Insight diagram
Spending by the government creates its own 'financial resource' as the process of crediting an account in the private sector takes place. This may sound like nonsense, but in fact it is 'monetary reality'. This premise is supported by Bell (1998; 2000) and Wray (1998a) who argue that the Treasury does not need to collect or borrow funds in order to spend, but crates new funds as it spends.

Perhaps the following thought experiment  helps to understand how this is possible.  

If you imagine two drawers, each representing an account. The first drawer contains 100 gold coins and the second is empty. Also imagine that there are no other gold coins available at this time. Let's call the first drawer account A and the second account B. Now if you want to transfer 30 gold coins from account A to account B, you would actually first have to take the coins out of drawer A and then place them into drawer B. Account A will then necessarily have 30 coins less in it. Now imagine accounts A and B are held in a computer as electronic money. Instead of 100 gold coins, account A only contains the computer generated number '100'  and account B shows '0'. To get account B to show a balance of '30', it would now simple be necessary to change the '0' to '30' on the computer. The need to raid account A and to take '30' from the number '100' before you could credit  account B does not exist. Money is created as it is entered in B's account irrespective of whether A's account is debited before or after this process or not at
Monetary Reality
Insight diagram
WIP concepts from Rachel Turner's Book Neo-liberal Ideology
Neoliberal concepts
Insight diagram
In this Insight I focus on the demand site of the Market and Price model, leaving the supply side out.
Demand factors
Insight diagram
This seeks to model increasing improvements in long run economic growth potential as the education level increases.
LR Economic Growth
Insight diagram
This model is made to illustrate the components that impact profitability on a basic level. 
Profit maximizing
Insight diagram
My Insight_ENVS8019 report 5 exercise
Insight diagram
Vicious economic circle of Aboriginal people
Insight diagram
Revisited Essence of MMT 2019 insight using Jim Byrne's popular mmt101 blog entry Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) in 70 Bullet Points as the basis of my Gemini interaction Feb 2026 using Gene Bellinger's AI prompts for causal loop diagrams. See insight version including 2019 notes for extras
MMT 101 Overview of Modern Money
2 months ago
Insight diagram
Multiscale view of Combined PH and Economic Views IM 70763  in preparation for integrating with Prevention Investment Framework (private) IM
Multiscale Zoomable Prevention Model View
Insight diagram
Bt resistance systems map
Insight diagram
Develop a system model using the gathered  Biophysical, Socio-economic, and Cultural data of Iwahig
System Thinking and Modelling
Insight diagram
This is a simplification of the Austerity vs Prosperity model in the hope that it will be easier to understand.
@LinkedInTwitterYouTube
Austerity vs Prosperity v0
Insight diagram
this model shows the relationship between economic growth and government debt (just the bailout debt) and the mortgage default burden. At the current rates, the debt will never be paid off.
bailout debt, mortgage defaults and economic growth
Insight diagram
Georgism
6 months ago
Insight diagram
Community Economic Impact
Insight diagram
This page provides a structural analysis of POTUS Candidate Mike Huckabee's economic policy based on the information at: http://www.mikehuckabee.com/tax-reform and http://www.mikehuckabee.com/spending-debt (here, the candidate did not have a single clear economic policy, so we used economic elements from other policy statements that were clearly relevant).   The method used is Integrative Propositional Analysis (IPA) available: ​ http://scipolicy.org/uploads/3/4/6/9/3469675/wallis_white_paper_-_the_ipa_answer_2014.12.11.pdf
DRAFT IPA of Mike Huckabee Economic Policy
Insight diagram
Based on the Market and Price simulation model in System Zoo 3, Z504. I made some more intrusive changes that make the model more realistic, or more 'economic', in another version 'simplified and improved'. 
Simplified Z504 Market and Price - System Zoo 3
Insight diagram
Economic Model - Final Project
Insight diagram
Introduction:
This model demonstrates the COVID-19 outbreak in Burnie, Tasmania. It shows how the government policy tries to reduce the spread of COVID-19 whilst also impacting the local economy.

Assumptions:
This model has four variables that influence the number of COVID-19 cases: infection rate, immunity loss rate, recovery rate and death rate.

In order to reduce the pandemic spread, in this model, assume the government released six policies when Burnie COVID-19 cases are equal or over 10 cases. Policies are vaccination promotion, travel restriction to Burnie, quarantine, social distance, lockdown and testing rate.

Government policies would reduce the pandemic. However, it decreases economic growth at the same time. In this model, only list three variable that influence local economic activities. 
Travel restrictions and quarantine will reduce Burnie tourism and decrease the local economy. On the other hand, quarantine, social distance, lockdown allow people to stay at home, increasing E-commerce business.
As a result, policies that cause fewer COVID-19 cases also cause more considerable negative damage to the economy.

Interesting insights:
One of the interesting findings is that the government policy would reduce the COVID-19 spread significantly if I adjust the total government policies are over 20% (vaccine promotion, travel restriction, quarantine, social distance, lockdown), 3560 people will die, then no more people get COVID-19.
However, if I change the total government policy to less than 5%, the whole Burnie people will die according to the model. Therefore, we need to follow the polices, which saves our lives.
BMA708 assignment3 - Model of COVID-19 outbreak in Burnie
Insight diagram
Hospital Linens Systems Diagram
Insight diagram

Primitive Legend:

Grocery Store Inventory is a stock that represents the amount of perishable food units available for sale to consumers. This stock is directly affected by the forces of economics as grocers can only sell at the level that their produce is demanded. As a result, once this stock exceeds demand, it will rise as food no longer sold.

Overstock Waste is a stock that is designed to model the overstock display assumption which states that consumers have more incentive to purchase foods from fully stocked piles rather than empty ones. This stock exists and accumulates over time because grocers purchase excess produce to give buyers incentive.

Ugly Food Stock is the stock that represent the amount of perfectly nutritious ugly produce neglected by consumers as they only buy the prettiest clusters from the display. This stock includes foods such as brown bananas, dented apples, and so forth. These ugly foods are left behind in addition to the overstock waste.

Education Programs is the stock that contains the amount of ugly foods delivered to local school districts for educating students on the significance of ugly food discrimination. These foods are utilized in various forms of comparative demonstrations to illustrate to students that ugly foods are just as nutritious as prettier alternatives.

Compost Alternatives is the stock that depicts the efforts of grocery stores trying to implement a method that allows them to reduce the amount of waste they send to the landfill. These compost methods may be in the form on enriched manure given back to the farmers that supply the produce.

10 Food Units/Resale Output is the variable that illustrates the amount of food units required to make a product for resale. For example, it takes 10 units of melons to make an assorted melon platter. Likewise, a single smoothie for resale will require 5 units of assorted fruits.

ISCI 360 Project Stage 2
Insight diagram
Launch page for Macroeconomics Textbook 2019 by Mitchell, Wray and Watts. There is also a book companion site
Macroeconomics Textbook Overview
Insight diagram

This paper aims at describing a case where system dynamics modeling was used to evaluate the effects of information and material supply lead-time variation on sales contributions margins and operating cash conversion cycle of a commodity export business.  An empirical dynamic model, loaded with econometric theory of price effect on competitive demand, was used to describe the input data.  The model simulation outputs proved themselves relevant in analyzing the complex interconnections of multiple variables affecting  the profitability in a commercial routine, supporting the decision process among sales managers.

SDR Case study System dynamic modelling
Insight diagram

From Oatley 2014 p214++

Balance-of-Payments Adjustment

Even though the current and capital accounts must balance each other, there is no assurancethat the millions of international transactions that individu- als, businesses, and governments conduct every year will necessarily produce this balance. When they don’t, the country faces an imbalance of payments. A country might have a current-accountdeficit that it cannotfully finance throughcapital imports, for example, or it might have a current-accountsur- plus thatis not fully offset by capital outflows. When an imbalancearises, the country must bring its payments back into balance. The process by which a country doessois called balance-of-payments adjustment. Fixed and floating exchange-rate systems adjust imbalances indifferent ways.

In a fixed exchange-rate system, balance-of-payments adjustment occurs through changes in domestic prices. We can most readily understand this ad- justmentprocess through a simple example. Suppose there are only two coun- tries in the world—the United States and Japan—and supposefurther that they maintain a fixed exchange rate according to which $1 equals 100 yen. The United States has purchased 800 billion yen worth of goods, services, and financial assets from Japan, and Japanhas purchased $4 billion of items from the United States. Thus, the United States has a deficit, and Japan a surplus, of $4billion. 

This payments imbalance creates an imbalance between the supply of and the demandfor the dollar and yen in the foreign exchange market. American residents need 800 billion yen to pay for their imports from Japan. They can acquirethis 800 billion yen by selling $8 billion. Japanese residents need only $4 billion to pay for their imports from the United States. They can acquire the $4 billion by selling 400billion yen. Thus, Americanresidentsareselling $4 billion more than Japanese residents want to buy, and the dollar depreci- ates againstthe yen.

Because the exchangerateis fixed, the United States and Japan must prevent this depreciation. Thus, both governmentsintervenein the foreign exchange market, buying dollars in exchange for yen. Intervention has two consequences.First, it eliminates the imbalance in the foreign exchange mar- ket as the governments provide the 400billion yen that American residents need in exchange forthe $4 billion that Japanese residents do not want. With the supply of each currency equalto the demandin the foreign exchange mar- ket, the fixed exchangerate is sustained. Second, intervention changes each country’s money supply. The American moneysupply falls by $4 billion, and Japan’s moneysupplyincreases by 400billion yen. 

The change in the money supplies alters prices in both countries. The reduc- tion of the U.S. money supply causes Americanpricesto fall. The expansion of the money supply in Japan causes Japanese prices to rise. As American prices fall and Japanese prices rise, American goods becomerelatively less expensive than Japanese goods. Consequently, American and Japaneseresidents shift their purchases away from Japanese products and toward American goods. American imports (and hence Japanese exports) fall, and American exports (and hence Japanese imports) rise. As American imports (and Japanese exports) fall and American exports (and Japanese imports) rise, the payments imbalanceis elimi- nated. Adjustment underfixed exchange rates thus occurs through changesin the relative price of American and Japanese goods brought about by the changes in moneysupplies caused by intervention in the foreign exchange market.

In floating exchange-rate systems, balance-of-payments adjustment oc- curs through exchange-rate movements. Let’s go back to our U.S.—Japan sce- nario, keeping everything the same, exceptthis time allowing the currencies to float rather than requiring the governments to maintain a fixed exchangerate. Again,the $4 billion payments imbalance generates an imbalancein the for- eign exchange market: Americansare selling more dollars than Japanese resi- dents want to buy. Consequently, the dollar begins to depreciate against the yen. Because the currencies are floating, however, neither governmentinter- venesin the foreign exchange market. Instead, the dollar depreciates until the marketclears. In essence, as Americans seek the yen they need, they are forced to accept fewer yen for each dollar. Eventually, however, they will acquire all of the yen they need, but will have paid more than $4 billion for them.

The dollar’s depreciation lowers the price in yen of American goods and services in the Japanese market andraises the price in dollars of Japanese goodsandservices in the American market. A 10 percent devaluation of the dollar against the yen, for example, reduces the price that Japanese residents pay for American goods by 10 percentandraises the price that Americans pay for Japanese goods by 10 percent. By making American products cheaper and Japanese goods more expensive, depreciation causes American imports from Japan to fall and American exports to Japan to rise. As American exports expand and importsfall, the payments imbalanceis corrected.

In both systems, therefore, a balance-of-payments adjustment occurs as prices fall in the country with the deficit and rise in the country with the surplus. Consumers in both countries respond to these price changes by purchasing fewer of the now-more-expensive goods in the country with the surplus and more of the now-cheaper goodsin the country with the deficit. These shifts in consumption alter imports and exports in both countries, mov- ing each of their payments back into balance. The mechanism that causes these price changes is different in each system, however. In fixed exchange- rate systems, the exchange rate remains stable and price changes are achieved by changing the moneysupplyin orderto alter prices inside the country. In floating exchange-rate systems, internal prices remain stable, while the change in relative prices is brought about through exchange-rate movements.

Contrasting the balance of payments adjustment process under fixed and floating exchangerates highlights the trade off that governments face between

exchangerate stability and domestic price stability: Governments can have a stable fixed exchangerate or they can stabilize domestic prices, but they cannotachieve both goals simultaneously. If a government wants to maintain a fixed exchangerate, it must accept the occasional deflation and inflation caused by balance-of-payments adjustment. If a governmentis unwilling to accept such price movements,it cannot maintain a fixed exchangerate. This trade-off has been the central factor driving the international monetary system toward floating exchange rates during the last 100 years. We turn now to examine howthis trade-off first led governmentsto create innovativeinter- national monetary arrangements following World WarII and then caused the system to collapse into a floating exchange-rate system in the early 1970s. 

Oatley's balance of payments