Make this my home page
More buttons
Best of the Day
Page
Turn off that Wi-Fi network - it's disturbing our chakras.
Video

Hot For Words: Lollipop

Blog
Innocent Spam
Game
EA SPORTS Complex on PlayStation Home
Art
Kinetic sculpture is a cross between art and engineering.
Cool tools
Hot links
Dadaist deconstruction of new media, as a flash game.
Everything you need to know about microscopic water bears
News for nerds
For lovers of the Green Fairy
Stories and art from Australia's Yolgnu people
Australia's best science fiction author
Did the earth just move?
Don't discount journalism
Novelist and comic book legend's homepage
Searchable history of the internet
Exposing systematic torture in Iran
Museum of science fiction, utopia and extraordinary journeys
The real story of christianity
Image bookmarking
Developing tech to get the internet to its full potential
Where Did It Go? - From Terry D McGee

There's a new computer virus that's deleting all the money in bank records. It started in a few small community banks in Australia where it was created as a mathematical thought experiment. Didn't do too much harm, was nicknamed Horatio. Unfortunately it escaped...

This week people asked why I keep urging an immediate spending increase on emission reduction technology and, separately, a lady almost died of shock when I said "money is imaginary". She thought I was being provocative but my actual reason was that both of these issues are intimately related to Keynes, Galbraith and how, history tells us, human society works and, also, what we can do about Horatio, the virus eating the money.

McCain and Palin, and other conservatives around the world, say it's obvious that, in this moment of credit freeze-crisis, that governments should reduce spending - "isn't it obvious" - they get very upset at Obama still planning new programmes & spending on green technology, promising bad things. Their mindset is what made the Great Depression so Great. John Maynard Keynes explained it back in the 1930's - that when free enterprise reduces spending governments need to increase spending.

In this crisis the state of Illinois USA has had its normal cyclical lending refused so that it has stopped paying most of its bills. On 10/10/2008 Illinois owed more than $2 billion. Some businesses have collapsed while waiting to be paid. In New South Wales Australia there are many public hospitals that can't pay their bills because some people in the state government are slowing down the release of funds. Neither Illinois nor New South Wales are broke but both are caught up in a counter-productive mindset, both victims of their respective federal governments who actually print the "money". Big banks in America are hoarding the Fed bailout billions (not lending it) in order to buy up smaller companies that get desperate (because the big ones are not lending). The Fed should lend direct now.

John Kenneth Galbraith in his book "Money" made it clear that money was created by the human imagination - a valuable book with two extra advantages of being short and very witty (all decision makers should read it straightaway). Galbraith was one of the team of economists who used Keynes's theories to fund America's World War II effort and the fact is that America did not fully recover from the Great Depression until it started its massive deficit spending to fight World War II. A sad fact in that it took ten years to convince people and it was then "invested" in blowing other people up. But it did prove that a sovereign government can afford deficit spending as long as the public believes it is for a valuable purpose and it did prove that deficit spending that creates jobs can stimulate an economy that is in a recession or a depression. Part of President W Magoo's problem with his 07-08 half trillion dollar deficit spending is that the public no longer believes the Iraq War is a valuable purpose and, secondly, his deficit has not been creating extra jobs but has instead been giving windfall profits to the multi-millionaires. Trickle Down Economics was always a sham and now even the trickle has dried up. Still it has surprised most people (except Steve Keen at UWS) how much has been lost so quickly and I've started to think that when the Horatio virus escaped it managed to get itself into America several weeks ago - which I guess would explain a lot.

To investigate it, and to calm down Ivy, the lady who almost ‘died of shock', we need to understand that governments and their Reserve Banks create money when they print it (or allow normal banks to "lend" it). They can, and do, get piles of old paper money and burn it (which kills any viruses) and then print more. Today most money is mere digits in a computer data file. That's why Horatio, this new money eating computer virus, can destroy a lot of money very quickly and when it hit a few small banks in NSW it freaked people out because it also got out into the customers computers. Strangely people noticed that Horatio happens to tell the difference between money numbers and all the other numbers in the computer and only deletes the money. So all of the computer equipment and connected machines kept working - it's just the bank credits that disappeared. It's a bit strange, weird and unsettling. The bank customers have still got their houses, cars, farms, factories and machinery - all working fine - so are they worse off. When the temperature goes up another 2 degrees, when bushfires increase they will be worse off, when the Murray- Darling River System dies they'll be worse off, when the Great Barrier Reef dies they'll be worse off. So which is most important - reality or money.

Money has no inherent value except as a means to trade, to sell one thing and hold money until you buy something else. The communities hit by Horatio have had to communicate intensely, quickly - arrange deals, barter-trade real commodities. They're surviving because they know who they can trust, irrespective of money. They have a sense of reality. You see, the exact amount of money in a country is unknown because it keeps changing faster than anyone can count it. Instead, people measure not how much money there is but merely if it's increasing or decreasing. It's a very nebulous thing even before you start adding ‘sub-prime loans' and ‘credit default swaps'. If money was gold-backed securities these new "financial products" would still be risky. Even gold? You can't eat it, it's too soft as a metal - most of its ‘value' is in our imagination which is why the first of our paper money was a promise to pay a weight of gold, and the English "pound" was born. However, as Richard Neville complained, a Pound no longer equals any gold.

Horatio's path out of Australia can not be mapped - the only evidence is money that has disappeared. Whether the last 2 months in America has been Horatio's work or whether the money eating virus is still yet to hit....will be discovered in the future....just as week to week we keep getting worse stories out of America. But whatever happens in that unfolding or ‘collapsing' story...the planet is still at the crossroads. Whether we save modern civilization or crash the planet into a CO2 rich hell is up in the air like an old gold coin spinning before it lands. The sooner we move, the sooner we reduce CO2 emissions the better our odds become that the coin comes down safe. Economic history tells us that the fastest way out of a depression is a war because the government (that can create Money) isn't afraid to run deficits to win the war. The war that can create wealth and jobs (instead of death and destruction) is the war against global warming emissions. Expenditure to reduce those emissions will rebuild many countries economies (by govt deficit spending) and build the technology of the future (which, if govts keep a %, will give windfall profits). But if Horatio takes hold we'll have to reinvent money - virus free.

Go back to previous pageLeave some feedbackPrint this pageEmail link to friendsBookmark in del.icio.usAdd to Stumble ThisAdd to your favourite bookmarksDigg this article

Tags

 

Related Stories

   
Next

So, I read today that the designer of Mattel's Barbie doll was obsessed with sex. Seriously? We need a book-length study to tell us that?

We in the land of feminist academics have been teaching the pernicious sexual politics of Barbie for years. The breasts that defy gravity, the hair, the long, long legs and of course the cruel, nipped in waist. Oh, don't forget the tiny clothes, the f*ck-me pumps, not to mention the well-equipped kitchens in every Barbie Dream House. The message of Barbie seems unambiguous to me.

Still, many students (and not a few colleagues) consistently resist seeing Barbie as a miniature sex toy, claiming instead that the doll was a good role model for little girls. (One could, after all, purchase a Barbie doll dressed as a doctor.) Or claiming, equally untenably, that toys had no impact on their ideas about gender roles or their own sexuality.

These students, mostly women, want to rescue Barbie, to protect their own childhoods from academic interrogations of pop culture and what those interrogations might reveal. That's understandable. Yet, many of these same students sit in my class pouring out of tank tops, squeezed into low-rise jeans, or tugging on mini-skirts so short they are nearly impossible to sit down in. That is, dressed like Barbie.

It's an experience I regularly have as a feminist critic of popular culture: a media event, book or news story demonstrates that I'm not wrong, my ideology is not based in "over analyzing," "hyper sensitivity," or "reading too much into things" (the three most common criticisms feminists tend to encounter). It's disappointing, frankly, to stumble so often upon evidence of society's sexism and to keep having to explain that it's there. Disappointing that Barbie was so obviously a sexed-up, misogynist, bad idea for little girls and to realize how thoroughly our culture embraced the toy anyway.

So, here we are again. Feminists were right: no one but a sex-obsessed man with a perverse idea of female anatomy would create a female toy like Barbie. And, as is too too often the case for feminists, being right isn't something to celebrate.

Dr. Bean is an Associate Professor of English at Marshall University, specializing in Gender Studies, Film and Drama. She is the author of "Post-Backlash Feminism: Women and the Media Since Reagan/Bush" (McFarland & Co. 2007). She hosts a blog on mid-life and feminism at kelliebean.com.