I wrote two versions of this article; this long one, and a shorter one. My editor/husband said the longer one was the better one because it explained some things he hadn’t understood. Yet nobody has a comment, at least so far.
I hope everyone knows that their 401K can be invested by the fund managers into AI without asking or notifying since the recent rule change that was made for Musk’s SpaceX IPO. Original investors can now begin to take their money away, leaving retirement, pension, and sovereign wealth funds invested via the index.
I’m a nurse, not a financial advisor, and my meager savings are in a local bank. I’m not a gambler, especially now. But the problem is when the big shot gamblers in the stock market screw up, the economy tanks and they will probably be bailed out to save the system while unemployment, homelessness, and foreclosures rise.
That’s why I pay attention and vote for candidates who care about workers, not just the wealthiest investors who manipulate the system, making rules that benefit them and put the rest of us at risk.
When I look around here in the UK and Northern Ireland I see younger generations being economically eaten alive by the neoliberal vulture capitalism politically introduced by Reagan in the US and Thatcher here. Most are being held up above deadly rising waters of destitution by the parents and grandparents who initially benefitted from massive financial deregulation. For now. Few are the inheritors of criminal wealth. They are the new aristocracy. These fatal iniquities worsen daily. We all know this politically supported social system is not sustainable.
There continues to be talk of Republicans reducing Social Security. Don't they realize that younger generations are also financially dependent on Social Security recipients? Cutting SS will make a bigger hole in the economy than they expect or than we can endure.
Ms. Maloney. The potential problem as I see it is that those "investors, those masters of the economy" who manipulate the nation's economy are not sticking to the fundamentals of all economic systems:
1)Raw materials
2) Labor
3) Markets
4) Money
The "masters of the economy" are not generating "real" wealth by
sticking to these fundamentals. They are instead generating what I call "phantom" wealth by increasing the "valuation" of their business enterprises through what is in effect a confidence game on a massive scale. This process is the same as what banks do when they lend out money they do not have; and thereby create what I have in your past blogs, called "phantom" money. Your response to my use of the term "phantom" money in the past, was to say that you had never heard of "fiat" money being referred to as "phantom" money. "Fiat" money does not refer to "phantom" money. "Phantom" money and "fiat" money are not the same things "Fiat" money is created when governments take their currency off the gold standard. "Phantom" money is what is created when banks lend money they do not have in their vaults. The banks are lending only a promise, not money.
It is a misnomer to call our system a "free" enterprise system. It is not a "free" enterprise system. It is a "private" enterprise system. And in the last 60 years or so the masters of this system have vastly increased the financialized proportion of our economy. In my terms, they have turned our economic system into a vast con game, worse even, than a casino game. Noam Chomsky has been saying this for decades, ever since Reagan, our first moronic president. Our second moronic president is only cashing in on what Reagan began.
I read that the system is based on “perceived value.” Who is doing the perceiving and with whose money? They are gambling with our quality of life and they obviously don’t care about the population.
For me, this essay laid it all out very clearly. If there is a collapse that requires fewer data centers, repurposing a data center as a warehouse seems logical, provided there is demand for a warehouse. But the actual equipment cannot be repurposed similarly (i.e., an Nvidia chip cannot be repurposed as a memory chip). If the demand is overestimated due to low take-up, the data warehouse may stay idle until demand appears, and then the technology may be obsolete. I am not sure a dispersion of data centers is the correct way to go. I think a giant data center city is required with its own power generation and water source. By definition, that requires a coastal location.
That may also require a desalination plant and a source of energy for desalination. Does it sound to you like they actually thought this through, or does it seem like they are all in a greedy rush to be “the king of the hill?”
Mr. Clark. I like what you say here. May I add something you might want to think about? Perhaps your imagination can add something I am not able to add.
Throughout homo sapiens' existence on this planet we have always INCREASED the per capita production of energy. Never have we DECREASED it; except in those cases where an entire civilization has collapsed. Cultural anthropologists are well aware of this. See, for example the little 1973 book THE CONCEPT OF CULTURE by Leslie White and Beth Dillingham at the University of Michigan, two of my teachers.
Here is my contribution to the topic which I evolved from my reading of the brilliant, largely forgotten British biologist, Lancelot T. Hogben:
The same thing must be said of the per capita production of information. It always INCREASES and in this age of electronic computers; it is clear that the two phenomena, energy and information, are inextricably bound up together. Furthermore, the two are both subject to the concept of entropy.
It seems inevitable that data centers will be built. The important question, I think, is: who shall benefit? All of us? Or the elite private owners of our economic system? Where the data centers are placed is no doubt important. But I think the question of qui bono supersedes all other questions.
Thanks for this comment. I think automation has always reduced the cost of products, but at the same time has made the owners very wealthy. We have to separate utility from wealth. Most all enjoy the utility of a cell phone or a TV or a dishwasher.
I wrote two versions of this article; this long one, and a shorter one. My editor/husband said the longer one was the better one because it explained some things he hadn’t understood. Yet nobody has a comment, at least so far.
I hope everyone knows that their 401K can be invested by the fund managers into AI without asking or notifying since the recent rule change that was made for Musk’s SpaceX IPO. Original investors can now begin to take their money away, leaving retirement, pension, and sovereign wealth funds invested via the index.
I’m a nurse, not a financial advisor, and my meager savings are in a local bank. I’m not a gambler, especially now. But the problem is when the big shot gamblers in the stock market screw up, the economy tanks and they will probably be bailed out to save the system while unemployment, homelessness, and foreclosures rise.
That’s why I pay attention and vote for candidates who care about workers, not just the wealthiest investors who manipulate the system, making rules that benefit them and put the rest of us at risk.
When I look around here in the UK and Northern Ireland I see younger generations being economically eaten alive by the neoliberal vulture capitalism politically introduced by Reagan in the US and Thatcher here. Most are being held up above deadly rising waters of destitution by the parents and grandparents who initially benefitted from massive financial deregulation. For now. Few are the inheritors of criminal wealth. They are the new aristocracy. These fatal iniquities worsen daily. We all know this politically supported social system is not sustainable.
There continues to be talk of Republicans reducing Social Security. Don't they realize that younger generations are also financially dependent on Social Security recipients? Cutting SS will make a bigger hole in the economy than they expect or than we can endure.
I stay well clear of AI investments. I have interests in quantum computing and fusion energy
Seems to me that decisions were made by C-Suite ignoramuses who were probably warned of the serious constraints but did not want to be the laggard.
Often wondered where all the electricity would come from when EVs and AI data centers abound.
Good question since the grid is already overloaded.
Should have gone with Tesla
Ms. Maloney. The potential problem as I see it is that those "investors, those masters of the economy" who manipulate the nation's economy are not sticking to the fundamentals of all economic systems:
1)Raw materials
2) Labor
3) Markets
4) Money
The "masters of the economy" are not generating "real" wealth by
sticking to these fundamentals. They are instead generating what I call "phantom" wealth by increasing the "valuation" of their business enterprises through what is in effect a confidence game on a massive scale. This process is the same as what banks do when they lend out money they do not have; and thereby create what I have in your past blogs, called "phantom" money. Your response to my use of the term "phantom" money in the past, was to say that you had never heard of "fiat" money being referred to as "phantom" money. "Fiat" money does not refer to "phantom" money. "Phantom" money and "fiat" money are not the same things "Fiat" money is created when governments take their currency off the gold standard. "Phantom" money is what is created when banks lend money they do not have in their vaults. The banks are lending only a promise, not money.
It is a misnomer to call our system a "free" enterprise system. It is not a "free" enterprise system. It is a "private" enterprise system. And in the last 60 years or so the masters of this system have vastly increased the financialized proportion of our economy. In my terms, they have turned our economic system into a vast con game, worse even, than a casino game. Noam Chomsky has been saying this for decades, ever since Reagan, our first moronic president. Our second moronic president is only cashing in on what Reagan began.
I read that the system is based on “perceived value.” Who is doing the perceiving and with whose money? They are gambling with our quality of life and they obviously don’t care about the population.
For me, this essay laid it all out very clearly. If there is a collapse that requires fewer data centers, repurposing a data center as a warehouse seems logical, provided there is demand for a warehouse. But the actual equipment cannot be repurposed similarly (i.e., an Nvidia chip cannot be repurposed as a memory chip). If the demand is overestimated due to low take-up, the data warehouse may stay idle until demand appears, and then the technology may be obsolete. I am not sure a dispersion of data centers is the correct way to go. I think a giant data center city is required with its own power generation and water source. By definition, that requires a coastal location.
That may also require a desalination plant and a source of energy for desalination. Does it sound to you like they actually thought this through, or does it seem like they are all in a greedy rush to be “the king of the hill?”
Mr. Clark. I like what you say here. May I add something you might want to think about? Perhaps your imagination can add something I am not able to add.
Throughout homo sapiens' existence on this planet we have always INCREASED the per capita production of energy. Never have we DECREASED it; except in those cases where an entire civilization has collapsed. Cultural anthropologists are well aware of this. See, for example the little 1973 book THE CONCEPT OF CULTURE by Leslie White and Beth Dillingham at the University of Michigan, two of my teachers.
Here is my contribution to the topic which I evolved from my reading of the brilliant, largely forgotten British biologist, Lancelot T. Hogben:
The same thing must be said of the per capita production of information. It always INCREASES and in this age of electronic computers; it is clear that the two phenomena, energy and information, are inextricably bound up together. Furthermore, the two are both subject to the concept of entropy.
It seems inevitable that data centers will be built. The important question, I think, is: who shall benefit? All of us? Or the elite private owners of our economic system? Where the data centers are placed is no doubt important. But I think the question of qui bono supersedes all other questions.
Thanks for this comment. I think automation has always reduced the cost of products, but at the same time has made the owners very wealthy. We have to separate utility from wealth. Most all enjoy the utility of a cell phone or a TV or a dishwasher.