Sign Post 100: References

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_broadcasting

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_television

https://www.nyu.edu/classes/stephens/History%20of%20Television%20page.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_introduction_of_television_in_countries

https://books.google.co.za/books?id=V6EHmNCmEWQC&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=What+is+the+sensory+difference+in+behavior+between+radio+and+television+broadcast&source=bl&ots=QojFAstMCX&sig=ACfU3U0vt2hyvqp3VzsOh9ESdxRwaCj1YQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiXs4ynwI_kAhVDSxUIHTTRD-0Q6AEwDnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=What%20is%20the%20sensory%20difference%20in%20behavior%20between%20radio%20and%20television%20broadcast&f=false

https://books.google.co.za/books?id=memaNxx1hxoC&pg=PT146&lpg=PT146&dq=What+is+the+sensory+difference+in+behavior+between+radio+and+television+broadcast&source=bl&ots=DNsRCFc5Y_&sig=ACfU3U3zusyy996lRRlF_wyeSSdipYh-Ag&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiXs4ynwI_kAhVDSxUIHTTRD-0Q6AEwD3oECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=What%20is%20the%20sensory%20difference%20in%20behavior%20between%20radio%20and%20television%20broadcast&f=false

https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199793471-e-62

https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/npb/people/amc/articles-pdfs/contexef.pdf

https://www.cdmc.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/170/2018/05/greenfield_beagles-roos_1988.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_psychology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_aspects_of_television

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08838151.2010.498851

https://www.nerdynaut.com/mass-media-and-psychology-the-relationship-between-the-human-behavior-and-mass-media

THE RADIO AND THE TELEVISION IN THE MORAL EDUCATION OF A CHILD
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjrsKKk0o_kAhX_QxUIHQyoAa4QFjAAegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ajol.info%2Findex.php%2Fog%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F57920%2F46286&usg=AOvVaw0cpnXJ3dTQt5PY3ueoHUEB

Post 6: Media rights and violations: Cause and effect. 2019/08/05: Political

Media influence in global aspects

Part One: Political

Think time: 

Should I publish this post or hold back. I have no participation from the public so it could be harmless to publish, right?
While I'm writing these pages I have to constantly re-negotiate the position of the individual against that of the state. In this matter, I have to be reminded often, that I'm wading into deeper waters than that of an economic discussion.

Whichever way I look at it, these factors are having serious impact on economies.

Write time:


My narrative is aimed at disclosing detail which will impact positively on the economy of the world. There is a lot of controversy, at this point in time, about the interference of media of all kinds, on all aspects of society.

I will table my ideas, which has no formulation or inclination, to direct, judge, or conclude an end result. 

I will be unbiased and will not issue an opinion. From an economic position we will put all the facts and conspiracies to a discussion test, without pointing fingers, yet, put the house in order theoretically, hoping that the result will lean toward favorite outcomes.

The first question we have to ask, before discussing media in its own right, is the rights of the players, who profit or lose most, from the media exposure.

The individual and the state seems to be the most prominent in this question.

Which is more important, individual or state, or are they equal? And why do we have to ask these questions?

In reality the State and it's sanctity, should have the highest priority. 

Why? 

Well, we select our parliament on the basis of one man one vote, in the Western and/or mainly Capitalist world, mostly. 

Socialist and Communist regimes have other rules, often more strict. To protect their status they manipulate the rights of the individual to make sure the state can function without interference.

By virtue of that fact and the mandate of Capitalist governments, to govern, we always assume, that they are governing on the basis of a constitution or historical common law migration. The latter is the case in the UK which does not have a written constitution.

This is a legislative process which allows the government to use any means necessary to act against aggression, dissent and a very wide range of issues, on behalf of and on instruction from the majority of individuals who mandated them. The written constitution then plays a huge role in securing the rights of minorities, under an act of Human Rights.

The question is of course to ask, can the two entities exist in harmony or a type of flux condition which suits both parties? This means that even though the laws are constructed in a rigid way, to be fair to any challenge, it must have a certain leeway, to give slack in cases where needed. If all instances or acts were in accordance with the legislative process and in line with the ambiguous lifestyle permitted by this act, the balance of power between State and individual will be in an equilibrium condition. I subscribe to the title "Fair and Reasonable"

What is the restrictions which will lead to a breakdown of equilibrium and create an unbalanced vehicle?

We can look at this as a tug of war. While all parties are "FAIR AND REASONABLE" and respect and trust can be upheld, the line should not move either way. When the power of one of the two parties are increased or diminished, the balance is in a stress condition, until it can be restored. Why could this balance be in stress? Let us view all or some of the possible issues which can undo the balance of power.

At this time, November 2019, the individual has become very strong in numbers, using social media grouping platforms. They can get attention within minutes, from this media. From this platform the state would have to go to a war condition, with its own electorate, to exercise it's mandate. The state in this case is considered a single entity or individual and cannot swamp the media with more than one voice at a time. While this limits the voice of the state the individual can rouse ten million voices against this one entity called "The State" and swamp any defense as if one man one vote secures a majority against the state. 

Every person, who opens his or her mouth, seem to be gored by somebody opposing their contribution, or nullify their voice and opinion. It makes no difference what the arguments are, there is an awful lot of disagreement and most of it has a huge emotional ingredient/content. The "for" and "against" on any point whatsoever, is roughly split down the middle, in many/most cases, because of media interference. 

The main media Channels are mostly owned by a few big corporations, who are not interested in any person's view point. They bait everybody to be able to wedge their own narrative to the foreground. In other words, talk shows and news channels are all used, or could possibly be used, as a propaganda platform. These platforms could be financed by somebody who has an alternate agenda, which could destabilize the power of the state. In some bizarre circumstances the state will indirectly own the media, to use it as a means to indoctrinate their voters. Communist countries do this often. It is part of the Socialist fabric.

The individual are in such a good position today, globally, where everybody claims the right of free speech, and which is granted. The private individual has his cake and eating it with whipped cream and cherries. Yet, we require our governments to perform with maximum efficiency, which they cannot do when citizens are criticizing them all the time. We are claiming that our elected officials are not doing what we voted them into government for, but we do nothing to replace them. Neither do we hold them accountable. In the worst case scenario the state uses its powers, with support from the police and military sector, to suppress uprising or dissent, as we are seeing in France and Hong Kong, right now.

In such a scenario the status between State and individual has reached volatile peaks of distrust and disrespect. This in turn will turn the state into a villain who discard the voice of the individual so as to secure the integrity of its manifest.

On par with this luxury of free speech we have inherited a very useful tool to create mass hysteria. The internet has opened up to give free speech, unchallenged leverage. You can use one of many tools to get your message of love or hate across, before the state even has the time to discuss the inherent implications. The state has no chance, in many of these cases, to review its point of interest. They have no time to appoint council in defense and secure a proper rebuttal on or about the argument. So most often they act on impulse, when an media attack takes place and this creates damage to their reputation before any defensive mechanism can be established or be discussed.

In effect, this is the core of the problem. One individual can lose his reputation and many can join in the rampage, by posting just one argument, but a government cannot afford to do the same, to garner conciliatory defensive action. This effect in reality means that the government can receive a million grenades in its office while only one or a few disgruntled individuals can soak up many grenades without an impact.

Governments across the world are all feeling the brunt of this mismanaged status and it will/might/could soon run into a "turn over" tactic.

 There are governments across the world who will allow this behavior only until the state lose control or seem to lose it. At that point the unpredictable could happen and sometimes the predictable does. This happened recently in Venezuela, when the government had to defend itself against a self proclaimed president, who in essence. is a nobody.

In this, we can see the present mantle of Hong Kong turning tables. While the Chinese has accepted some liability in the transfer of Hong Kong, the area now belongs to China and will be administered by it. Within this cusp we seem to forget the incidents in Tienanmen square in Beijing. Hong Kong will/could/may become the mirror of that event. The only reason why China is not making war with the Hong Kong locals are that they, China's banks and Communist party officials, are laundering huge sums of Asian Currencies into the Dollar bank system, for own benefit.

Why are the forces which requires equal trust and respect, both from government and individual, so important?

That event of right's being eroded, will become the turning point for many protests globally. Governments will toughen up and we could see escalation of tensions, where the individual will/might/could lose his grip on his sovereign rights. This and the coming season of poverty, water scarcity, food price manipulation, monetary collapse, will all tie in with the rise and fall of the age of modern surveillance techniques and curtailment of the social media platforms. For our world to be safe, this has to happen. It has been proven over and over that there is no cohesion in a group ticket, when there are hundreds of managers and one laborer or lawlessness cloaked under the mantel of freedom of speech.

In the analysis it seems that the individual has secured too much leverage in the relationship with its government. The consequential damage is that governments will be forced to abandon the unwritten truce pact, of a level playing field and return to a type master and servant relationship. No government in the world will ever be able to function while the media and individual rights have the upper hand.

Is our world then unsafe right now?

My personal opinion:

In all my life, which is from after world war two, I have never seen this world more dangerously tilted toward destruction of life, any type of life, as we know it. In an opposing argument I have neither ever seen so many issues being tilted toward resonance of a cause, to sustain life, being guarded so strongly by emotions.

In the next post I will discuss population growth and how this manifest with available resources. This topic has an immediate influence on all structures of life yielding dynamics. It has a direct tie to the influence of media in all it's forms. To coin a phrase, we are used to this one: The pen is mightier than the sword. Well, to me; "One word voiced on social media is more powerful than any declaration of war ever written by the pen".

We have now looked at the discussion from a distance, watching the ornamental image being turned to various angles of perception, so that we can distinguish the light from darkness. Let us then look at  the Media and how it is delivering the programs, including the news bulletins.

The following part of this memorandum hinges on selective references. If you think that you have read enough on internet about the issue on the subject, please skip the yellow section following this paragraph. this part is about the origins of radio and the technological track of advance that followed to this point. The point made here is that the information era has it's advantages as well as disadvantages. 

However, the result of this scientific wonder is that the individual became stronger all the time while the government did gain in the past until the individual learned that he could usurp power from the government, without force.

The media began as a radio which could only host talk shows. We could hear stories being told and everything was about sound. The radio broadcasting of music and talk intended to reach a dispersed audience started experimentally around 1905-1906, and commercially around 1920 to 1923. VHF (very high frequency) stations started 30 to 35 years later.

At this time only one sensor of the human body was and could be manipulated. There were thousand of programs and although most were used for either education, fun, spiritual, news, community involvement, entertainment, etc., many were tuned, by respective governments, to be setting a course for cultural development, in a way that pleased the State. The State always had a hand in the evolution of the public broadcasters and as such, used these facilities to further its own bias. Every country in the world has a public broadcasting division or more, which has the authority to provide programs to the masses, to appease the voters and provide a public service. It is a well known fact that Communist and Socialist countries have a very narrow band of disbursement of its intellectual matter. In short the message is that the public should only hear what the State wishes it to do.

We must admit that this medium had a very limited focus on the individual. The individual could multi task while listening to the radio so that much of the conversation could be missed if the attention was drawn to other duties.

The number of television sets in use rose from 6,000 in 1946 to some 12 million by 1951. No new invention entered American homes faster than black and white television sets; by 1955 half of all U.S. homes had one

June 2, 1953 – the coronation of Her Majesty Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom was the first to be televised live on British television. July 23, 1962 – the first live transatlantic television broadcast via the Telstar I satellite.

From these references we can see that Television was part of the household since the 1950's.

As reference I quote from the Oxford Books about the power of broadcasting in the political sphere and how it will or should/could behave in the future.

"Major Research Findings

An important question stemming from these trends asks what these shifts in the media landscape mean for politics and for political communication theory? As it turns out, there is considerable research to help answer this question, but it is not without controversy. Two major areas of scholarship pertaining to the first part of this question are whether narrow casting leads to greater audience selective exposure, and whether selective exposure will foster political polarization that serves to undermine democracy. Another area of scholarship addresses the second part of the question by examining whether new forms of media content (e.g., niche news) and patterns of their consumption necessitate entirely new theorizing and expectations about media effects on political outcomes."

and

"Conclusion

This chapter posed the question of whether mass media will continue to endure in an environment of vast choice and increased audience control over both media content production and its reception. Implications of the shift from broadcasting to narrow casting, and to hyper personalization of content, invite political communication scholars to re-examine long-held theoretical assumptions about whether, where, and how media effects are likely to occur and to devise new methods to study them. While the chapter made clear that mass media will likely endure, it also raised new questions that will have to be addressed as scholars strive to understand the nature and effects of mass communication in the future."

 It is not my intention to find in favor or against this narrative. It is however essential to derive from such titles the track which demands our full attention and participation, in learning how this medium will influence the mind of those producing goods and services and those buying those products, or for that matter, the economic outcomes of Nations. How will the psych of the human, behave in lieu of the bombardment of information which it has to dissect. 

In the WIKI : "Social aspects of television" the following is written and I quote:
"The social aspects of television are influences this medium has had on society since its inception. The belief that this impact has been dramatic has been largely unchallenged in media theory since its inception. However, there is much dispute as to what those effects are, how serious the ramifications are and if these effects are more or less evolutionary with human communication"

In the article, "The Relationship between Traditional Mass Media and Social Media”: Reality Television as a Model for Social Network Site Behavior, written for Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, we get to hear about reality TV and mass media/mass audiences. In this script the writer does a very extensive analysis of these two norms and how it contributes to the total picture of media use.

In this article, look very carefully at this sentence: "Viewers are operationalized as active processors of television content who learn and model behavior portrayed in television programming"

In the article:"Mass Media and Psychology: The relationship between the human behavior and mass media" we read:
Politics is one of the best examples where mass media and psychology are inter-related. The point made by Krosnick (2001) has demonstrated that the understanding of the voter about the candidate’s personal traits such as leadership, trustworthiness, intelligence are the keys to win a vote in the USA. This fact has been again practically proved from the result of presidential election United States in 2016. Because of that, politicians try to share their personal vision and show their personalities using mass media like television interviews, social media, and websites. This media-psychological integration has made the duties of politicians more difficult and competitive.

In the article
"THE RADIO AND THE TELEVISION IN THE MORAL
EDUCATION OF A CHILD"
I quote:
"Preamble
The radio and the television, audio and visual techniques of
transmitting information, knowledge and education to a wider
audience, are eloquent testimonies of man’s creative potentialities in
recent times. Their power and influence on the contemporary and
globalized human society can not be doubted. The young and the
un-discerning adults are at the mercy of what they hear on radio or
watch/receive through television sets"


This in essence ties up my argument about this subject. From the information shared here it is evident that governments see the media as a envelope of strategy which is in violation to it's destination. Where it used to serve the purpose of governments it now mostly only serve the individual. 

On a global platform it makes sense that the media is mainly used as a battering ram to dispose of the governments across the globe. It is also not a secret that governments like the USA and Russia, including others like China, are using this medium to further their own interfering ends in smaller countries.


Whether we will adjust, in society, to respect our governments, even when we disagree with their position, remains to be seen. It may happen that the global positioning against the interference by this medium, could get agitated long before a state of acceptance by both parties concludes. This will have an inevitable course of rebellion by governments against those internet sites which gives audiences world wide a stage to operate from. It will take just one government to consolidate it's powers, to break the bank on this matter. If only one Western nation's government, remove all these rights, in favor of a stable government, the rest will follow suit. That will be the end of Social media as we know it. The question now is, how far are we from that point and what will be the pointers that will serve this purpose.

Post 3. Volatility on the global platform 2019/6/16

It was not my intention to talk about the results of the time we are living in, neither was it my intention to talk about issues which I have not discussed in previous chapters. 

Now, it has become necessary to change that cord and jump between past and present occurrences as they are either happening or where the results we get, are pertaining to past decisions and actions. I'm therefore compelled to discuss issues of relevance today, to bring fresh product to the table, so to speak.

What is happening on the global stage, and what will happen as a result?

As you read the news globally the following results.

1. Financial markets are under pressure everywhere.
2. Deficits are order of the day, every country seems to have one.
3. Interest rates are very low which is indicative of lower demand for loans or stagnant domestic growth.
4. Inflation is high.
5. Demand for higher wages is an ongoing siren.
6. Growth in GDP is low for every country.
7. Most countries are in Austerity condition.
8. Even with gold in demand the price remains low.
9. Oil price remains under pressure to be low.
10. Retirement age has increased everywhere while retirement is actually not possible.
11. Retirement investments are stolen by governments, to meet costs.
12. Gold is seized by those holding it under guise of non democratic rule.
13. Small countries are under siege by big countries who wish to subvert them for resources.
14. Insolvencies are higher than ever.
15. Bad debt is so high that it is becoming irretrievable.
16. Money on foreign exchanges are slumping.
17. No demand for resources. Over supply.
18. Flooding, Seismologic critical issues as far as Earth quakes and volcano activities.
19. War drums beating everywhere. EU government rebellions.
20. Threats of nuclear use, for protection, while there is no threat.
21. Movement of people/migration on a unprecedented scale.
22. Media channels being political inspired, instead of reporting on issues of the day.
23. The groups who are opposites in politics are fighting as if their lives depend on it.
24. Large scale political fraud in voting systems worldwide.
25. Free speech is suddenly a right, while governments see it as a privilege when they need to.
26. Demonstrations/revolt, has increased in every country, to the point of creating carnage.
27. Religions are in distress and the two biggest, Christianity and Muslim are gearing for showdown.
28. Racism is being used by the "under-dogs" to attack regimes, which fails to recognize them.
29. Antisemitism and the holocaust is continuously prostrated to claim rights, by Israel.
30. Fight for fishing waters and energy filled land and shore  lines, is becoming an serious issue globally.
31. Tariffs is now high on the agenda of every nation and everyone seems to have a problem with some or other unfair rate.
32. Climate change is such a hot debatable point that people are threatening revolt, everywhere.
33. Noticeable is the amount or money being spent, on war material, while people are dying of hunger. The sale of arms and ammunition is now more important than Industrial progress and Agriculture.
34. Energy has suddenly become a huge issue, globally. This in the face of economic decline.
35. Alternative energy is something nobody talks about, but it was sold as the next best buy. Coal plant energy is still beating the drum above any other solar substitute.Everything else is more dangerous or un-affordable.
36. Healthcare has become a dependency of every human and the system support it is failing.
37. Thousands of people homeless all over the world.
38. Money being spent on new horizons, like space ventures, while millions going hungry.
39. Arms race effectively doubled up because it stimulates economies.
40. Countries are changing feathers faster that the bat of an eye: Turkey from NATO turning to Eurasia.

And the list continues. When last did we experience such a huge list of disparities?

When last were we in such close positioning to war, or the threat for publicity purposes?

Post 2: Gold Standard

Are we still relying to gold as positive support for currencies?

By now everybody, every country, knows that we are no longer using gold as a standard to support our sovereign cash. It was dropped as support for the US DOLLAR by Richard Nixon in 1971. This is also the date the USA treasury introduced FIAT money. FIAT money is essentially a form of intangible currency which is not backed by gold but rather by a guarantee of the government issuing it.

From my own research the gold mineral did increase to 1,600+ US Dollar per ounce, for a short period in 2012 and then floated close to where it is now, around US Dollar 1,450/ounce.

Later in the blog I will come back to the term "Inflation", but for now I can say I have done all calculations since 1960 to 2016, to provide feedback of the income related to gold holdings. Gold has been a steady income source over eighty years, performing at par with the inflation rates, given by the FED, for the same period. 

Gold has been in demand ever since the 1970's but it is held captive by those who control the market. They, whoever they are, do not allow for much speculation, so it is not a profit related market, tightly controlled and not subject to bulls and bears. It is so tightly regulated that governments of this day and age, who are buying truckloads of the commodity, which should be influencing the price upward, find a price unscathed by demand.

Since I was active on the international market, with a German company, to invest in gold mining operations all over the world, I had to conduct research pertaining to set-up of a mine, through the start-up line, to sales. 

It emerged from my research, that there are only three refineries in Africa. No gold are supposedly allowed to be sold on international markets without being cast in specific weights and numbered by a refinery. On the one hand, that is good, because it contains crime in speculation and substitution. On the other hand, it restricts trade on an informal basis, which would give a better support for market requirements. It will/does elicit a lot more undocumented production for the black market and therefore, no or little tax on production, which could surpass professional and regulated mining.  

In my refined search for investors I found many, who would do anything for a good deal in mining, until they understood, that setting up plant and machinery for a mine, is a hefty sum, which does not include a guarantee of a huge pocket of gold reserve. On the other hand, informal mining is also not genuinely lucrative because it is normally inconclusive and an accidental find, which could claim the life of the single miner, even before any gold is found/sold. Informal mining is extremely dangerous, never-the-less it takes place on a huge scale. Although illegal, most of these African refineries, which belongs to a range of secretive companies, must be buying black market gold for a penny a dollar, under the pretext that they are not able or allowed to. It is the way scrap dealers operate on a global scale. I have operators who dealt with them and know this for fact. We do not have to test it for resonance, it happens. Who gains from this? Obviously the owners of the mine and refinery, who are normally the shareholders of some or other conglomerate. In my story line, this does not impact on the result, but I expect you to remember this when I add mix in the jug of economics.

We are always informed that gold has no bearing on our present currencies and is not considered a support for it. It is emerging now that this news are being cast aside by some of the more prominent Economies and that gold is definitely considered as a support for national currencies. As example we heard the news this week, that Deutsche Bank has confiscated twenty tons of gold, owned by Venezuela. This gold is redeemed, whether used as an excuse for seizure or a genuine tenure for unpaid loans, which were given in the last three years. If gold was becoming irrelevant, DM would stake no value to it.

Is gold, as standard, never going to be viable again?

Not a strange question in 2019. Every country in the world is hoarding gold, buying thousands of tons per year, to support what?

Yes, gold will find its place as currency support again, soon. For this to happen, the Petro Dollar will have to be suppressed or replaced as global trading currency. When will this happen? The process has already started, but the completion or transfer as global currency, could take ten years or longer. The woven fabric of dollar transactions are very well dispensed into the dynamic of the banking and trading system, it cannot be eliminated in one day or even a year.

Where is the gold coming from, since there are very few profitable gold mines operating in the world? It is evident from corporate stats that the majority pool of legalized gold is not harvested from legitimate corporations. From this evidence it should be evident that the gross product mined, comes from internal legal mines and small, perhaps illegal mining operations. This in turn will mean that the international community is not following its legitimized track of purchase, only, they are/they could be buying illicit gold from illegal miners when ever it is tabled for sale.

How is it possible that China, Russia, India, USA, Europe,

etc., are dashing for gold, during the years 2016 to 2019, without a price hike. Most countries in the world are buying thousands of tons gold, why is it not reflecting on the gold price?

The answer lies in self manufacture. All these countries are buying bullion from their own mining operations. The real shift in price will come when non-mining countries start buying gold. This is the only way that these governments can contain the gold price.

Gold price is controlled by the big purchasers just like the price of oil is. Only one issue prevails and that is that the price can only be controlled as long as there is total control of manufacturing and the sales market.

Gold is not in this vehicle. Just like cocaine, gold will always be produced by a sector of uncontrolled entities as well and sold black market. This operation is much bigger than we are told. Information on black market gold is suppressed because those who buy must be doing trades in this market, at huge profits.

There is no doubt in my mind that the gold price will hike above five thousand dollars an ounce as soon as non-mining entities start buying huge amounts of gold.

Please leave a note to say what you think!!

 

Post 1: The Global Accounting Principle

Post 1: 

The Global Accounting Principle

How did it all came to life?

It is important to remember our roots in the world of money. 
How do we remember what we ordered? How do we analyze our income and expenses? How do we know if we made a profit? How do we know if we have money to spend or how mach we saved into our investment accounts? Only one way, and thanks to our history and the makers, we have our present accounting system.

I will quote from other sources: 

Luca Pacioli

Accounting Basics: History Of Accounting. The name that looms largest in early accounting history is Luca Pacioli, who in 1494 first described the system of double-entry bookkeeping used by Venetian merchants in his “Summa de Arithmetica, Geometria, Proportioni et Proportionalita.”

The modern profession of the chartered accountant originated in Scotland in the nineteenth century. 

 

A short story of our accounting system.

As we see in above note, this accounting system is as old as the mountains, so to speak. It has survived all these years and no other system will ever be able to replace it, proven beyond a doubt by the users. As it happens, no better system could have been chosen, since it fits into our economic patterns with an exact nature, subject to enormous scrutiny and tests. The amazing point about the matrix of its design is that it could be tailored as civilization demanded from it and it fitted like a glove into the IT world. So far, nobody could ever fault the system.

What is the nature of this system?

In its purest form, it is just an income and expense sheet. Everything else revolves around this concept. It could not be an easier system.

Is there any other system actively used on the planet?

No or perhaps I should say I don't think so. If you know of any please enlighten me.
Reference: https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_international-business/s19-01-international-accounting-stand.html

Why was this accounting system initially developed?

Initially, it became necessary to record transactions because of the volume of goods trading hands as well as the frequency of trades. It displaced the barter system which was good for trade on a small scale and usually only for physical items, mostly agricultural goods. With much larger populations it was an easy way for the government to collect tax. If you recorded your transactions the could and did force you to keep those records for their own inspections and as a result of your turnover on black and white, your taxation could be determined accurately and fast.

What is a barter?

A barter is an exchange of goods, normally of agriculture nature, and not necessarily of the same kind. It has become a conviction in economics that a barter is not a trade, because a trade will/could involve products like services, and payment systems which a barter does not allow for. This method of transacting, barter, is time consuming and impractical when discussing or procuring goods, long distance.

Is a barter allowed in the accounting system of today?

Theoretically and practically, it is not allowed, unless you can determine the tax which has to be paid to the government, on the transaction. But it still happens often and is then usually undisclosed. In the present condition of sanctions imposed by the USA on Iran, as example, Iran now barters oil for goods falling withing the scope of the sanctions. What is important is that value in this case has a definitive value linked to either oil market price or the commodity rate of products withing the barter. since the transaction is concluded between Nations there is no tax added so it is not a serious bookkeeping issue. This leads us to say that a barter still exists but the exact value is very difficult to determine and account for, in the financial papers of anybody or company. The next point is that tax has become an exact/forensic science in the predictions/forecasting of national income and expenditures. There is no place for transactions where price cannot be determined, before the trade is established. It is however important to realize that the accounting system is linked to a trade and that the reverse is not true. A trade can be transacted without tax, in certain conditions, and not be recorded on an accounting system. Many individuals and companies dodge the tax laws by paying cash for goods and this is then not recorded. 

Is it then fair to say that tax laws will become more strict?

Of course. Most of the Nations/Countries who are reliant on tax, needs to stop the gap of avoidance, in order to pay it's debts. Everybody is always trying to avoid paying tax. So the game is becoming more critical and intense. There are many fraud cases today of tax avoidance, yet many are not visible enough to be attached. It is therefore common knowledge that the countries are changing many criteria in order to secure the tax revenue. In this example I can only think of the early days of Paypal and now Bitcoin and all the transactions involving invisible currencies. I'm not sure of the exact flow of accounting in these companies, but I'm sure that much of it escapes the tax net. I can also remember the Panama Papers and all the offshore accounts which escape the net of tax. Until recently expats of a country escape the net as well but that gap seems to have been closed or will be shortly. We can therefore assume that the global banking system is guided to account for all transactions, local and foreign. It will be prevalent that everybody who earns a salary, will have to have income paid to bank accounts, where their income can be justified. The use of cash is coming under the spotlight more and more and less cash is injected into economies, to force every earner to use a bank account. More and more loans are afforded against proper delivery into a bank account related to a paper trail, for the same reason. Every account holder, scooped into the tax net, will provide details, of those signed up, and the income which should provide tax. We see all the debt burdens globally, this is one way the countries can get more tax avoider's into the tax net. Many countries give amnesties as a decoy for surveillance on activity within anonymity, to redeem discount on prosecution of tax avoidance. The amnesty is just a tool to secure all the information of those who have been avoiding the net all along.

The discussion about the Accounting Principle ends here. Please feel free to send me your thoughts. Thank you.

The Sign Post Manifest: Final Analysis

The Sign Post Manifest

Global Economy in distress: The final analysis

We know what a sign post is and I decided to use the painted idea as my indexing method, in order to emphasize/table certain issues and posts.

At this time all my statements will be posted as questions, rather than answers. 

I'm writing a book which I should rather call a thesis. The difference being that it will have a much larger volume of words and cover a bigger range of ideas than one topical issue.


I had to make a serious decision about disclosure. Do I tell you what the book is about, upfront? Or do I leave you, to develop your own sense of the result, the author is aiming at. To keep your attention and focus I have decided on the latter course. A book about economics is never interesting unless one can capture the story line so uniquely camouflaged, involving your audience, to act as a fly in a spider's web.


 I will ask of anyone who read this blog, to get involved, to research the topic with me and give further narratives to expand this universe of economics and the warfare within it, in civil society. 

The topic is intense and the depth of search for the real answers could be construed as conspiracies. It is important that all issues are carefully diverged and dismantled so that the exact path can be visualized. 

The first few SIGN POSTS, those only a few yards from the starting point, will be about the journey up to now and some critical information I wish to surface, as a collection of important issues pertaining to this book. We tend to forget what it, global economics, is all about, and what the morphing principles are, which are included, to make economic paste. These first signposts will jog the memory about all issues resonating with or are assumed to tie in with the crux of the matter, which I'm dissecting. It may be that these signs will bore you. That is ok. I see it as reference material, almost as if the book is a jug and the difference in content is the mix. For some there will never be enough sweetener or alcohol in the mix.

I will answer all relevant questions per email and use/post here your rebuttal, only in cases where it supports the result. I do require your input, however trivial.

Before I start, I should emphasize that there are many volumes to this book. The study is hard and wide. Please read every page and find a historical similar.  If you do think that the passage is old and well known rhetoric, remember that I'm talking from the viewpoint that you know nothing, or that you have to refresh your memory. do not establish a narrative that I'm just writing about well known ideas, seeking to claim image. In order for you to get relevance in the path which I write on, it is imperative that you know about all increments which has an influence on the topic, regardless of your conscious viewpoint or knowledge. 

What is the result I'm seeking? 

In the first place, I have to qualify the story line. 

The economic life of the world/planet, has reached a point where we can scrutinize the updated lifetime of it and of this civilization, in a visual timeline.

That is what we will discuss, and which is the story line for the book. Although this book is about economics, it is not the normal number crunching diary. It is a look into past, present and future of our global choices, which could be leading to a severe breakdown in our economic welfare and the subsequent demise of many support systems in our global society. 

This blog is then intended for me to give you as the reader certain ideas to consider. I would prefer that you give me your own ideas about the posts. The reason why I do this is that I would like to get a fair estimate of the value of my mindset and to align a path of reasonable accuracy if not total, to the goal of highlighting the resulted outcome. 

As you know, in economic terms, we submit an idea and then the supporting data, to show an possible outcome. Most, almost all student of economics globally, are "within a train of thought and a supported track of learning", which is imposed by higher education, in order to form ideas on a scholastic page. Economist are all more or less aligned to talk about the same topics with answers which can be read from the same defined data and formulas, which is conceived as a hundred percent tested and correct. They then test their narratives against others in their field in order to have a reasonable chance of comparison. The best view I have of a formalized educated economist is of someone, who are brainwashed, to use a bath as a cleaning vehicle, instead of learning that many types of bathing methods exist and are in play. This is a convoluted idea and not surprising then that we get projection from these masters, that projects on that basis. Images which symbolize the harmonious economic conditions, edge on the Niagara falls type assessment as final barrier, as if it should be harnessed in that way and no other.

In this blog and the book, I/we will endeavor to give data analysis as I proceed but that part of the equation is not a requirement. It is only used to prove certain points raised and as a support for that option. There will be nothing to prove in this book, only a synopsis that could give leaders of our world an insight and it may act as a lever to bring change while there is still time to do so.

The contents of the book will be important to world leaders and people who are caretakers of global economies, who could use the ideas to change design in the fabric of GDP and issues which could contribute to a healthier economic society.