Ocean/atmosphere/biosphere model tuned for interactive economics-based simulations from Y2k on. This Scenario hits Affluence (1% decrease per annum) to increase decarbonization of energy. Additionally, decrease in affluence is increased by temperature increases damaging the global economy
Ocean/atmosphere/biosphere model tuned for interactive economics-based simulations from Y2k on.
This Scenario hits Affluence (1% decrease per annum) to increase decarbonization of energy. Additionally, decrease in affluence is increased by temperature increases damaging the global economy
Overview of Part G Ch 27 to 30 of Mitchell Wray and Watts Textbook see  IM-164967  for book overview
Overview of Part G Ch 27 to 30 of Mitchell Wray and Watts Textbook see IM-164967 for book overview
 
			 
				 
					 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 nece

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. 

   THE 2020 MODEL (BY GUY LAKEMAN) EMPHASIZES THE PEAK IN POLLUTION BEING CREATED BY OVERPOPULATION.  WITH THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF ARABLE LAND NOW BEING 1.5 TIMES OVER A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (PASSED IN 1990) AND NOW INCREASING IN LOSS OF HUMAN SUSTAINABILITY DUE TO SEA RISE AND EXTREME GLOBAL WATER R

THE 2020 MODEL (BY GUY LAKEMAN) EMPHASIZES THE PEAK IN POLLUTION BEING CREATED BY OVERPOPULATION.
WITH THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF ARABLE LAND NOW BEING 1.5 TIMES OVER A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (PASSED IN 1990) AND NOW INCREASING IN LOSS OF HUMAN SUSTAINABILITY DUE TO SEA RISE AND EXTREME GLOBAL WATER RELOCATION IN WEATHER CHANGES IN FLOODS AND DROUGHTS AND EXTENDED TROPICAL AND HORSE LATTITUDE CYCLONE ACTIVITY AROUND HADLEY CELLS

The World3 model is a detailed simulation of human population growth from 1900 into the future. It includes many environmental and demographic factors.

THIS MODEL BY GUY LAKEMAN, FROM METRICS OBTAINED USING A MORE COMPREHENSIVE VENSIM SOFTWARE MODEL, SHOWS CURRENT CONDITIONS CREATED BY THE LATEST WEATHER EXTREMES AND LOSS OF ARABLE LAND BY THE  ALBEDO EFECT MELTING THE POLAR CAPS TOGETHER WITH NORTHERN JETSTREAM SHIFT NORTHWARDS, AND A NECESSITY TO ACT BEFORE THERE IS HUGE SUFFERING.
BY SETTING THE NEW ECOLOGICAL POLICIES TO 2015 WE CAN SEE THAT SOME POPULATIONS CAN BE SAVED BUT CITIES WILL SUFFER MOST. 
CURRENT MARKET SATURATION PLATEAU OF SOLID PRODUCTS AND BEHAVIORAL SINK FACTORS ARE ALSO ADDED

Use the sliders to experiment with the initial amount of non-renewable resources to see how these affect the simulation. Does increasing the amount of non-renewable resources (which could occur through the development of better exploration technologies) improve our future? Also, experiment with the start date of a low birth-rate, environmentally focused policy.

 This model shows the simulation of COVID-19 outbreaks
when it hit Burnie, Tasmania. This model will show how government intervention
will impact the total number in COVID 19 cases and the overall economic
activity.     

   

    Assumptions    



 1.   The current Burnie population in 19550.
Ther
This model shows the simulation of COVID-19 outbreaks when it hit Burnie, Tasmania. This model will show how government intervention will impact the total number in COVID 19 cases and the overall economic activity.

 

Assumptions

1.   The current Burnie population in 19550. Therefore, the susceptible population is equal to the current Burnie population.

2.       Since Burnie is just a regional city, the virus infection rate is 25% as 5000 people in Burnie went into quarantine during the outbreak last year.

3.       50% of people who are infected will recover.

4.       20% of people who are infected will die because Burnie population average is old.

5.       Government intervention and policy will reduce the Infection

6.       COVID-19 is only countable as a case if the infected people have been tested, and the percentage of testing depends on how many infected people have been tested.

7.       Following a recovery, there is a chance that people could lose their immunity, and also the immunity loss rate measures this.

8.       Government intervention will reduce the infection rate by 15%.

9.       Lockdown will cause tourism industry to shut down and affect the overall economic activity.

10.   Lockdown is one of the most effective way to prevent infection.

11.   Strict health protocol also contributes to reduce the infection.

12.   Vaccination will not make people fully immune to the virus. However, vaccinated people will reduce the immunity loss percentage.

13.   Economic growth rate percentage is based on year 2020.

Findings

1.       COVID-19 could be significantly reduced in number and the spread of the vaccine could make a significant impact on the epidemic.

2.       Economic activity will drop during the first phase of government intervention, However, it will steadily increase overtime

3.       Less people going to be susceptible as government imposed covid 19 rules.

WIP Dynamic map from Steve Keen's Minsky at 100 Lecture  video  and slides and later Emergent Macroeconomics papers
WIP Dynamic map from Steve Keen's Minsky at 100 Lecture video and slides and later Emergent Macroeconomics papers
This model illustrates the current practice and consequences of government spending. Following the
direction of the arrows from right to left the model shows the following sequence
based on current practice:

 Government
Spending at a certain point leads to spending in excess of tax receipts. This
w
This model illustrates the current practice and consequences of government spending. Following the direction of the arrows from right to left the model shows the following sequence based on current practice:

Government Spending at a certain point leads to spending in excess of tax receipts. This will automatically lead to the issue of treasuries in the belief that the excess spending must be financed by borrowing (although the government has the capacity to create  money). This in turn will increase the national debt.

 Consequences that follow from this practice:

1) That national debt increases whenever the government spends in excess of tax receipts.

2) That the government must pay interest on the debt issued, which in turn increases and reinforces the need for government spending.

3) That the interest paid on treasuries will increase private sector income.

There is an alternative view, supported by Modern Monetary Theory, of how government spending can proceed. Please see this  Insight: 

https://insightmaker.com/insight/19954

Scott Page's Aggregation diagram from Complexity and Sociology  2015 article  see also  IM-9115  and SA  IM-1163
Scott Page's Aggregation diagram from Complexity and Sociology 2015 article see also IM-9115 and SA IM-1163
I made this as an illustration of a piece of text I read in Regenerative Economics, household economics.
I made this as an illustration of a piece of text I read in Regenerative Economics, household economics.