Alternative currency and balanced living system. Alternativna valuta i uravnoteženi životni sistem. Moneta alternativa e sistema di vita equilibrato.

Linija

Search

Home Alternative News News Nobel Family: Economy Is Not A Science

Crom Alternative News

Investigative journalism and useful articles on various topics.
marti misterija
User Rating: / 2
PoorBest 

Norwegian lawyer and activist Fredrik Heffermehl claims that over half of Nobel Peace Prizes awarded since 1946 are illegitimate because they are in breach of the terms of Alfred Nobel's will. The yawning gap between the real world and the economics profession has never been wider. The latest analysis of the existing situation by Joseph Stiglitz - internationally renowned economist and winner of the 2001 Nobel Prize in economics: "We have to understand that the problems have been festering for years, not just the last three years. As individuals we have certain basic rights. We aren't created by the law. We exist by nature. But corporations are man-made. They are supposed to serve our interest, our society's interests. And we are creating them with powers that are not serving our society's interests. An institutionalized system of skewed incentives allowed Wall Street bankers and other corporate executives to gamble with America's wealth and then get away largely scot-free after the house of cards came tumbling down, plunging the U.S. into the worst economic crisis in decades and destroying trillions of dollars of wealth worldwide. Put Corporate Criminals in Prison."


Frederick Soddy turned the scientific world on its head, by proving the divisibility of the atom. Later Soddy won the Nobel Prize for discovering the existence of isotopes. Soddy was a serious scientist. He was also an underground economist. And he turned the upside down world of economics right side up again. Here’s his conclusion: "I thought that, as a scientific man, I ought to know something about economics. So I studied the money system for two years and could make nothing of it. Then, one day, the truth dawned on me. What I was studying was not a system, but a confidence trick." He also concluded economists were incompetent, and economics pretended to be a science. But it wasn’t a science, which is why everyone has such a hard time understanding it. Frederick Soddy, Nobel laureate in chemistry, decided that economists’ dangerous drift into pseudo-scientific abstraction must be halted before they destroyed industrial societies, because their uninformed ideas contravened the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Now, the family of Alfred Nobel, led by lawyer Peter Nobel, has disassociated itself from the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economics In Memory of Alfred Nobel.




Stefano Battiston and James Glattfelder, a pair of physicists at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich did a physics-based analysis of the world economy as it looked in early 2007. Their work has revealed that the world's finances are in the hands of just a few, world's stocks are controlled by select few.

The ever-increasing abstractions in finance and its models based on “efficient markets” and “rational actors”; capital asset pricing, Value-at-Risk, Black-Scholes Options Pricing, have been awarded most of the Bank of Sweden prizes since they were founded in the 1960s and foisted onto the Nobel Prize Committee. Most of these abstract models, based on misuse of mathematics, contributed to the financial crises of 2007-2010.

Nobel family point out that Alfred Nobel never would have approved of a prize in economics since it is not a science – and would have disapproved even more that most of the prizes were given to Western, neoclassical economists using mathematized, abstract models – far from Nobel’s wider concerns.

The scale of industrial and financial operations become global and ever more computerized and digitized, accelerating the abstraction of management. In the post-Bretton Woods, turbulent global casino, the $3 trillion plus daily electronic trading of currencies and sovereign bonds are driven largely by speculation, credit default swaps, and high-frequency trader’s algorithms. The mathematical fantasy that debt-money is wealth and can reproduce itself is revealed again in the actual global financial crisis. Even Alan Greenspan admits that it was all a scam and fraud:

 

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this video

 

Recently, one of the largest Italian newspaper, Il Giornale, published the truth under the title "Global Monetary Sovereignty In Private Hands": money is backed by nothing, money is created out of thin air in the form of debt by the central banks - privately owned institutions.

Money is a useful information system for tracking our use of nature’s resources and scoring the games we humans play, but it gradually became mistakenly equated with the real wealth of the world's nations. Similarly, too often economists and politicians describe money flows in economies as analogous to the human body’s circulatory system. Yet human blood’s hemoglobin cells do not charge money or interest for the life-giving oxygen they deliver to every other cell in our bodies.

The mismatch is between the real-world economies, where real people grow food, make shoes, clothes, shelter and tools in real factories, versus the human mind’s tendencies toward abstraction. Our mental models are memes that crystallize into habits, dogmas and outdated theories such as those in conventional economics and finance. These led to collective illusions: about “efficient markets,” “humans as rational actors” and the lure of “compound interest” that still guide the decisions of too many asset managers.

Useful idiots now claim that no one could have predicted the financial crises. The truth is that thousands of critics, scholars, market players and independent researchers accurately predicted and warned of the coming debacle – but were ignored by the leading elites in business, government and academia. Mainstream media accepted conventional "wisdom", funded by advertising from incumbent industries and their financial allies while their lobbyists took control of the world governments. After the rotten reforms lubricated with the mountains of the fresh printed funny money, the IMF, the World Bank, the BIS and the G-20; how can a paradigm shift allow new voices, new models and more accurate modeling and control of systemic risk to emerge in the global financial system?

 

 

First, we must recognize the crises we face are not normal economic cycles, black swans, fat tails or perfect storms; but symptoms of our limited perception, fragmentary reductionist mindsets, models, research methods and academic curricula , particularly in economics and business schools. Equally urgent are the phasing out of all the hundreds of billions of dollars recently injected in form of perverse subsidies propping up obsolete, incumbent corporations and industries still blocking the emergence of cleaner, greener information-rich technologies and new companies.

 

In a fascinating article published by the Huffington Post titled "Priceless, How The Federal Reserve Bought The Economics Profession", one can discover how famous economists earn money for living and why, despite everything that has happened and worst yet to come, are not inclined to criticize the central bank and monetary policy.

Trickle down economics has failed utterly, even as the politicians and central bankers still assure that sucking the tit of over-indebted taxpayers and printed money into big banks and bloated financial sectors will somehow trickle down to Main Street and local businesses. Hopefully, all this together with ballooning debts, deficits and un-repayable compound interest, the foreclosure and mortgage securitization scandals and auditing Fannie, Freddie, FED, ECB and others will provide enough evidence to voters in all countries of the needed paradigm shift and new policies.

Exposing all the statistic illusions, inoperative models, dysfunctional economic dogmas – including their unsustainable offspring: debt-based money and compound interest – can begin the Green Transition to the emerging economies of the 21st century. The new coalition is now visible: responsible and green investors and companies, environmentalists, Millennials, progressive labor unions and their pension funds, students, independent media and voters, systems thinkers, futurists and academics pioneering new courses in sustainability, as well as dispossessed homeowners, jobless workers, professionals and veterans eager to put their skills to work – all are ready to help grow the fair green economies of the future.

 

The Nobel Family Dissociates Itself From The Economics Prize

On October 11th Peter Nobel, a lawyer and descendent of Alfred Nobel, issued a statement dissociating the Nobel family from the so called Nobel prize in economics:  

The Economics Prize in memory of Alfred Nobel should be criticised on two grounds. First, it is a deceptive utilisation of the institution of the Nobel Prize and what it represents. Second, the economics prize is biased, in the sense that it one-sidedly rewards Western economic research and theory. 

The Economics Prize in memory of Alfred Nobel should be criticised on two grounds. First, it is a deceptive utilisation of the institution of the Nobel Prize and what it represents. Second, the economics prize is biased, in the sense that it one-sidedly rewards Western economic research and theory.

Alfred Nobel’s testament was not a hasty piece of work. It was a carefully thought out document. Also, Alfred Nobel’s letters suggest that he disliked economists.

The proposal of a Riksbank [central bank] prize “in memory of Alfred Nobel” was discussed by the Nobel Foundation on April 26, 1968. Professor Sten Friberg, rector of the Karolinska Institute, opposed the idea. The Nobel committee of the Norwegian parliament [which selects the peace prize candidate] expressed serious misgivings. But a rapid decision was expected, apparently under pressure. Why? Riksbanken’s chief Per Åsbrink had close contacts within the government, and for the Nobel Foundation it was vitally important to conserve its tax privileges.

What was the position of the Nobel family? Three days before the meeting of April 26, the then director of the Nobel Foundation, Nils Ståhle, met two members of the family and telephonically talked with a third one. Their position was that “it should not become like a sixth Nobel Prize”, but that if the economics prize could be kept clearly separate from the Nobel Prizes then it might be an acceptable idea. On May 10, Ståhle and the president of the Nobel Foundation, von Euler, visited the family’s eldest, Martha Nobel, then 87 years old — with severely impaired hearing but intellectually in good form. They obtained her written approval of the economics prize “under given conditions,” namely that the new prize in all official documents and statements should be kept separated from the Nobel prize, and called the “prize in economic science in memory of Alfred Nobel.”

In a telephonic conversation with a nephew, Martha Nobel said that the whole thing was prearranged and impossible to oppose, so that one could only hope that they would keep their pledge that no confusion with the real Noble prize should occur. There was no approval from the Nobel family as a whole. We were informed only much later.

What has happened is an unparalleled example of successful trademark infringement. However, nobody in the world can prevent journalists, economists and the general public from talking about the “Nobel prize in economics,” with all its connotations. That is why, in the name of decency and in order to honour Alfred Nobel’s memory, this bank prize in his memory should be given on a different occasion than the Nobel day [a day of  ceremonies headed by the king].

With no knowledge of economics, I have no opinions about the individual economics prize winners. But something must be wrong when all economics prizes except two were given to Western economists, whose research and conclusions are based on the course of events there, and under their influence. I can imagine Alfred Nobel’s sarcastic comments if he were able to hear about these prize winners. Above all else, he wanted his prizes to go to those who have been most beneficial to humankind, all of humankind!

 

The only possible reaction to self-destruction is right in front of your eyes - stop using their debt-money, try alternative currencies.