Model showing the effect of bank lending of deposited money as a multiplier in the creation of new money. Multiplier effect is shown as related to the bank reserve requirement on deposited funds.

Microeconomic measures can produce counterintuitive 'emergent' effects at the macro or systemic level. The commendable act of saving money by individuals during uncertain economic times has the perverse macroeconomic effect of making a recession  worse: in aggregate there will be less money available for spending, suppressing demand for goods and services. Economists call this effect 'the paradox of thrift'. Similarly, logical efforts by companies in such conditions to reduce their wage bill or their postponement of investment decisions will reduce spending in the economy  and deepen the economic downturn.

What can be done to counteract this harmful dynamic? The missing spending can be replaced by government spending: governments have it within their power to effectively counter economic downturns!

This model is an attempt to understand the interactions within an economy in an attempt to determine where the leverage points are to stimulate an economy.

@LinkedIn, Twitter, YouTube

Model showing the effect of bank lending of deposited money as a multiplier in the creation of new money. Multiplier effect is shown as related to the bank reserve requirement on deposited funds.

Simplified Causal loop diagram (from CLD 1 Insight) after quantitative simulation experiments from Fig 5.20 Dianati, K. (2022) London’s Housing Crisis – A System Dynamics Analysis of Long-term Developments: 40 Years into the Past and 40 Years into the Future UCL PhD Thesis and Video presentation

Afirmația că nu poate exista activitate economică fără energie și că combustibilii fosili sunt finiți contrastează cu faptul că banii nu sunt finiți și pot fi creați de guverne prin intermediul băncilor lor centrale la costuri marginale zero ori de câte ori este nevoie.

The statement that there can be no economic activity without  energy and that fossil fuels are finite contrasts with the fact that money is not finite and can be created by governments via their central banks at zero marginal cost whenever needed.

An important fact about COAL, GAS and OIL (even when produced via fracking) is that their net energy ratios are falling rapidly. In other words the energy needed to extract a given quantity of fossil fuels is constantly increasing. This ratio (Energy Invested on Energy Returned - EIOER) provides yet another warning that we can no longer rely on fossil fuels to power our economies. We cannot wait until the ratio falls to 1/1 before we invest seriously in alternative sources of energy, because by then industrial society as we know it doday will have ceased to exist. 

PS: A link between growth in energy consumption and GDP growth is clearly illustrated on slide 13 of Gail Tverberg's presentaion entitled ''Ooop! The world economy depends on an energy-related bubble''. In fact, the slide shows that growth in energy consumption usually precedes GDP growth.

https://gailtheactuary.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/oops-debt-bubble-10_30_15.pdf

Model based on the Sustainable Money System.

The systemic problem is to understand what influence the gold price?

Many articles say that the gold price is manipulated and some analysts predict that the bubble will burst. (1)

We think that understanding how gold can be influenced by different factors is an interesting research topic. The variation of the gold price is a real-world problem which evaluates through the interaction of a group of different elements.

It seems that the gold price is a very complex problem understanding. Of course everybody has his own thinking about the problem according to his own filter.

But this approach is most of the time not valuable because there is not a full view of all the variables and their link. In a context of a growing demand and a constant supply, be able to determine if gold price will continue to increase and if this asset will represent a safe investment for the new decade.

In September 2011, gold price surged a record, $1,274,75 an ounce. According to the Commodities guru George Soros “gold was the ultimate bubble" and was no longer a safe investment.

On the other hand, the research conducts by metal consultant GFMS predicted that gold will hit a new record of $1,300 an ounce. (2)

Who was right? Both of them. 

This example illustrates how complex is the problem.

At the time of this research the price of gold is $1,316,79 an ounce.

Wealthy persons are concerned by preserving their fortune, they also look to maximise their wealth and to keep it safe. Many options are available to investors, despite buillion is a popular asset on a long-term portfolio, nowadays is it gold a safe investment? That is a good question. Also understanding the impact of gold on the economy and how it is link to poverty might be interesting. To analyze an issue, one must first define it.

In order to get a better understanding of the gold price we will model this complex problem. Our goal is to visualize the interconnection of elements and be able to identify feedback loops with the aim to understand the complexity of the problem.

We will analyse different documents from various sources, underline variables and identify their relationships over time.

 

Trying to look objectively how tax changes to the wealthiest could lower debt and any impact to the economy.

Model supporting research of investment vs. austerity implications. Please refer to additional information on the SystemsWiki Focus Page and Modern Money & Public Purpose Video.

Haaglanden Social housing Fig 18 SD Model feedback structure from Eskanasi 2014  thesis Other models in the thesis include middle income households and mortgage debt

A model to gain understanding of the causes and effects of a population's interest in engineering.

The statement that there can be no economic activity without  energy and that fossil fuels are finite contrasts with the fact that money is not finite and can be created by governments via their central banks at zero marginal cost whenever needed.

An important fact about COAL, GAS and OIL (especially when produced via fracking) is that their net energy ratios are falling rapidly. In other words the energy needed to extract a given quantity of fossil fuels is constantly increasing. The falling ratio 'EROI' (Energy Return on Energy Invested ) provides yet another warning that we can no longer rely on fossil fuels to power our economies. In 1940 it took the energy of only one barrel of oil to extract 100. Today the energy of 1 barrel of oil will yield only 15. We cannot wait until the ratio falls to 1/1 before we invest seriously in alternative sources of energy, because by then industrial society as we know it doday will have ceased to exist. An EROI of 1:1 means that it takes the energy of one barrel of oil to extract one barrel of oil - oil production would simply stop! 

'Efficiencyism’  can be described as a blind belief in the effectiveness of efficiency measures without taking into account circumstances and the wider context.   The graph on the left shows how the frequent use of the term 'efficiency' at the level of local interactons can lead to the emergence of  'efficiencyism' through upward causation, denoted by the arrows pointing upwards.  However, there is also downward causation from the global level depicted by the red arrows which can increase the blind application of efficiency measures at the local level. In other words, efficiency for the sake of efficiency becomes a dominant idea.  The tyrannical influence of 'eficiencyism' affects all of us to varying degrees and unfortunately can often have very negative side effects, such as an increase in unemployment, social injustice and even increase inequality.  Of  course, well thought out efficiency improvements can also bring great  benefits.   I recommend reading an excellent article by Dr. Charles Chandler, who explains the term 'efficiencyism' with some excellent examples and also points to some  of its undesirable effects.

http://www.ageofoe.com/010-efficiencyism-holds-us-back/

The effect of austerity in the wrong place

The statement that there can be no economic activity without  energy and that fossil fuels are finite contrasts with the fact that money is not finite and can be created by governments via their central banks at zero marginal cost whenever needed.

An important fact about COAL, GAS and OIL (especially when produced via fracking) is that their net energy ratios are falling rapidly. In other words the energy needed to extract a given quantity of fossil fuels is constantly increasing. The falling ratio 'EROI' (Energy Return on Energy Invested ) provides yet another warning that we can no longer rely on fossil fuels to power our economies. In 1940 it took the energy of only one barrel of oil to extract 100. Today the energy of 1 barrel of oil will yield only 15. We cannot wait until the ratio falls to 1/1 before we invest seriously in alternative sources of energy, because by then industrial society as we know it doday will have ceased to exist. An EROI of 1:1 means that it takes the energy of one barrel of oil to extract one barrel of oil - oil production would simply stop! 

Model in support of an article being written about the relationship between investment and austerity. See Version 2

See also:
* Inv vs Aust Sim [IM-2736]
* Inv & Output 1 [IM-2740]
* Inv & Output 2 [IM-2741]