram: there are those of you Leaders who do the math in the Sky mostly gathered in the Cities (analyse the data of society, guide the creation of the strategies), and then there are those of us Leaders on the Ground mostly gathered in the Suburbs, that speak of the results of the math to the masses and run the strategies.
(definition of LL-parity)

“On an awesome boat last summer someone I now know exists said “we need philosophers in politics, so then I was like ‘OK – I dig that. Partying with massive power attached – the challenge of maximum orthodoxy and conscience! I’m down for that.'”

For purposes of ensuring world safety: the Finance Folk should really speak with the Philosopher People on a regular basis. I guess it just makes sense, once more, to start developing a new language to catch up on the pace of the already-existent times being investigated, a language that combines two very significant forces to create a forward-projecting force that aims to define better living-outcomes for all involved in creating it. Getting these numbers-and-words driven thought-racing folk together, Bankers and Philosophers, clearly require that we begin investing into the research & development of “Quantum Speak: the Language of Potentially Perfect Action, available to be had through the continued investigations into the design of and of the Markets – a Story of the Continued Evolution of Money, looked at from a whole bunch of perspectives” (not the greatest name for a book, but we can work on it, the main point is that it catches the core thought of everything quantum – that of valuation and its inherent subjectivity: what makes ourselves, our Selves).

Peg a mindblock in the past and you pressurize the body into motion with thought-lag, fling a mindscope into the future and you'll depressureize the body into flight. Staying in sync with the moment should never be forgotten.
Peg a mindblock in the past and you pressurize the body into motion with thought-lag, fling a mindscope into the future and you’ll depressureize the body into flight. Staying in sync with the moment should never be forgotten.

(Money, Politics): the language of respect for the individual and collective, for without them, they aren’t

Sales: the process of tossing around word-packaged fiscal masses entangled with various emotional and motivational charms

Ultimately speaking, the Animals & Planet are the source of the money, for that is where the Meat & Other Products grow, live and die for our bodies and souls to be fulfilled with their culinary (and might I add body-nutritional) value. So: we should look after the Meat, that lives on the Planet, and thus requires it, and for my part – at least – I’m going to be One of Those Many who will gladly pay more to keep eating Meat, whilst of course agreeing that quality (both ethical & product-wise) must never be risked. That is why I would also start the implementation of Basic Income to Citizens via Farmers and Teachers, of all sorts, so that they can focus on creating the Operating Instructions that keep said levels of quality growing to perpetuity, building the base of the financial system, as a whole. I think Academia as a whole should be a part of said Price-Setting Implementation Project, as mediated with the United Nations for legal implementation (of said Operating Instructions).

Connecting People

Always rely on the fact that the markets love you for trying, and even just for your very being.
Market motivation.
Be a leader, not a whiney-weener. Or is there too much wimp in you to try?

“Getting feedback is the best experience beside the process of creating the incentives for others to give the feedback to you. Whether or not the feedback is good, bad, somewhere in between – or all three at the same time – then you’re getting the most valuable data of all time: the data on yourself, which is what you need to serve all the others.”

“Never denigrate the nature of stupidity for, if you do, it must mean that you hold yourself in a higher regard in the consideration of your own intelligence. If you do that then you must ask yourself is the other worth lambasting or was it indeed yourself – along with the other so-called intelligent – that simply didn’t do good enough of a job in education? Just a thought.”

“I have a dream of a world where socially responsible isn’t a competitive marketing advantage. Rather, it just is. All we need is a science that isn’t built on the infinite reductivity cost-cutting – causing resultant behaviour as taught – and we should be fine. I mean – yes – it’s cost-cutting to a certain extent but when quality starts to suffer, then that’s when we need to understand the other direction of economic thought, the one where emotions matter: the cost-growing, and all the life-motivational aspects it brings along with it.”

“Beauty: it isn’t just in the eye of the beholder. It can also be in the ear, the mouth, the stomach, the muscles.. so many places for beauty to be felt through. So many.”

“The best thing you can always fall back on is physical activity. It will enable you to draw upon the energy required to provide yourself and others around you with much more wholesome life experiences. Healthy: it’s better for you.”

“A salesperson is like a farmer. Just as a farmer connects a seed with the Earth to grow food, a salesperson connects an idea with a human to grow value. Perhaps we can define the primary sales idea as eat something so you don’t die.”

(Suomessa lienemme siis voivan kaikella niin sanotulla terveellä järjellämme käyttää maanviljelijän ohella sanaa mielenviljelijä, joka 
käyskentelee ympäriinsä istuttamassa arvoa kasvattavia ideoita)

“My warmest regards to my Finnish Air Force-based upbringing and the entire worlds of Formula 1 and skydiving for leading the way in teaching me all about epicness and how to secure it.”

For all our friends

When I hear people in Finland speak of alustatalous (literal translation: platform economy) then I proceed to raise my thumb in approval and think to myself: “Good job – you have understood the basic nature of business. I am very proud of you.”

For the economy is the platform, the social network with a purpose.

If there is one thing I have learned from my career through the past dozen-plus years – whilst realising the significant gaps in the prevalent business and economics education that I myself went through in getting my Master’s degree (not blaming anybody, just saying there’s a lot of work to do in reorganising the schools of organisation) – then it is this: every business is a platform business, and this should be taught on the first day of business school, because it describes the core – the seed – of where the formation of the markets begins and thus is one of the most basic knowledge components of the entire science. A common teaching of the unquestionable basics creates a shared logic – just as is everyday with physicists and chemists and biologists and whatnot – and thus a shared manner of operation-in-thought, which increases the potential for successful outcomes in co-operation amongst practitioners, out in reality.

You know – just like medical doctors can gather around a human body and work together, because they jointly know what they are gathering around – a human body, just like the one they themselves inhabit. Similarly – practitioners emergent out of the schools of organisation should know what it is that they are gathering around, starting with the basics: of organisations, for example – organisations of people.

The Organisation’s Core

Every business is a platform business since every business is connecting people from two sides. It makes no difference as to how the connection of the people is achieved. That is what the attempt of making money is all about: trying to see what human connection works in creating value. What do people want to make and consume to create value for each other?

Who knows? You can’t really know. Not until you try, that is. That is why in Finland we say Yrittäjä for Entrepreneur, which literally means Trier or Attempter.

There is a potentially infinite set of connective permutations possible – as in ways to connect people – always reducing down to one person connecting with another to create value, intermediated by a business operating the exchange of money and the contracts enabling the exchange of it in trust (indeed, it is a bunch of contracts that create the very existence of money in and of itself – setting the core definition of money as a system of quantitatively objectified trust: as opposed to trust being retained solely inside humans in a qualitative form).

I’ll say it again in different words. Whatever value is being created (whatever a transaction makes real and worthy), the connection creating the value is the platform that is always being spoken of: the business itself, through the products & services that it offers. It is of no matter who makes the products & services, whether it is the business itself or an outside source of content they draw upon: it is the business that brings the pieces together. That is why, objectively, it is called an organisation.

The organisation – the business – is a container built by the documentation of history (proving that history has a lot of practical value, as it practically operates the foundations of today). The container contains all the parts it requires to bring people together in whatever manner, like a function f(?) that contains the potential to contain all the variables within itself, with the variables defining whatever it is that is being traded. The variables are the pieces of the puzzle being put together in the process of value creation: the organised parts, forming the organisation.

I’m going to keep repeating these basics in different permutations of words so that the message really sinks in with my intended audience, the message about the presentation of the fundamental core of the Market Sciencesthe sciences studying the components of the organisations and the organisations themselves that create the markets, the interaction between the organisations that grow the markets, and the sum whole of the economy that they end up resulting in by way of accumulative logic.

Businesses – all businesses, and all organisations for that matter – exist to connect people, allowing for the creation of value, whatever value that might be. By definition, organisations are platforms, connecting people within them and between them. When business people such as Bankers speak of the markets, they speak of the people coming together through organisations in the act of valuation, capitalisation, and realisation had when potential demands meet potential supplies (valuation) and form a contract enabling an exchange (capitalisation), leading to the operation of the exchange (realisation).

This is a completely industry-agnostic definition of what money does as it runs through organisations of whatever kind – wherever they might lie in society. Money flows through the organisations in society as guided by the prevalent sets of factual and moral knowings held by people (which also explains the motivations for the initial creation of organisations), creating potential supplies and demands that lead said people into situations in life in which they then operate a series of decisions that either end up forming capitalised contracts of exchange or not. After which life goes on, once more*.

Big Theory in practice

All businesses are platform businesses. All organisations serve to connect people. A grocery store connects eaters and farmers: people. A newspaper connects newsmakers to newsreaders: people. An AI connects its developers minds to those who need support in forming analyses, or whatever else the AI is designed to do: people. A trout company connects a fisherman and a trouteater: people.

People to people: One’s demand for supply is an Other’s supply of demand.

It is always a matter of people operating on platforms to come together, since even the algorithms trading the stocks were created by people. Always people in, people out – that is how the money works, flowing from the people into the system of organisations (the economy) and back out of it, into the hands of the people.

Even within the organisations – people.

All businesses operate in two-sided markets – not just digital media companies, where the term is most used. The business is a container – like a factory in paper form – where content goes in on one side and then someone takes it out on the other, creating value both ways. First on one side there must be a product (starting with an ad), then on the other side there can be customers, and there must always be a promise of a match between the sides, since otherwise there is no potential to invest into. When there are customers, then there can be more products.

The company is by definition a platform bringing people together to have their needs fulfilled: a utilisation of skills to be supplied, a set of demands to be fulfilled. Skills create supplies that fulfil demands, always held by people.

It does not matter what the product is, it does not matter who the customers are: all businesses operate a two-sided market where both demand- and supply-sides, by definition, need to be played by the One operating the business. Ultimately, the playing of the instrument of the markets reduces down to the Entrepreneur’s relationship with themselves, standing on the platform of life – their balancing of the three fundamental, objective forms of equity: the contracts, the money, and the time.

The Entrepreneur is the ultimate human platform, owning the paper that runs the organisational platform – the legally organised platform – the platform that is a business, through which the Entrepreneur connects with other humans.


Impact

This is the first lecture of all business schools in the future. I work every day towards making it so that the teaching of the basics is not forgotten, for it is the shared knowing of the basics that forms mutual understanding in the markets, increasing the potential for trust to form between market participants, increasing the likelihood of a healthy global market. The basics are the foundations of a common operating language – the obvious things that need to be taught, the Newtonian Laws of Physics of the economy – and the contents of this text, its links, and this website of mine are as basic as it gets when it comes to teaching about business. When you get more basic than the human – as in the ground we stand upon and the atmosphere within which we live – you’re in the product engineers’ world: a different, deeper realm of science.

As basic as it gets is what we must go for when we create real, actual science, for there comes a point where the arguing ends and the knowing begins: objective truth is the seed of knowledge and when we talk about people connecting with people to create value, you need but think of all the people involved in having delivered everything around you right now to you – including yourself, to yourself – to know that you are looking at objective truth, where even the philosophers of Theory of Knowledge** can’t deny that people connecting with people are what brought this moment and its surroundings to you, right now.

All students of business around the world need to begin their journey into Academia by learning about the basics of how business is all about connecting people: about the nature of contracts and money themselves and how they serve, through time, to bring people together through the organisations they inhabit and utilise: day-in, day-out.

The function of an organisation is to connect people. These must be commonly shared knowledge for global markets to function properly: for global money to be able to act better and operate a healthier market that builds the quality of the lives lived on this Planet, now and in the future. People operating the market must have a shared language that starts with the very basics, because though the basics may be basic, that does not mean the basics are simple and trivial to learn or teach (not to mention apply), for the basics – like seeds – are immense in size, once they start to grow. The global market consisting of the entire breadth of human cultures cannot function cohesively without shared knowledge of the absolute and objective basics, starting with all of the above.

Once more, I shall repeat the same message in different words, assisting in its understanding:

The Market Sciences cannot develop further without a shared base of absolutely common, unquestioned understanding. Without the Market Sciences – the sciences churning out market practitioners – functioning on a commonly shared logic, the health of the global markets mostly reduces down to chance (gambling on the hope of functioning human interactions), and we simply cannot live in a peaceful, modern, interconnected world – sharing the fruits of our knowings – if its operating system (the markets) relies on the mathematics and logics of chance.

I look forward to my academic career (with practice on the side, to check my own skills, as proven with revenue) and the infinite stream of first-years ready to face human reality at its hardest core: the contracts and the money, enabling the love had in time, by connecting the people.

“Organisaccio huset!”

Mandatory reading:

Quantum Economics: The New Science of Money by David Orrell

Social Physics by Alex Pentland

The MSC – filled with and surrounded by people, ultimately culminating into a salesperson carrying an ad: at your door, in your inbox.


*It is my personal belief that this description of the modus operandi of money in the markets is one and the same thing as quantum gravity, which I wrote about in an artistic fashion back in July (see link) when I felt I got it – the sense of a path of emotions leading towards a point: an event of culmination, such as the formation of a contract or a gathering of emotions with some other purpose. Let’s see what the physicists have to say about this power-grab of a term from their realm of science. But I do believe that the cleanliness of our homes proves the existence of quantum gravity: because at some point, it gets so messy, that you have to either buy cleaning services or become a student of Marie Kondo, and it is the seemingly random appearance of the decision, that does the proving, of the quantum gravity’s being (for it is what can pull you into the situations, that you’d rather have continued to deny their right to be, but since here they are, you must be able to at least somewhat see, how it is that you got sucked into it: and you should want to, for by facing your weaknesses, and by giving them value through the challenge that they by their nature provide for improvement, for it allows you to realise that using the muscle of the will makes you stronger. Quantum gravity: when it comes down to the basics of power, it’s what it’s all about).

ps. Physicists – have you ever considered remembering that we move around the sun at an insane speed of 30km a second? Are we thus, in real-time, integrating our path from A to B, over and over again at different wave-amplitudes and -frequencies (depending on the situation we’re in)? Just some thought.. for thought. Me to you – like a thought trade, entangled through (active transfer) space and time by the Internet, and in (passive storage) space and time by some hard drive within some server, somewhere!

“At times, when I’m really performing at my best, I feel I can integrate the information of being at a data transfer rate of infinite megabits per instant!”


**My Theory of Knowledge essay dated February 13th, 2006, from my completion of the International Baccalaureate diploma, can be found below (and to all other IB-Ohhhh graduates – yes, it was worth the extra point, bringing my total to 41/45):

Do questions like “Why should I be moral?” or “Why shouldn’t I be selfish?” have definitive answers as do some questions in other Areas of Knowledge? Does having a definitive answer make a question more or less important? 

People from different parts of the globe see the world in many different ways. For some, the eternal question in life might be “Where will I find my next meal?” whilst others might ponder the ultimate question over the meaning of life itself. Different areas of knowledge spur different methods of thinking and evaluation of knowledge, and many questions that arise might not have definitive answers. However, this lack or presence of a definitive answer does not define the importance of a question.

         Ethics as an area of knowledge results in questions such as “Why should I be moral?” or “Why shouldn’t I be selfish?” which, in practise, do not have definitive answers. Can such a question over morality or selfishness be labeled universally with a single answer? In my opinion, this is an impossibility since people around the world are in very different situations. When someone lives in the ongoing search for their next meal, is it right of them to be selfish and eat without sharing, even if others wil continue to starve? Some could say that they are perfectly justified in keeping themselves alive at the expense of others in such conditions, whilst others would most likely argue that it would be wrong to act to the detriment of another. Such situations would be unlikely in developed nations, where the viewpoint of such an act would be negative. 

         It is important to remember that, while a situation of justified selfishness may arise, overall an individual is very dependent on the collective decisions made around him. Political decisions over social welfare, for example, can be very serious issues for low-income members of society. Whereas a low-income family may depend on social welfare, a well-off politician might consider it more important to divert funding to something more pertinent to himself. Depending on the situation, selfishness can be objectively justified or unjustified. It is true that, most often in the actual world, it is more common to run into objective justification for being unselfishand moral.

         But how would a well-off citizen act if put into the situation where he has no food? The question over morality and selfishness cannot universally be given a definitive answer, as being moral could mean, for example, following one’s own or someone elses moral rules. Situations for differing individuals are remarkably varied around the world. If you had barely enough necessities (food, water, clothing, shelter) to live, would you mainly concern yourself with protecting your own family, or think about everyone else living around you before yourself? There exists such different peoples that thinking a single set of absolute moral rules exists everywhere is almost absurd, even if arguments for absolute morality exist. A definitive answer cannot be given.

         Does this lack of a definitive answer make questions, such as these over morality and selfishness, less important? I strongly believe that it does not. The examples of morality and selfishness are perfect in illustrating cases where definitive answers are not available universally, but questions about them are still important. This has been recognised by the United Nations in their Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed for the first time in December of 1948[1]. The declaration sets out, in thirty articles, the basic rights for every human benig, which reaches out into morality by preventing immoral and atrocious acts against a human’s rights. This is perhaps the closest that one can come to a universal set of rights and morals set out in writing, which the UN of course hopes every individual will adopt into their own system of moral beliefs. Nonetheless, people in India cannot be expected to hold the same set of moral rules as people in Finland, for example.

         This same view can be seen in other areas of knowledge as well. The Arts is an area of knowledge that gives birth to many questions and is a field where opinions and subjective thoughts play a major role. Judging a piece of music, for example, has a set of guidelines where it’s different attributes can be more objectively valued through evaluation of technical difficulty, musical flow, and other such measures. But can there be a definitive answer to the question: “Is this a good piece of music?” Through personal experience, I am strongly of the opinion that there can be no such definitive answer. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart composed music that was, in terms of musical theory, of the highest calibre, but still an ardent listener of rock music may consider Mozart as not worthy of his ears. The same logic applies to paintings and other branches of the Arts. Even so, the questions posed in the Arts are not any less important, since critique and questioning has moved artists forwards in search of new, previously unheard or unseen, forms of art.

         In history, many interpretations of past events would be unheard of were historians not willing to pose questions without definitive answers. Asking these questions is no less important, however, as historians might come up with several different possibilities that open up new ways of looking at some aspect of history. The question over the cause of the First World War does not have a single definitive answer, but is rather a collection of many different causes that historians have brought to light. Asking the question has been important, since all the different causes that historians have brought about have been written in today’s history books, which hopefuly the politicians of today and tomorrow are learning from.

         Opposing views can be considered as well, though. Arguments for the importance of a definitive answer are based on the search for knowledge. Knowledge is a “true and justified belief” which, according to this definition, has factual backing that makes it true. The natural sciences, as an area of knowledge, is more often based on the search for definitive answers that explain why and how things in the world are. A scientist might argue that asking questions with no definitive answers is pointless, since it does not provide any gains forward in terms of knowledge and understanding of the natural world. For example, the question lingering over homeopathy, an alternative form of medicine, has existed since the practise emerged in the late 1700s. Homeopathy is treatment with an “ultra-high dilution” that has perhaps less than one molecule of a substance, and there is significant controversy over whether or not it works and, more importantly, whyit works. Some have the opinion that if homeopathy is safe and determined to be helpful, then it is not important to ask why[2]. This view takes it that the question is not important, as it might not have a definitive answer.

         Doctors researching new medicines might consider the questions they are asking more important, since their results can provide new treatments and actual gains in medicinal knowledge that can help the sick. Finding a cure, or a “definitive answer” for cancer or AIDS, for example, would benefit the people of the world far more than searching for an answer to the meaning of life. There is definitely a logical and strong argument for the doctor’s case, and for him a definite answer is far more important than an ambiguous one. Does it make the other’s quest for an answer any less important? No. The doctor has an opinion, but it all boils down to everyone having their own priorities and thoughts of what is important and what isn’t. It is comparable to the situation encountered with morals, as they are not the same for everyone, either. In these matters, great personal emphasis must be taken on what one considers to be most important. I admit that in this case it is most likely that the majority would back researching a concrete cure for AIDS, rather than attempt to answer a philosophical question that, in reality, probably doesn’t have any universal answer. Most important, however, is in my opinion the acknowledgement that some individual’s may have different opinions.

         Not asking any questions on subjects with no definitive answers would mean no progress, however, and thus I would personally counter the statements claiming the unimportance of researching the causes of why homeopathy works. More important, to challenge the importance of knowledge, would be in my opinion to question the subjects that have definitive answers. As an example, the atom was thought to be the smallest thing in existence, until it was split open and sub-atomic particles were discovered. Who knows, perhaps sub-sub-atomic particles are a thing of the future, if a scienctist decides to challenge the current knowledge. The example of the earth being flat fits in perfectly here, as the belief could still be around had no questions been asked. Questioning existing knowledge is equally important as questioning things that don’t have answers.

         The importance is not on the answer, but the question itself. Asking whether or not a definitive answer makes an answer more or less important is, in my view, not as important as asking the question in the first place, no matter what type of an answer is achieved. Even in today’s world, where many things are accepted as knowledge, it is important to remember to question the answer, as only then can new realms be discovered.


[1]http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

[2]http://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopathy

Gaudeamus Igitur

Gaudeamus igitur
Iuvenes dum sumus.
Post iucundam iuventutem
Post molestam senectutem
Nos habebit humus.

Vivat academia!
Vivant professores!
Vivat membrum quodlibet
Vivant membra quaelibet
Semper sint in flore.
Semper sint in flore.

Ubi sunt qui ante nos
In mundo fuere?
Vadite ad superos
Transite in inferos
Hos si vis videre.

Vita nostra brevis est
Brevi finietur.
Venit mors velociter
Rapit nos atrociter
Nemini parcetur.

Vivant omnes virgines
Faciles, formosae.
Vivant et mulieres
Tenerae, amabiles,
Bonae, laboriosae.

Vivat et res publica
et qui illam regit.
Vivat nostra civitas,
Maecenatum caritas
Quae nos hic protegit.

Pereat tristitia,
Pereant osores.
Pereat diabolus,
Quivis antiburschius
Atque irrisores.

Tasa-arvovalta


Kiteytys: tasa-arvo syntyy todellisesti vasta siinä vaiheessa kun ymmärretään ne rakennuspalikat, mistä tasa-arvo koostuu. Kun kansalainen oppii oikeuksiensa juuret, kykenee hän itsenäisesti puolustamaan niitä paremmin, sillä silloin hän omaa kyvyt nähdä kun hänen oikeuksiaan loukataan. Kun nähdään kansan suvereniteetin koostuvan yksilöiden suvereniteetin summasta (joka määrittyy oman suvereniteetin ymmärryksen tasosta ja halusta puolustaa näitä historian saavuttamia oikeuksia, josta oma suvereniteetti nykyhetkessä koostuu) voidaan todeta, että kansan suvereniteetti on juuriltaan riippuvainen opetuksen tasosta.

Voimme siis täten päätellä, että koulutukselliset investoinnit ovat maanpuolustuksellisia tekoja.

But remember to get up off the couch as well.

Ihminen yli protokollan

Millaista olisikaan suomalaisen Suomessa olla
Jos meitä palvelevat virkahenkilöt, työskentelykulttuurissaan
Eivät eläisi ainaisesti yllä leijuvan virkarikkeen uhan alaisina
Vaan lentäisivät myös viran ihmistä palvelevien mahdollisuuksien 
Motivaatioiden ylentäminä?


En ole piilotellut näkemyksiäni demokratiasta. Arvostan demokratiaamme äärettömästi, kuitenkin muistaen kyseessä olevan Suomen lipun alla elävän kansallisen hallintojärjestelmämme kansalaispalautejärjestelmä. 

Demokratiamme ei siis missään määrin ole järjestelmä itsessään vaan merkittävä osajärjestelmä kokonaisjärjestelmästä jonka tehtävä on tuottaa valtaistettua (pakottavasti navigoivaa) tietoa kansalaisten mielipiteistä koskien maassamme elettävän elämän tilaa ja sen koettua kehityssuuntaa, ja voimaannuttaa tuo tieto todelliseksi yhdistämällä se luonnollisiin henkilöihin kiteytyvään poliittiseen valtaan joka on luotu olevaksi osana kansallisen hallintojärjestelmämme lainsäädäntörakenteita.

Demokratiamme siis varmistaa, että kansallinen hallintojärjestelmämme on hallittaviensa henkilöiden tiedonohjauksellisessa hallussa: pelkät virastojen palvelupalautejärjestelmät eivät riitä luodakseen kansanvaltaa, sillä virkahenkilö olisi ilman demokratiaa silti palautteen yläpuolella vallallisesti, voidessaan kohauttaa olallaan sisääntulevan tiedon arvon ja jatkaa johtamistaan kuten on ennenkin tehnyt. Demokraattisesti valittu poliitikko nousee virkahenkilön yläpuolelle vallankäytössä ollessaan virkahenkilön ylin johtaja, ja täten kansanvalta on luotu.

Nämä itsestäänselvät asiat me tiesimme jo, mutta onhan itsestäänselvyyksiä hyvä kerrata, ettei niiden tuoma terve järki unohdu matkan varrelle.

Tiedämme kuitenkin myös nykyisten demokratioiden heikkoudet, etenkin liittyen sortaviin tilanteisiin jossa vähemmistö saa enemmistön kahleisiin tai toisin päin. Monesti – ellei peräti aina – tunteita herättävät sortovaltaiset tilanteet tulevat yllätyksinä, sillä vaali- ja hallintovaltamatematiikka on monelta kohtaa arvaamatonta sen myötä, että poliittiset luottamussuhteet poliitikkojen ja virkahenkilöiden kesken ja heidän välillä elävät ajassa, aivan kuten muutkin asiat ihmisluonnossa, jossa töitä tehdään. Milloin äärilaidalta tuleva pienpuolue saa juntattua hallitusneuvottelut, milloin asemaansa puolustava eliitti saa hiljennettyä orastavan muutoksen erinäisin valtaverkostoissa toteutetuin keinoin: ken tietää.

On siis nähtävä se kuinka jatkuva valtakamppailu voi myös olla haitallista sitä mukaa kun kamppailua tasaisin väliajoin tasapainottava yhteistyökyky katoaa poliittisten ja virkahenkilöllisten toimijoiden väliltä. Tämä on luonnollinen lopputulos esimerkiksi tässä historian hetkessä, jossa elämme: yhteiskunnallinen muutos viime vuosikymmenten seurauksena on ollut niin merkittävää, että ne näkemykset siitä kuinka elämää tulisi elää, ne näkemykset jotka ohjaavat poliittisten mielipiteiden muodostumista, ovat erkaantuneet hyvin kauas toisistaan. Tämä on mielestäni ollut suhteessa siihen kuinka paljon tietoa on ollut saatavilla muiden ihmisten elintavoista. Yhtäältä voi nähdä ihmisiä jotka ovat sitä mieltä, että elämää eletään edelleen sunnuntain kirkossakäynnin asettaman kellotustahdin mukaan kun taas toisaalta on kirkkaana esimerkkinä nykypäivässä heitä joiden arjen kello tikittää algoritmien ohjauksessa, älypuhelimeen saapuvien notifikaatioiden varassa.

En minä ota kantaa siihen, kuinka ihmisen tulisi elää ohitse sen, että elossa heidän tulisi kyetä valinnoillaan pysymään: aivo- ja sydäntoiminta, ajatuksella ja pulssilla todennettuina, ovat merkit siitä, että valitut elämäntavat kykenevät täyttämään elämän minimivaatimukset ja pitämään henkilön hengessään kiinni. Se on yhteiskunnallisen johtajan primäärinen tavoite: objektiivisin ote minkä voi ottaa.

Ongelma nykyisten demokraattisten toimijoiden keskuudessa on usein se, että siellä toimivat henkilöt pyrkivät todentamaan omia elämänvalintojaan oikeiksi saamalla muita muuttumaan heidän kaltaisekseen. Tämä on lähtökohtaisesti täysin hyväksyttävää ja ihmiselämän vaihtoehtoja lisätessään peräti kannustettavaa – elämäntapamainontaa ei saa koskaan kieltää, sillä jonkun demokraattisilla markkinoilla tarjoama maailmankuva saattaa olla toisen, kadoksissa olevan, pelastus. Ongelmalliseksi mainonta muuttuu siinä vaiheessa kun se yliprojisoi ja muuttuu aggressiiviseksi: kun omaa identiteettiä vahvistetaan lyttäämällä muiden valintoja.

Minä koen, että kansallisen hallintojärjestelmän ikuisesti primäärinen tehtävä on suojella yksilön vapautta olla itsensä, jotta hän voi arvottaa elämänarvon mahdollisimman korkealle, eläessään sitä kuten hän haluaa. Siinä määrin missä yksilön itsemuodostama identiteetti ei uhkaa muiden oikeutta muodostaa omaansa, niin minua kiinnostaa lähinnä se, että yksilö pysyy elossa riittävällä laatutasolla ettei minua iljetä hänen olemisensa osana omaksi kokemaani kansakuntaa. Jos minua iljettää jonkun olemisen laatutaso niin se on merkki siitä, että järjestelmä ei tuota riittävästi hyvinvointia. Ja haluan elää sellaisessa järjestelmässä, josta voin olla ylpeä, ylpeyden määritellen heikoimman aseman kautta.

Sen sijaan, että mollaisin omasta mielestäni iljettävissä olosuhteissa elävää henkilöä, mottaan yhteiskunnallisena johtajana itseäni siitä, ettei kansallinen hallintojärjestelmä vieläkään toimi riittävän hyvin. Ajatukseni kiteytyy englanninkieliseen mietteeseeni “disgusted, but respecting.” Olen kunnioittava iljetystäni kohtaan, sillä loppupeleissä iljetys on itseni määrittelemä ja se tarkoittaa sitä, että on enemmän töitä edessä. Otan iljettävät olosuhteet omaksi taakakseni. Onneksi tykkään työnteosta ja asioiden aikaansaannista.

Tiedostan, että ympäröivät olosuhteet ovat voimakkaampia elämän laatutason muokkauksessa kuin osaamme huomatakkaan. Tiedostan, että valtaosalla yksilöitä ei ole mahdollisuuksia itsekseen vaikuttaa niihin. Sen takia yhteiskunnallisia johtajia tarvitaan, loogisena osana luontoamme.


Tasa-arvovalta

Tiedostan siis myös, että on monia yksilöitä joilla taas on valtaa vaikuttaa vallitseviin olosuhteisiin omien ajatustensa ja niiden projisointitaidon voimalla. Opin eräältä suuresti arvostamaltani naiskirjailijalta kerran, että sanat ovat loitsuja: jos osaa ajatella vallitsevaa ympäristöään fiksummin ja kykenee kehittämään esitystaitojaan siten, että saa sanoillaan muutkin ajattelemaan fiksummin, niin silloin loitsu toimii ja kaikki elävät paremmin. Myyjänä olen aina pitänyt asiakkaitani järkevämpinä ihmisinä sen jälkeen kun he ovat ostaneet tarjoamaani palvelua tai tuotetta, sillä olen aina halunnut uskoa tarjoamani palvelun tai tuotteen arvoon, löytääkseni motivaatiota myydä sitä.

On toki tärkeätä muistaa, että loitsut ovat aina jossain määrin subjektiivisia. Mielestäni kuitenkin subjektiivisuuden käsittely loppuu siinä pisteessä kun aletaan puhua väkivallan logiikasta: kaikkien kansalaisten pitäisi kyetä näkemään objektiivisella, kyseenalaistamattomalla tasolla, kuinka väkivalta ei koskaan todellisesti kannata.

Tämän ymmärtämisestä lähtee tasa-arvovallan rakentuminen. Väkivalta murtaa todellisuutemme kantimia, nakertaessaan rauhaa horjuttamalla yksilöiden mielenvakautta ja siten heikentäen ihmisen suorituskykyä elämän elämisessä, madaltaen elämän hetkessä koettua arvoa.

Väkivaltakin on logiikkaan pohjautuva kompleksi. Mikäli ymmärtää yleisen suhteellisuusteorian vaikutukset yhteiskunnallisessa luonnossa niin ei ylläty siitä, että Ranskassa mellakoidaan. Kun kansalainen katsoo omasta vähävaraisesta asemastaan vauraudessa eläviä johtajiaan ja kokee, etteivät johtajat suoriudu tehtävistään – tämän vähävaraisen kansalaisen oman hyvinvoinnin kautta mitattuna – niin hänelle muodostuu kannustin ilmaista mielipiteensä. Sitä mukaa kun johtajan ja kansalaisen välisen hyvinvoinnin suhteellisuudentajun hahmotuskyky repeää liitoksistaan, niin se repii aika-avaruuden tasapainon – mielessämme elävän todellisuuden kuvamme vakauden – rikki, ja sitten alkaa mellakat.

Mikäli johtajan ja kansalaisen välinen hyvinvointisuhteellisuus säilyy ymmärrettävänä, niin rauha elää. Ihmisen tulee vakautuakseen ymmärtää miksi hän elää kuten elää ja miksi toinen elää toisin. Ymmärrys luo luottamuksen ennaltaedellytykset.

Väkivaltaa ennaltaehkäistäkseen pitää siis nähdä, miten aika-avaruuden taipuminen yhteiskunnallisessa todellisuudessa tapahtuu. Tämä mitataan numeroiden ja sanojen – tiedon – kautta. Tiedon tila määrittelee ne historian ajat missä elämme, ja nykypäivänä kykenemme havaitsemaan enemmän tietoa itsestämme ja yhteiskunnastamme kuin koskaan ennen. 

Sanoja ja numeroita ei kuitenkaan noin vain muuteta muuttaakseen vallitsevaa tiedon ja sen muodostaman todellisuuden tilaa: jos numerot ja sanat yhtenä päivänä sanovat yhtä niin ei niitä väännetä pinnalta jotta seuraavana päivänä ne sanovat jotain toista – jotain miellyttävämpää – vaikka se kuinka helppoa nykypäivän digitaalisin tiedonjulkaisumenetelmin olisi. Aika-avaruuden taivuttaminen yhteiskunnallisessa todellisuudessa – todellisuuden tilan todellinen muokkaaminen – alkaa sanojen ja numeroiden – tiedon – lähteiden ymmärtämisestä ja ohjaamisesta. Ihmisten kohtaamisesta.

Arkisemmin sanottuna: ihmisiä pitää kuunnella, jotta heidän ongelmat voidaan ymmärtää, jotta heidän ongelmiin voidaan puuttua, jotta heidän tuottama tieto todellisuudesta voi työn kautta tapahtuvan puuttumisen myötä muuttua. Ilman ihmisestä lähtevää tiedonmuokkausprosessia – ilman ihmisen todellista palvelemista luonnossa – on mahdotonta muodostaa ymmärrystä siitä, miten tieto muuttui ja siten on mahdotonta muodostaa luottamusta tietoon, josta tiedon pohjalta hahmoteltu mielenrauha rakentuu. 

Ymmärrys luo luottamuksen ennakkoedellytykset.

Voidakseen siis rakentaa tasa-arvovaltaa ihmisten välillä tulee ihmisten keskenään ymmärtää miksi he voivat luottaa toisiinsa. Mielestäni on yksi polku ylitse muiden rakentaakseen tasa-arvovaltaa ihmisten välille ja se on suomalaisittain itsestäänselvä ratkaisu: koulutus.


Tasa-arvovallan rakennus

Ymmärtääkseen ja siten luottaakseen ihmisten välillä elävään tasa-arvoon pitää ihmisten itse ymmärtää, mistä rakennuspalikoista tasa-arvo koostuu – vain näin he voivat kokea sen todeksi. Vain näin sanat voivat olla todellisesti totta.

Lain edessä kaikki yksilöt ovat tasa-arvoisia mutta lainymmärryksessään eivät. Kaikki eivät välttämättä tiedä oikeuksistaan, sillä oikeudet kehittyvät koko ajan, valtaosiltaan nopeammin kuin niiden opetuksen tahti.

Lainymmärrystä yksinkertaisimmillaan ilmaistuna


On muutama oikeus jotka ovat olleet meille jo pitkään taattuja ja joita opettamalla voimme vahvistaa tasa-arvoa, sillä tasa-arvoisesti oikeuksiemme edessä seisomme ja ymmärtämällä ne samoin keinoin voimme kunnioittaa niiden olemista, ylipäänsä. Tasa-arvovalta kasvaa kun kansalaisten keskinäisymmärrys – eräänlainen yhteiskunnallinen painovoima – vahvistuu, tukien rauhan tilaa entisestään, luottamuksen lisääntyessä.

Ymmärrys luo luottamuksen ennakkoedellytykset. Tämä on niin tärkeä sanonta, että toistin sen.

Kiteytän tasa-arvovallan muodostavien oikeuksien tärkeimmän kolmikannan: meillä on kaikilla oikeus omaan kehoomme, meillä on kaikilla oikeus omaan mieleemme ja meillä on kaikilla oikeus omaan omaisuuteemme. Tämä lihaamme, sieluamme ja tavaroitamme suojeleva yksilöoikeuksien kolmikanta on jakamaton ja vahvistettu olevaksi YK:n ihmisoikeusjulistuksista lähtien, jotka toimivat periaatteen tasolla kaiken lainsäädäntömme pohjana ja pitäisi toimia myös käytännössä, lakeja soveltaessa.

Kun ihmiselle opetetaan, että he yksilöinä omistavat itsensä omana pääomanaan elämässä, niin voivat he myös itse oppia suojelemaan oikeuksiensa säilymistä sillä ovat paremmin varusteltuja huomaamaan, kun niitä ja siten heitä ihmisinä loukataan.

Mitä enemmän ihmiset oppivat oikeuksistaan, sitä paremmin he osaavat niitä siis suojella. Sitä parempaa kansalaispalautetta he osaavat demokraattisen järjestelmän kautta johtajilleen antaa. Jää johtajien vastuulle – josta heille historiankirjoihin jäävää kunniaa ja tilille ilmaantuvaa palkkaa maksetaan – vastata oikeuksien täyttymisen vaatimusten tuomaan kysyntään, kansallista hallintojärjestelmää ohjaavalla johtamistaitojen tarjonnallaan. Taas arkisemmin: johtajilla on vastuu kuunnella saamaansa palautetta, eikä pyrkiä estämään palautteen syntymistä ylipäänsä.

Kaikki lailliset palikat ovat koulutuksellisille toimenpiteille jo olemassa, sillä yksilöoikeuksiemme kolmikanta ei ole mitään uutta. Oikeudet ovat olleet meidän jo kauan aikaa, mutta niiden kouluttaminen ontuu. Täten tasa-arvovalta ei pääse kehittymään kunnolla.

Koulutuksen alkuun lienee mielestäni tärkeätä painottaa kuinka kauan muutoksissa voi kestää kun johdetaan maailman isoimpia organisaatioita: kansallisia hallintojärjestelmiä, kuten Suomea ja sen lippua. Demokraattisen kansalaispalautejärjestelmän käyttäjät ja sen kautta valtaan päätyvät henkilöt tekevät tällä ymmärryksellä ensimmäiset luottamusta muodostavat kauppansa, molemmat huomatessaan, ettei yhteiskuntatason todellisuus muutu samassa ajassa kun älypuhelintä pyörittävä algoritmi taikoo ruudulle notifikaatioita. Aidoista muutoksista ilmoittavat notifikaatiot – isot uutiset – vievät aikaa muodostuakseen totena, sillä ihmisten välille rakennetun luottamuksen kyhäämisessä menee aikaa, sillä joidenkin pitää ensiksi tehdä maan pinnalla töitä, ennen kuin työn tuloksista voidaan uutisoida taivaan pilvessä. 

Yhteiskunnallinen aika-avaruus ei taivu yön yli muokatessaan niitä sanoja ja numeroita, jotka todellisuuttamme kuvastavat. Kunnioitettakoot sitä, että luottamuksen arvo elää nimenomaan siinä, että sen pohjustavan ymmärryksen rakentamisessa menee aikaa, joskus paljonkin. Täten luottamus ei myös murene hirveän nopeasti, normaaleissa olosuhteissa (joita Internetin kumpuamisen aika ei ole edustanut). 

Arvostaessa yli kaiken sitä aikaa mitä meille on elettäväksi annettu niin lienemme kykeneväisiä malttamaan mielemme. Rauhoittamalla työntekoon, teemme työllämme rauhaa. Tasa-arvovallan aika alkakoon, ainakin minun puolestani: ei ole kuin kolme pointtia opetettavana. Jos Stubb pystyy heittämään three-pointtereita, niin emmeköhän me muutkin: ainakin perusoikeuksiemme tasolla. Kaikkien pitäisi osata ymmärtää oikeutensa jotta he kykenevät niitä puolustamaan itseohjautuvasti.

Hyvää Joulua kaikille teille – omien seurantatyökalujeni tuottamien sanojen ja numeroiden valossa määränne kasvaa kuukaudesta toiseen peräti yllättävääkin tahtia.

Olen kiitollinen palautteestanne, nyt ja jatkossa.


Gifts, Christmas Had Quietly

Selling Ourselves To Starelves: How Incredible!

Missä voi
Omistaa loma-asunnon
Jossa voi
Olla rannalla
Jossa voi
Olla vuorilla
Jossa voi
Ojentaa maljan
GP:n voittajalle?


For Flying Societies (Around the Sun)

Remember that history class
Pretty much
Means operating instructions


Balanced Petroleum

Work-life balance makes no sense
Firstly, life should always come first
Since life contains work
Just like the function
Contains its variable

Life-work balance, on the other hand
Just doesn’t ring, not at all

What does makes sense, and rings so well
On the third hand, the indivisibly invisible one
Connecting us all
Is home-work balance
Since life, at both its daily ends
Half-way into the day
And fully out of it
Contains a home
Which we must work
To maintain
In balance
For that is just how it is
Obviously.

So if we assume
As an axiom, of sorts
Life as a given(A functional container
For everything within itself – such as your soul
Including itself – such as your body)
Since here we are
Reading about it
Then in our words
And thus our minds, held within our souls
And the resultant ways
Of being created
We shouldn’t be setting it up
Against work
To keep creating a destructive function
That simply doesn’t need to exist
In everyday life, which the immensely vast majority of us live in

The one function of words in battle that
Put simply
Means slavery
To a hellish question
Because by matching
Life in one corner
Work in the other
What you’re essentially asking is
Do you want to work
Or do you want to live

Which is really silly
Because for home to exist
You must be doing both anyway
Being alive and working
That is

Thus
What I recommend is
Seeing life
As the ring
And running the balance
Between how much
Working in one corner
And how much
Homing in the other
There should be
To find the quality level (the level, also meaning the balance)
You wish to live in

Thus
Defining the ring
The Ring Of Life Lived
Finding “I” (You), Naturally Now
Which You yourself
Along with all the Others you’re influenced by
Are building
Day-in
Day-out
Because it is your relationship with “it”
That you’re working with
Just like everyone else, out there.

Now then
Which One of you, out there
(I see you in my tracking stats, and where you’re from)
Wants to pay me some money?
At this time, my running rate
(the rate at which I’m ready to run to You, for You, to create value – for US)
Is €25,000 per month, 3-month minimum*

*Not including VAT
(Paid in Finland,
for that is where I work best,
where my points made in power,
are clearest and thus most secure
for implementation in practice)


O, Hope

Potential Mother, of my (Our) Child
You are so big, so grand (particularly in carried expense)
But I guess it makes sense
Since if the sperm
Was bigger than the egg
It simply would not fit.

Supremacy Over the Tool

Spoken with the force of self-control, 

Felt with the conquering of addiction,

– parlay selfissimo:

“It’s not that we are computers. It’s that computers – and what we do with them – are us.

We – humans – made them and everything we’ve done with them, and it is my strong opinion that remembering this fundamental ordering principle is of the utmost importance so that we evolve to recognize our supremacy over the tools that we use to go about our lives, whatever those tools may be: from computers to champagne.

As I point my smartphone at a thing with a purpose – like a magic wand – it is me pointing at the thing with the smartphone, not the smartphone pointing at the thing with me. The magic wand isn’t using me as a tool to give itself purpose as it relates to the thing: I am using it to give purpose to the thing as the thing relates to me.

In the process I am giving purpose to the magic wand and its maker, as the smartphone is what allows me to point at the thing with a purpose, in the first place. So, whilst I give purpose to the thing by wanting to do something with it via the magic wand, then in any given situation, I will also be giving meta-purpose to the tool itself: the enabler of the pointing with a purpose, and its maker.

The importance of the meta-level – the enabling – can never be discounted. But in the practice of reality – in the priorisation of importance in the moment of action – the purpose of the meta-level comes in dead last: just as it is supposed to, for the enabling is an obvious given, as otherwise the moment would not be. 

The tool is the bridge over the crossing. I am the bridger of the crossing. I give purpose to the bridge by using it. I give purpose to the other side by seeking to go there. I create the market for the creation of the bridge, thus seeking its maker. The purpose of the maker and the tool is acknowledged in the transaction of the obtainment of the tool – when the aforementioned tool is the thing, being pointed at with another tool, such as a credit card – but after the transaction the purpose of the maker and the aforementioned tool is relegated into the past with the credit card it was obtained with: into the meta, bound to serve in the present moment, to be pointed at the newly present thing, whatever the aforementioned thing might – in the present – be.

Like a road to anywhere of any kind, the tool – whatever it may be, on whatever level of its functioning – does not drive me: I drive it.

So it is that I am: Master of the Tool, Crosser of the Bridge.”


Identiteettini: primäärisesti Ihminen, toisinaan Suomalainen ja Tanskalainen, arjessa Töölöläinen ja joka hetkessä ihan vaan oma Itseni.

Aika se on ennen, nyt ja jälkeen – aina mennen ja aina tullen, samalla ollen. 

Muistojen voima

Muistoja luodaan jatkuvasti. Niiden arvotettu merkitys alkaa määriytyä luomista seuraavan ajan myötä, loppupeleissä katsoen sitä määrettä, kuinka pitkään muisto elää – jälleenkerronnan kautta. Ihminen määrittää jonkun muistin arvoa kerronnallisella käytöksellään, antamalla tai olemalla antamatta muiston luoneelle tarinalle lisää elinaikaa jälleenkerronnallisella teolla.

Muistojen syvempää arvoa löytääkseen pitää ymmärtää niiden sisältämien eri asioiden merkitystä osana yhteiskuntaa ja omaa elämää sekä niiden välillä, yli ajan analysoiden ja palauttaen argumentoinnin siihen hetkeen, missä itse elää. Tarkastelemalla muistien sisältämiä asioita oman elämän näkövinkkelistä mahdollistaa tunnetason ymmärryksen niiden merkityksestä.

Motivaatiot jälleenkerronnalle ovat yhtä monenlaisia kuin ihmisetkin. Kategorisoituna ihmiset voi kuitenkin funktioltaan tärkeiden muistojen säilyttämisen kohdalla nähdä ennalta-arvattavina: esimerkiksi turvallisuuteen liittyvät työt siirtyvät yhteiskunnassa todennäköisesti kuin luonnostaan ajassa eteenpäin olettaen, että yhteisöllä on jaettu tahto pysyä kasassa – turvallisuuteen liittyvän työn merkitys muistetaan yhteisössä kuin automaationa, joten sen rakentamiseen liittyviä tarinoita kerrotaan herkemmällä liipasimella etenkin jos olo on muuttunut turvattomaksi.

Varmasti tämän myötä erilaisten myynti- ja muunlaisten sotamytologioiden laajalevinneisyys eri ihmisyhteiskuntien historioissa on olemassa, sillä niiden sisältämä tieto on auttanut turvallisuuden siirtymisessä ajassa eteenpäin. Esimerkiksi Neil Gaimanin kirjoittama Norse Mythology on kirjoitushetkellä Suomalaisen kirjakaupan seitsemänneksi myyty teos – lieneekö tämä merkki skandinaavisen mytologian turvallisuutta opettavasta sisällöstä ajassa, missä olot ovat muuttuneet turvattomammiksi?

Mielestäni sillanrakennus- ja kulkuväylämytologioita tarvittaisiin nykypäivässämme enemmän, myynti- ja sotamytologioiden rinnalle, sillä loppupeleissä sillat ja muut kulkuväylät ovat niitä jotka mahdollistavat eri kohtaamiset missä tarinat ja niiden luomat muistot syntyvät: olivat ne sitten rauhaa rakentavan myynnillisiä tai sitä rikkovan sodankäynnillisiä. Tanska on nykyisiltä talousrakenteiltaan erinomainen lähde näille olosuhteita luoville rakennustarinoille, jos siis siltoja halutaan rakentaa ja kulkuväyliä operoida. Tanska on näiden lajien maailmanmestari, sillä se on kerännyt muistoja niistä Tanskan Dannebrog-lipun alla jo melkein 800 vuotta: kenties pitempään kuin yksikään nykyisin pystyssä oleva moderni yhteiskunta.

Miten esimerkiksi Maersk näkee maailmanpoliittisen kehityskulun oikaisun – mitä siltoja pitäisi rakentaa, että talousjärjestelmä toimisi globaalisti vakaammin tulevaisuudessa? Sillä on ilmiselvää nähdä, että ihmiskunnan hyvinvointi on riippuvaista sillanrakennuskyvykkyyksistämme, niin kukapa sen luontevampi vastaamaan näihin kysymyksiin kuin sillanrakentajat itse!

The Solvation of Universal Basic Income

This one really isn’t hard. It just needs a complete reconstruction of the base of the financial system: of money. Instead of one-dimensional money, we need to make it two-dimensional: give birth to the other side of the coin.

One-dimensional money – as we have it now – is as it is. Equal on all fronts: a euro is a euro, a ruble is a ruble, a yuan is a yuan: earned by working for it.

Two-dimensional money maintains the equality of the number. A euro is still a euro in number. But two-dimensional money arrives into our use through two separate forms:

First, we have money as we know it now: that earned through work, useable and saveable in the marketplace.

Second, we have money as we will know it through universal basic income: that given as a natural right, enabling all lives to be lived with a basic sense of dignity. Natural Money differs from Worked Money in that it is born at the beginning and laid to rest at the end of each month. Natural Money can only be used – not saved – and thus it can be directed purely in the direction of covering life’s basic necessities so that everyone can live with dignity.

Now that we have the blockchain, we can build it. Two-dimensional money is within very easy reach, administratively & technologically. Just issue each Citizen a payment card, load it up with Natural Money every month, and send them out into the marketplace.

The purveyors allowed acceptance of Natural Money can be limited by a standard definition of basic needs (not too much science required here – and politics will maintain the definition process across time). In turn, purveyors accepting Natural Money will – of course – have it transferred into Worked Money that they can save up, since they have worked for it.

The importance in making Worked Money saveable is that that annotates the value of work as the path towards ownership and increased personal sovereignty, and we should wish to maintain the value of work, as work is what keeps us where we are, setting the preconditions required for us to be able to move forward. Without work, we inevitably slide backward as we forget how to operate the societal machine and all its parts – such is the process of natural decay, which work counters, and let us not forget that society is a part of Nature. By making Worked Money saveable and thus giving it additional value as compared to Natural Money, we maintain the sanctity of the value of work and preserve the value of equities already had.

This is not to say that a life lived mostly or perhaps someday even fully on Natural Money isn’t or won’t be a sovereign life in and of itself, as well. It is just that work should have the higher valuation when it comes to increasing One’s sovereign power through ownership, since ownership is a powerful world-defining force that shouldn’t come without prerequisites. Ownership sets the stage for our forward progress by having control over the equity that we live our lives upon, and it takes work to own something well. The value of work cannot be discounted.

This solvation of universal basic income is completely dependent on us living in the digital age, since otherwise the overhead costs of issuing and transforming the moneys every month would be irredeemably high. Let it be an example of why the digital platform we have built is worth preserving at all costs. It is what allows us to live in freedom – now and always to come.


A final note 

It is important to see how universal basic income allows for a more sustainable growth path for the economy over time, by being a natural stream of income not dependent on any other factor than the fact that people live. This fuels the economy without the need for work that might not otherwise need to be done, saving natural resources and allowing for people to live more freely.

Universal basic income removes the infinite growth pressure on the economy brought on by the design of our retirement systems, which are currently dependent on the infinite growth of equity values, which are in turn dependent on the infinite growth of productivity, which in turn means the constant further pressurisation of workers, leading to the inevitable string of social unrest seen across history, when pressures come to be too high to bear – just as is being seen in France right now, for example, and probably in many other places to come, as well. That is – unless changes are made in time to the economic balance of power.

All in all, the economic calculation of the past simply won’t work in the modern age. One-dimensional money – where there lies a dominant-submissive relationship between owners and operators – simply cannot deliver the solutions we need to fix all the problems we have, from climate change through to economic inequality and all the social problems that these bring.

The only way forward – the only way to depressurise the economy whilst maintaining systemic stability and a modern quality of life – is to introduce a universal basic income. The best way to do that is to give rise to two-dimensional money. There is no better way to give power to the people – the power that they need to live their lives in peace, free of everyday fear, like animals in the wild.

We are not animals. We are humans: destined to live in peace, in comfortable indoor spaces.