ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I see the chief exec of the Financial Conduct Authority expresses this view:
Quote:Andrew Bailey, chief executive of the FCA, has said bitcoin is not a really currency but more like a commodity.If so, then those who designed Bitcoin will have got their wish — to have created a digital equivalent of gold (hence their "mining" analogy) — since the price of gold too is subject to speculative swings.Bitcoins and other so-called "cryptocurrencies" (Bitcoin's only one of many, there's another called "ether", which would be an appropriate name for money conjured up "out of thin air" if that's what they were) are tokens that have to be used to pay for the services offered by computer networks practising blockchain technology (see the Pathfinders column in this month's Socialist Standard). Bitcoin offers ultra-secure electronic payments but the technology can be used to offer as yet undeveloped services. So buying these tokens is a speculative investment in what might turn out to be a profitable venture. It's like the dot-com boom of the 1990s and should perhaps be called the blockchain boom.
Thanks, Robbo, for what happened to "Common Voice". This part struck me as particularly significant
robbo203 wrote:…WiC was almost entirely an internet-based phenomenon, meaning that there was a very limited and narrow range of interactions between members.I see this as a warning that we should not follow the view that has been expressed here that we too should become "an internet-based phenomenon" without physical meetings between members. That would be the way to prove the Private Frasers right.
Brian wrote:You also seem to be thinking that if the post is paid the EC does the selection. Not so under the present party rules. Nonetheless, if such a post does become our new reality it will by necessity mean quite a few changes in the rules.If a change in the Party Rulebook is going to be required nothing will be able to be done until at least the second half of 2019 when the votes on the motions discussed at 2019 Conference are counted. It's not clear what you are proposing anyway. You seem to be suggesting that it's one of the existing Party officers, presumably the General Secretary, who should be paid as someone not selected by the EC, but the General Secretary is subject to annual re-election so any employment contract would have to be temporary…One of the remits of the Ad Hoc Committee of which you are a member (not the only one) is to propose any changes of rule that may be necessary to implement their recommendations. Which are going to have to be a lot more precise than the brainstorming going on here.As to the salary, when we discussed this at our branch £1000 a month was suggested as reasonable to do the present, part-time work at Head Office. If converted into a full time post that gives a figure nearer Robbo's, which is also roughly Lenin's famous "workers average wage" which I assume is what the SWP and SPEW's full-timers get.
That banks couldn't lend more than they had, as had once been generally understood, and that the old bankers' saying that "every bank loan creates a deposit" had been misunderstood. All it meant was that a bank loan would encourage an expansion of business activity, which would bring in more deposits.Judge for yourself:http://www.theoryandpractice.org.uk/library/meaning-bank-deposits-edwin-cannan-1921It wouldn't be surprising since Cannan was one of Hardy's professors at the LSE.
Oh no, not amending Terms of Reference again. When I was on the EC a couple of years ago we discussed amending terms of reference month after month after month. It was one reason why I decided not to stand again and maybe why there's a shortage of EC candidates.Anyway, what's there seems flexible enough. It allows what you want. The Pamphlets Committee has an idea for a pamphlet. All they need do is put it to the EC, no need to wait for Conference. If it's a reasonable proposition it will be okayed. If it's a proposal to print poetry it will be turned down.
robbo203 wrote:Incidentally, I have never quite understood why the old "World Socialist" journal was discontinued. Can anyone enlighten me?Seven issues were produced between 1984 and 1987. It stopped, basically, because not even active members were buying it let alone non-members. Also, we were having difficulties getting good quality articles from the Companion parties. I can't remember exactly but I don't think more than a few hundred per issue were printed. There's good stuff in them and there are still copies of some of the issues left at Head Office if anyone wants one. Just ask.It was set up in accordance with a resolution passed at 1983 Conference:
Quote:That this Conference favours the publication (in addition to present publications) and instructs the EC to act accordingly.But, can I put a similar question to you, why did the publication "Common Voice" stop being produced. For similar reasons?
Janet, here it is;
Quote:Publications Committee1. To edit and produce pamphlets and leaflets on subjects decided by Conference or approved by the EC. 2. To report to the EC annually in January on the results of work done and money spent in the previous calendar year. This is intended to be part of the EC report to Annual Conference. 3. To report to the EC annually in July on future plans and financial requirements for the coming calendar year. This is intended to be part of the EC report to the Annual Delegate Meeting. 4. To be composed of at least 2 members appointed annually by the EC from nominations branches.Not much. Do you want to be nominated for next year's committee?
You are mixing two things up — the fact that money does not measure the usefulness of what is for sale and whether using money is a good or a bad thing. Nearly everyone accepts that money does not measure usefulness but comparatively few want a society in which money would be redundant. You are the ORIGINATOR of neither.
It would have to be self-financing (as it wouldn't be) and not take resources away from the Socialist Standard (which it would). And it would require a Conference resolution (unlikely to get through) .So it's a non-starter. It's not a priority.and would only be a vanity publishing. Another of the thousand blooms flourishing here that will wither in the face of reality.
These were activities (indoor and outdoor meetings, selling the Standard door to door) organised by the Party in the 1960s and 1970s. It was also the title of a supplement to the September 1967 Socialist Standard which carried articles from all the Companion Parties. The 7 days were the week 3-10 September. But this wouldn't have been the only one. Here's the report on that one:https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1960s/1967/no-758-october-1967/week-meetings-londonThe Irish party organised one in October 1963, in fact this might be where the idea came from:https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1960s/1964/no-715-march-1964/letter-irelandSelling the Standard door to door (canvassing) died out years ago as has selling it in pubs though that lasted a longer into the 1980s.
Prakash RP wrote:I expected some comments from yoy all on the content of my last post. It passes my comprehension why you all are silent on the SIGNIFICANCE of the THESIS that money canNOT measure the worth of a commodity.It will be because it's a commonplace observation which we, and most other people, agree with. Of course we go further and say this situation should be ended by bringing in a society based on common ownership and production for use instead of production for profit which would make monetary calculation and evaluation and money itself unnecessary.
I am afraid Joel Sobel is right, as we pointed out in the discussion of the other thread you started –it isn't you that is the first to point out that money doesn't measure use-value (only exchange-value) and that this was known at least as far back as Adam Smith. As he wrote to you:
Quote:Joel Sobel Oct 25 to me: Dear Mr Prakash, I agree with the comments of the distinguished people who have replied to your message. The monetary value of an object does not measure worth. This idea, however, has been known since (at least) Adam Smith and the references to the diamond-water paradox are appropriate. So I believe your insight is sound, but not novel. Best wishes, Joel S.The present situation is flexible enough. 1986 Conference passed the following resolution which is still in force and applied:
Quote:This Conference resolves that the New Pamphlets Committee, while continuing to be a sub-committee of the EC, should have the authority to produce pamphlets and leaflets on subjects which have been approved by the EC without having to submit the texts to the EC for editing; quantities and expenditures to be agreed by the EC.Its current terms of reference say:
Quote:To edit and produce pamphlets and leaflets on subjects decided by Conference or approved by the EC.So the position is clear: the subject of a pamphlet is decided by Conference or the EC; after that the Publications Committee produces it in the same way the Editorial Committee produce the Socialist Standard.Having said that, it is a bit surprising that nobody has raised the question of whether printed pamphlets are things of the past and have been superseded by online publications. I say that as a pamphlet reader and collector who doesn't like reading things online, but is this the view of, how shall I put it, more modern readers?
