Talk:Transfinancial Economics

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please go to main page

New, Shorter TFE "Paper". To be deleted. The updated version isnow on the page link above

Transfinancial Economics is a major global paradigm which believes that progress towards a fairer, and better world could be greatly facilitated by a reformed financial system. As such, it champions the cause for a non-debt based economy in which taxes, and indeed, interest on loans could overtime be phased out altogether. It claims too that non-repayable debt-free money ( unearned money) could be used where necessary with interest free loans. The former would not lead to serious inflation as too much of it would not be created. This notion is like Quantitative Easing, or QE. Such innovative funding, or Facilitation Finance created by Facilitation Banks, or FBs would essentially be targetted at "major" environmental/climate change projects, and socio-economic initiatives where notably the initial capital is difficult, or even "impossible" to raise via conventional methods (eg. venture capitalism notably).

Moreover, with the phasing in of what maybe termed advanced Transfinancial Economics it would be possible to get a highly accurate electronic profile of the entire economy. Since this would be so, it would also give future economists a very accurate understanding of how much new non-repayable debt-free money could be created without serious inflation by FBs, and indeed,by democratic governments which could phase out taxation overtime. Among other things already mentioned such innovative funding could in part, or in full fund in time charitable ngos.The social, economic, and political implications of this would be immense. It could infact lead to an advanced automated technocratic world in which money, and wage slavery would no longer be necessary.All this could occur in the context of open democracy, and respect for universal human rights.

Also, it should be noted that TFE believes that success in the introduction of this reform would probably come about by working pragmatically with banks, and corporations rather than otherwise.

It is important to understand that we are not discussing a soviet style command/planned economy but one in which a more responsible form of capitalism could be developed with the right financial incentives, and the right marketing strategies.

Present Day Economics.

Mainstream economics has developed a somewhat appalling reputation as the dismal science. Most of its work appears to be largely theoretical, and based on questionable statistics, and mathematical modeling. Its economic forecasts often, or not turn out to be wrong. Moreover there is still an obsession with the need for more, and more unsustainable growth even though the planet has limited resources.

The so-called Neo-Classical Economists still have great influence over the economic profession. Many of them believe in the free market in which little, or virtually no regulation is needed, as capitalism appears at large to do well by being largely unimpeded. Yet, the so-called Efficient Market Hypothesis received a battering with the Great Financial Crisis (GFC) starting around 2008(and seemingly continuing at the time of writing with the Euro Crisis notably) in which the entire global banking system nearly collapsed but was saved by massive bailouts. Many commentators point out that this was largely due to a lack of real regulation of banks.

Transfinancial Economics, or TFE itself is a form Heterodox Economics which deals with mainly non-mainstream economic thinking. At the time of writing (May 2011) many governments notably in the Eurozone have resorted to varying degrees of austerity rather than the Post-Keynesian Economics in which governments spend their way out of recession (due to the GFC). TFE believes in some form of the latter as a means of creating new jobs,thus, reducing unemployment.

The Creation of Money.

In TFE, money is recognized as being digital, or electronic data which can be transmitted from one bank account to another at the flick of a button. Virtually all of it is created out of thin air by banks via Credit Creation as a repayayable loan with interest charged on it. The amounts they can issue are limited by a fraction of reserves held. This has been aptly called fractional reserve banking. However, a small minority of experts (Steve Keen) claim that this is not correct that banks as soon as they create new money try to back it up with borrowed money from elsewhere. This seems more credible, but official documents appear to suggest that some form of fractional reserve bank persists.

Some radical monetary reformers also believe (like the Muslims) that it should be free of interest, or usury. Others though claim that it should still exist, and could either go to private banks, or to the government. A number of reformers dislike the idea of banks being nationalized, and believe they should remain in the private sector.

It is also claimed that new non-repayable debt free money could be created by government, and this could reduce taxation. As the evidence seems to indicate if enough of it is produced it would not lead to serious inflation.

Apart from the above radical monetary reforms there are made up free local community currencies which strictly speaking are meant to be tax free, and interest free. These have obvious limitations but they are easily set up, and are workable.

TFE is also regarded by many as being very similiar to Social Credit founded by Clifford Douglas. Indeed, it could be argued that the former is a modernization of the latter.

The Problem of Redistribution.

There is probably more than enough money to change the world. The problem is gaining access to it especially where there is a genuine social, economic, or environmental issue at stake that may have been overlooked, or ignored. Apparently, most of the money of the world exists in financial trading, or "betting casinos" of the world. Indeed, the sum total of it maybe several times greater than the entire Gross Domestic Product(GDP) of the planet!

Some activist groups have suggested the implementation of the Tobin Tax on currency speculation in particular to raise funds notably for environmental concerns of the real productive economy. Ofcourse, nothing has seriously come of it.In TFE such an approach at "redistribution" in this context is ultimately seen as unnecessary.

Redistribution of financial wealth using taxation is fine, and ethical as far as it goes. But the problems facing humanity such as food security, climate change, population growth, and the like are colossal. To try, and solve this via earned money alone through taxation, and business investment will probably become increasingly difficult. Hence, the need for TFE to speed up, and facilitate change using in full, or in part newly created non-repayable money. If enough is created electronically notably for governments, and ngos it would not ofcourse be seriously inflationary. This has been mentioned before....and capacity should also be ideally be taken into account. This is explained later.

The Emergence of Facilitation Banks.

The introduction of Facilitation Banks, or FBs is a crucial start towards full implementation of TFE. They can be seen as "superbanks", or as prototypes of future banks, and banking. They could become a part of the mainstream banking system but they have far tighter regulatory framework to operate in.

Essentially, FBs would have powers to electronically create closely monitored new non-repayable debt-free money (ie. Facilitation Finance ) as well as repayable interest free loans if necessary. The interest on loans does not have to come from the customer but instead be electronically created by the Central Bank, or by some indpendent authority. Something similiar could happen with the debt-free capital. In other words, an operating cost ideally, or alternatively "grant interest".

The basic aim, and purpose of such FBs is to create funds for projects which would be difficult if not "impossible" to finance by convetional means as indicated earlier on. Their remit though is targetted at solely investing in large, or small-scale concerns to do with energy alternatives, enviromnetal projects as well as social/ethical entrepreneurship.The decision making process on all this must be independent of the FBs.It must notably be transparent, holistic and "objective" as possible with all options for consideration for some specific project, or projects that could be vital for the social, and environmental "health" of the planet. In the main this would require bona fide experts in their respective fields. It could involve partnerships with governments, ngos, and existing green businesses.

Ofcourse, when ready, investors using their own earned money could invest in some project in order to gain a return. Indeed, their assets could be financially protected by the FB should the economy of any country face any serious problems, and hence, avoid capital flight.

A startling feature of FBs is that in theory at least it could electronically create infinite sums of capital as they are not legally constrained, or backed up by incomplete, or full reserves held unlike Credit Creation. However, their financial dealings are continually tracked electronically to prevent fraud by the Central Bank, or by some other credible body which could impose instant fines electronically.

Anyway, the amount of money which FBs can create is dependent on the costing of relevant resources, or products from suppliers in a binding contract. This is known as Resource Capacity Requirements, or RCRs. Essentially, it means that the amount of goods needed to be manufactured for some commercial project would need to be planned in advance. As far as possible possible checks on the relevant suppliers as to whether they have capacity to produce such resources needs to be undertaken ideally. Capacity could be increased if necessary by the FB.

In the "normal" economy, money as loans with interest are invested in any number of businesses. If too much capital is created ofcourse suppliers for some commercial enterprise may not always be able to fulfill orders on time. They may experience over-demand, and hence, raise their prices which can in turn lead to a degree of serious inflation. With RCR, money as Facilitation Finance is created notably as non-repayable grants but take full account of whether the suppliers have enough capacity to meet demand. Thus, inflationary problems are largely avoided. Such a method of financing is very much like Advance Market Committment, or AMC.

With the aid of experts it is hoped that Facilitation Banks, and indeed, Facilitation Finance in the context of TFE will become a serious proposition. This innovative financial model would certainly be more advanced than anything created by such controversial global institutions as the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. Indeed, FBs would not lead to competition with "normal" mainstream banks as they could possibly have equal shares in the FBs, or some other arrangement(s). Understandably, some ngos may regard them with suspicion but hopefully this will be dispelled if everything goes to plan successfully.

Critics will probably point out that elected governments alone should have the power to create Facilitation Finance as new non-repayable debt-free money rather than mainly private companies (though they could be part owned by the state if desired). The reason for this approach is that it is hard to see that a country like the US which is still a world economic power (at the time of writing) would frown on the idea of greater government interventionism in the so-called Free Market Economy. Thus, something like FBs maybe be more acceptable, and their influence towards a more environmentally, and ethically centred business developments would be more agreeable. Rather than more, and more regulation (which ofcourse could be difficult to pass into law by many countries notably America) they would be able to "nudge" commercial enterprises as never before to reform themselves using financial incentives (ie. commercial grants, and interest free loans). Ofcourse, quite a number of businesses to a limited degree try to appear green to their customers as they see this as a good selling point. Some business leaders would claim that using normal market strategies rather than resorting to "subsidy" like incentives should be possible. However, TFE takes a different position.

Finally to close this section it is absolutely vital to ensure that those who do the decision-making of the FBs for various environmental, and ethical/social projects should be people genuinely concerned with such matters, and are NOT there just to make a fast buck to use the American expression. A credible, and transparent legal framework should be in place to make certain that his happens.

Democratic Governments, and Taxation.

In TFE, taxation could be phased out overtime. In other words, earned money from the people would be gradually reduced in terms of tax liability as new debt-free money is phased in. In other words, Facilitation Finance by democratic governments.This would not lead to serious inflation especially when a system of electronic monitoring of transactions is undertaken. This is explained a little later. Moreover, as with FBs ofcourse the Resource Capacity Requirments, or RCRs are used in debt-free money creation. This could be carried out by a body independent of the Treasury, and would be electronically monitored to avoid any chance of serious deficit spending.

At the present time democratic governments cannot legally create money electronically. If there are shortfalls in tax revenus they can issue bonds. These are IOUs mainly sold to the rich, and super rich companies, and corporations in which money is lent to governments. When paid back by governments the bonds also carry interest which act as profit for lenders in the private sector. In other words, a good example of debt-based economics.

Anyway, the global bond market is huge.With TFE it could be gradually phased out. Investors could receive compensation, or alternatively other kinds of financial instruments, or investments could be found. These could be far more lucrative.

Lastly, the so-called sovereign wealth funds of governments investing in the markets to raise money would probably be banned, or limited. The reason being that they would be unnecessary as the body of elected representatives would have electronically monitored money to fund the public sector. But the bond market would still exist for the time being as indicated in the last paragraph. Furthermore, the so-called "casino" economy (eg.currency speculation, derivatives, et al)already mentioned would still exist in a more modified form possibly.

Electronic Profile of the Entire Economy in "Real-Time" via Electronic Transaction Monitoring, or ETM.

Most products, and services in the business world have codes for ease of accounting. Small shops, and supermarkets often, or not have barcodes which are used at checkouts to electronically account for sales transactions of customers. This is known as the Electronic Point of Sales, or EPOS. This notably gives retailers an accurate understanding of the demand of certain barcoded products along with their identifications. Such a method known as Electronic Transaction Monitoring, or ETM could be used to create an electronic profile of the entire economy in "real-time". Under new laws retailers would not only account for their sales but would also at the sametime transmit their information to a public, or semi-public Inflation Authority (which could be a part of the banking system). With modifications in barcodes, and business codes in general such transaction data (largely identified but not always) would be able to build up a highly accurate electronic GDP of the economy on a daily basis (ie.24/7). But why is this neccessary, and important? The answer is three-fold.

i) To electronically monitor, and track, and compare price changes of specific sets of products, and services. If serious rises in prices occur they could be targetted by direct electronic controls rather than always using indirect controls of taxation, and interest on loans which would be phased out over time. This process would involve advanced computer programming, and the possible use of supercomputers by banks connected with the Inflation Authority. A more decentralised version of this could also exist.

ii) To create a highly accurate electronic "audit" of resources used to make up products, or goods. This will become increasingly vital as scarcity increases. Such data would be good for democratic government planners, and for businesses.

iii) To bring about a greater understanding of the mechanics of the economy itself. This maybe very useful for future economists. With computer simulations, and projections garnered directly from ETM of the real economy itself it would be possible to reasonably predict the inflation risks involved in the creation of new debt-free money for certain projects. It would also give us direct data of the capacity of various "small" companies, and corporations which would be essential for FBs,and democratic governments. This in turn would allow for a highly accurate basis on which new non-repayable money could be created electronically (ie. the RCR). Indeed, the origins of potential business cycles of boom, and bust could also be tracked, and resolved.

However, all this cannot fully rule out uncertainty, and the irrational behaviour of the markets. But everthing could still work well in spite of this as TFE is a robust system of future economics.

It is clear that existing Economic Indicators would be largely, if not wholly superseded by the new "electronic economy" proposed here. This is revolutionary.However, ETM may not be able to monitor, and track all products, and services. This should not be a serious problem as long as the real economy is largely if not wholly under the spotlight so to speak. It may also be possible with the right legal arrangements with banks (including FBs ofcourse) to have Macra, and Micro ETM in certain types of Facilitation Finance funded projects to to keep an eye on the potential "inflationary" character of the Free Market Price of specific suppliers of relevant goods, and services. In other words, limited Electronic Transaction Monitoring, or ETM.

Lastly in this section, it is important to understand that ideally only those businesses which make serious efforts to be environmentally friendly, and ethical could receive a Zero Tax, and Zero Interest status. There would be no real excuse not to do this because money from FBs, or democrative governments would always be there.On the other hand, those enterprises which continue to use environmentally unsustainable technologies, and markets for the products, and services would continue to pay tax, and interest to a large extent. But the door would always be open for them to change. Ofcourse, Facilitation Finance would ultimately be phased in to replace taxation, and interest per se.

Direct Electronic Controls If Absolutely Necessary.

It must be made very clear that direct electronic controls in the economy are used only if it is absolutely necessary. With the continous electronic monitoring of the Free Market Prices of the transaction of goods, and services the data which results is transmitted to the Inflation Authority where computers, probably supercomputers are programmed to check any inflationary problems.

There are a number of things which the electronic controls could do when needed:-

i) National Inflation Adjustment.

This is when most if not the entire economy can have its money electronically adjusted instantaneously thus maintaining its purchasing power.

ii) Automatic Inflation Rebate.

When a price of a product being bought at a checkout is found to be above the inflation rate new money could be used to instantly adjust it to the "right" Free Market Price. This could be like a tax but the money taken at the point of sale is recreated electronically in the account of the retail company. In other words, it is temporarily taken out of general circulation where the inflationary pressures are being "felt."

iii) Automatic Inflation Deduction.

This is when a temporary "tax" is created at the point of sale in which the inflated portion is instantly taken off at the point of sale. It is the opposite of the Automatic Inflation Rebate which for obvious reasons would be more popular.

iv) Instant Electronic Price Subsidization.

This is when a price of a product maybe below the inflation rate, and an instant subsidy, or adjustment is created, and transmitted back by the Inflation Authority to the relevant checkout after a computer check.

v) Electronic Price Capping.

Here, a maximun price maybe set by a government, or even by an FB in certain circumstances. If the price of production starts to exceed the maximun price, the producers would recieve instant financial help, or compensation where necessary. Ofcourse, electronic price capping should be avoided if possible.

The Question of Economic Growth.

As many realize the planet has finite resources. Thus,continous exponential growth cannot go on indefinitely. In TFE there is a long period of rapid economic growth but it is heavily influenced by the notable power of FBs, and Facilitation Financing making the present capitalist system environmentally sustainable, more ethical, and energy efficient as never before in human history.

There are those who believe in no-growth economics, or steady-state economics. Such notions are fine as far as they go but their approach towards genuine change is alot slower in a complicated world. Moreover, how finite is our planet? This is arguably at present an "impossible" question to fully answer. But, it has also been pointed out that most of the resources of our planet lie under the sea. To actually "mine them" is prohibitively expensive. With Facilitation Finance it would be possible. Apart from this there are all sorts of ways to deal with the resource question. They could include the following:-

i) The development of safe nanotechnology which could create new resources out of thin air via the manipulation of atoms.

ii) Space exploration with the aid of Facilitation Finance could find resources from other planets. These could be brought to our terrestrial world.

iii) Again, with Facilitation Finance it would be possible to create colonies on other planets, and hopefully, use their resources responsibly.

iv) Inventions could be developed to create more out of less, and less. Vertical Farming is perhaps a good example as it helps to increase land space for agriculture.

Ideally though, people (especially the young) must become more, and more educated in that we must live simpler, less materialistic lives. This does not mean going back to the "stone age" but instead to an advanced technological world in which higher values, or ideals should take their place rather than over-consumption of worldly goods.

Some Other Key Benefits of Transfinancial Economics.

Apart from the above section there are many other benefits with TFE. They would include the following list.

a) Poverty.

With TFE, NGOs concerned with this issue would become increasingly empowered financially by Facilitation Finance which could be had directly from a FB, or possibly a government agency. It could also come from one, or more independent funding body.

Moreover, it could modify microfinance in the developing world to include a UBI, or Universal Basic Income, or subsidy of sorts without having to borrow money all the time (except for the development of some form of self-employment/business). It would be electronically created by FBs, or by governments, or by both of them in partnership. So-called "grant interest" could accrue too as explained early on.

b) Health Care.

Irrespective of whether health care is largely in private hands, or not there would be a stage at which Factilitation Financing could enhance the existing system in which everyone in spite of their economic status has access to high quality medical intervention.This process could happen in both the developed world, and the developing world.

c) Food Security.

Here, innovative but safe production of more food could be funded in full, or in part by Facilitation Finance. Moreover,like their developed world couterparts developing world farmers could receive subsidies but via new non-repayable money created electronically.

d) Population.

Ngos with ideas, and projects concerned with this matter could be funded in full, or in part by Facilitation Finance.

e) Industrial Emissions.

One way, other than Cap, and Trade to reduce industrial emissions is to have governments use Facilitation Finance (rather than earned money from taxes) as a way of compensating for lost profits in return for companies to reduce their emissions from entering the atmosphere.

f) Ethical Business Takeover.

This is a highly controversial concept in which certain industries might be regarded as unethical, and unsustainable in some way. They could be subject to an Ethical Takeover. This would probably require the pressure of ngos, the people, and governments to undertake such a measure with the aid of Facilitation Finance.

g) Ethical Environmental/Social Intervention (Similiar to the Above Claim).

When the FBs are first introduced into the world they could have powers to suspend with compensation any serious large-scale, or small-scale environmental commercial project which maybe causing controversy .Ideally, where such situations like this exists (eg. coal seam gas case in Australia) they should be dealt with legally. Unfortunately, there is no international environmental agency which has legally binding global regulations to prevent companies especially corporations from doing anything highly questionable. It is here that FBs may prove beneficial in the extreme in partnership with governments, and/or ngos.

It should be said that TFE is not the panacea of all the problems of the world. But it can certainly help many of them.

Automation, and the New World.

During the transition from a debt based economic system to a non-debt one in which taxation, and interest are phased out many momentous socio-economic, and political changes would probably occur. One of them is the introduction of automation on a huge scale.This would lead to growing unemployment. However, since at the end of the day taxes would be phased out social security would ultimately be generated by Facilitation Finance. Something like a UBI, or Universal Basic Income could also be introduced irrespective of whether one is employed, or not. Social security benefits could "top it up."

In the light of the above, other kinds of "leisure-like" forms of "work", or employment could come into being.Alternatively, for some, a green business could be created but with a degree of automation included. All this has great implications for ngos, or non-government organizations, or charitable npos, or non-profit organizations. They could expand, and be able to bring aboard new recruits as money would become easier to find, and fundraising itself would also be ultimately phased out altogether.Hence, progress of socio-economic, and political issues (eg. Fair Trade, Human Rights,Poverty Reduction,Globalization, et al) will gain greater momentum, influence, and power as never before in human history.

Certain better financed ngos would find it easier to challenge elitist plutocratic power structures if they feel that their activities to a certain extent are unethical in some manner, or other (eg. some banks, and corporations). Though TFE may make the wealthy richer with green/ethical type investments with the aid of FBs it could ironically lead to their own demise when automation begins to take over work activities. It is then that money itself could become ultimately unnecessary.

With the growing financial empowerment of ngos for a new, and hopefully a better, and fairer world the following values should be included notably.......

i) The continuance of open democracy, and respect for universal human rights. This is vital.

ii) Growing altruism in society should act as the key incentive rather than money. This is very important. Indeed, so-called Happiness Economics seems to indicate that money is not everything. At the sametime, over-consumption of worldly goods does not achieve this either.

iii) Evolution towards direct democracy in which a Universal Debating Project, or "forum" could be credibly created on the internet on a p2p Open Source basis to show "all-known" arguments for, and against social, economic, and political issues (without verbal padding). In other words, an objective, and holistic approach to information. This could be updated continually. Something called Debatepedia is a good example of what could be done.

iv) The need to move towards a society in which cooperation rather than competition should be the incentive to drive the world forwards.

v) Ngos notably concerned with inequality would become increasingly powered by grants to educate, and challenge society for a world with greater equality, and greater fairness..

It is ultimately envisaged that something like an advanced technological world will emerge. The Venus Project inspired by Jacque Fresco, a noted populariser of Technocracy is an example of what could be done in the future.

Campaign Activism for Transfinancial Economics.

In order to bring about the serious possibility of change from our present debt based economy of taxation, and interest to one which is non-debt based, a campaign would be necessary. Unfortunately, a grassroots organization(s) for the present time to challenge banks, and their kind is unlikely to work.... though we may be wrong if the protests "succeed".This is pointed is repeated again after this section...

To promote this campaign it is suggested here that a professional website would be set up to spread the word of Transfinancial Economics as a serious, and credible proposal if the world is to successfully survive the global problems of the future. It would be sent to people, and organizations that have power, and influence such as government policy makers,academics,financial companies, et cetera. This is probably the way forward.

The TFE website itself would include the following features.

A news update about the campaign progress.

Commissioned papers (initially) by willing economists possibly using econometric models to show the efficacy of TFE in technical terms, including detailed studies on various facets of the subject.

An online Journal of Transfinancial Economics.

A powerpoint presentation of TFE for downloading.

Possible field trials of the electronic technologies involved in TFE. This could be in part, or fully funded by governments, and/or by Corporations...

The following piece should give us further insight as to how a new financial system could become reality...................

Whether we like it, or not, the Monetary Reform of TFE would probably have to go before the US Government(ideally free from undue corporate influence),the European Parliament (if it is still around in the future!), the UK Parliament, and other democratic governments.

Here is the basic draft proposal is presented in the context of the US Goverment.

1. A special academic website could be set up with commissioned papers on TFE by recognized experts notably in IT, the law, and economics. This should add credibility to the research project.

2. The above site could be sent notably to those who have real power. In other words, the top bankers, top CEOs of "green friendly" corporations, and US politicians.Ideally, they should be those who are known to be seriously interest in environmental, and high ethical social issues.

3. A Bill for the American government could be expertly drafted known as Facilitation Banking Bill I. This would allow for the setting up of Facilitation Banks, or FBs if it were passed into law.

4.These would have the legal powers to create new non-repayable money which would be electronically monitored for urgent environmental, and socially ethical enterprises at a micro, and macro level. Its operations unlike the normal mainstream retail, and investment banks would be transparent in extremis. Ideally, they should be legally "separate" from the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank notably.

5.Just as banks benefit from the interest charged on the loans the new non-repayable money created electronically would also have what might be termed "grant interest," minus the principal. This "interest" could created electronically by an independent body. Mainstream banks could also have equal shares in the FBs, and would receive passive revenues from them.

6. These new financial institutions would also be able to electronically create loans. However, they would be interest free. The interest again would be created by an independent body.

7. The NGO promoting TFE reform with the aid of the academic website mentioned at 1. would emphasis the great importance, and need for a credible full legal framework in which the decision-making process for commercial grant applications should be for genuine environmental, and socially ethical business projects.

8.A second Bill which could be created after Bill I could be drawn up and is known as the Electronic Transaction Monitoring Bill II.

9. This is a very controversial Bill, and represents advanced TFE. It may takes years to become Law even if Bill I is passed, and becomes an Act.

10. Most monetary reformers would probably dislike the above because it implies a highly pragmatic approach to the banks, and bankers in which they could benefit greatly from the introduction of Facilitation Banks, and indeed, with ETM.

11. Time, and time again evidence suggests that working against the banks, and other financial institutions is probably a waste of time though it is ofcourse the most ethical approach. However, what matters NOW is whether humanity will survive into the future, or not irrespective of whether the plutocratic elites exist, or not. For that a new financial system on the lines of TFE would have revolutionary implications.

12. By presenting TFE as a powerful "business opportunity" for the rich, and powerful it could ironically lead to a better,and fairer world...