Banking is not ‘green’, this is obvious, the exception of one ‘sustainable’ bank or another doesn’t make a difference. We can explain it has two reasons, the first, environmentally banks don’t care. They live of cashflow and credit for any activity, whether it is drugs, wars, chemical plants, it’s all the same. The more profit the businesses they invest in make, the more people need credit. The second reason explains their preference for fossil fuels, which is that a fossil fuel based mechanized economy responds to our present type of credit, which is carbon credit, in a predictable way.
You give a guy money to buy a house, and because food, logistics, mining, manufacturing all depend on fossil feuls the guy can use the money to get his plan executed, hire people willing to work for the money, get the logistics companies to move the stuff. That all hinges on one big condition : The money buys fossil fuels. Try runnig a cab business accepting money that doesn’t buy gasoline. Money shifts fossil fuels around our globe, at least in the real economy part of it. Banks covet our dependence on that fuel as much as they covet our dependence on credit (money has to be in short supply).
The financial crisis is a strategy designed by the banking system to remain in control as fossil fuel supplies dwindle.
This system is coming apart because the basic desire for humans is not to be rich, but to survive. Contraty to the economic mythology the market is not the essential thing, it is production, ownership. Where economic interest will always try to distance us from what we need, so the intermediaries seem essential to our survival, our own instinct is to get things where we are. Many things have been made very hard for us to do, like owning property, selling energy, producing food, just so we become wage earners supporting the so called carboncredit economy. Now that fossil energy is dwindling this system has no answer but cut more credit, so less carbon is consumed. It has no answer to the crisis, the crisis is it’s survival strategy!
Money is a mobilizer if it promises a share of what people help produce
The growing cost of the banks trying to surivive is the waste of human potential in society. Money should not be originated, brought in circulation only to burn fossil fuels. This is something the banks have pushed increasing our fossil fuel dependence over many years. Instead money can simply be a promisory note, for instance "good for three potatos", and used to organize the planting of a potato field. As poeple trust the ‘potatomoney’ they work the field. Later when it is time to harves they know they will get three potatos for every note they own. The only way this is possible today would be potato futures, which would be done by a bank like JPMorgan Chase. While in principle the farmer needing the hands in planting can create that money. No reason why these notes could not be used between planting and harvest to pay for other things.
By the example above you can see that almost anyone with a viable plan could create their own money. This is the natural thing to happen. Words can mean money if one says "If you help me plant this field you get 3 potato’s each!". Banks always foment distrust for this type of situation, smearing it and reminding you of times it didn’t work out so well, because they live of that distrust, or rather, irrational fear of being cheated, as part of their deciet. You have to be confused and at a loss, and then the neat good looking bankers will ‘help’ you. They use you, and this use comes at an incredible cost.
Our idea of ‘saving the banks’ is the most generous handover of power to them in history
To break the control banking has on society and individuals they secrecy of banking needs to be lifted. Rather the whole franchise of lending out money based on fractional reserves or on valuated assets needs to be centralized in an utility type organization, so the whole financial system needs to be sacked, but that is a bit of a stretch for some. There is a good reason why a financial system is a labyrinthal casino, because as stated above it depends fundamentally on carbon cashflow which has a hard limit, the fossil fuel supply. An essential part of banking thus consists of losing money, dissapearing it, which as long as it increases control over assets is fine! Banks don’t need money, it is just a tool for them.
Instead of trying to make banks more honest we propose a new system, a hypertransparent system for transactions. Instead of securing the data of people doing transactions we propose to open them up 100%, in fact, the visibility of all transactions guarantees the integrity of the system. It consists of two parts:
1. The transaction log.
2. The observers
The transaction log processes entries done into it. It functions almost 100% like twitter does today. Twitter creates a publicly visible log of messages entered by the twitter user. There is no privacy against any internet user. Anyone can see the messages. The only difference is that in our case all messages are transactions.
The observers are all the users that can access the transaction log. Because they all can they can reconstruct the sequence of all transactions reported. In practice this means a user accesses the transaction log from a digital device with local storage and working memory. This means at any time many copies of the transaction log exist apart from the storage necessary to serve the log by the main site. The integrity/validity of the transactions in the log can be derived from them being reflected in the copies stored in the observer devices. A hologram of datepoints means no one person or even a group of people can ever create a false impression of certain transactions having taken place that where not originally fed into the transaction log. You know a transaction has to be 100% reflected by the observers or it is bogus.
> Pete sends three dimes to Hans
> Sally sends 40 dollars to Jurgen
> BASF sends 400 tons of salt to AKZO (order 1234)
> Frans sends $500 for 20 steel pipes
Each transaction is essentially both a contractual promise as the execution of a transfer of ownership of goods or services. The currencies like the $50 are not of the sender or the reciever, but of the country that creates them for the purpose of transactions. Therefore it must be clear what can be transacted in what currency, what backs it, what is the basis of a currency in use. This does complicates things a bit, but that complexity is not hidden at the cost of having an instabile unreliable economic and financial environment. The key notion is that credit is not extended to allocate carbon to consumers, but that currency is created to the measure of goods and services to be traded. Then it is a pure trading system, while right now banking is a covert energy distribution system. Credit is not created by banks, but by anyone that wants to trade what they have.