This model illustrates a scenario whereby a client wanted to move from a Fixed rate/ton/route transported to a Tendered rate/ton/route in order to reduce the overall cost of transport. There have been considerable ''unintended consequences'' as a result of this.
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:
Simple model of the global economy, the global carbon cycle, and planetary energy balance.
The planetary energy balance model is a two-box model, with shallow and deep ocean heat reservoirs. The carbon cycle model is a 4-box model, with the atmosphere, shallow ocean, deep ocean, and terrestrial carbon.
The economic model is based on the Kaya identity, which decomposes CO2 emissions into population, GDP/capita, energy intensity of GDP, and carbon intensity of energy. It allows for temperature-related climate damages to both GDP and the growth rate of GDP.
This model was originally created by Bob Kopp (Rutgers University) in support of the SESYNC Climate Learning Project.
Goodwin cycle IM-2010 with debt and taxes added, modified from Steve Keen's illustration of Hyman Minsky's Financial Instability Hypothesis "stability begets instability". This can be extended by adding the Ponzi effect of borrowing for speculative investment.
This model simulates the economics of buying a home. It was created to compare buying a home against using investment returns to pay for rent. According to Micheal Finke, house prices typically run 20x monthly rental rates.
Try cloning this insight, setting the parameter values for real-world scenarios, and then running sensitivity analysis (see tools) to determine the likely wealth outcomes. Compare buying a home to renting. Note that each run will keep the parameters the same while simulating market volatility.
FORCED GROWTH GROWTH GOES INTO TURBULENT CHAOTIC DESTRUCTION BEWARE pushing increased growth blows the system! (governments are trying to push growth on already unstable systems !)
The existing global capitalistic growth paradigm is totally flawed
The chaotic turbulence is the result of the concept and flawed strategy of infinite bigness this has been the destructive influence on all empires and now shown up by Feigenbaum numbers and Dunbar numbers for neural netwoirks
See Guy Lakeman Bubble Theory for more details on keeping systems within finite limited size working capacity containers (villages communities)
Clusters of interacting methods for improving health services network design and delivery. Includes Forrester quotes on statistical vs SD methods and the Modeller's dilemma. Simplified version of IM-14982 combined with IM-17598 and IM-9773
From Bill Mitchell and Warren Mosler December2018 billy blog entry and mosler's MMT white paper (google docs) 2019. Some highly aggregated stocks and flows and boundaries introduced.See also Feb 2026 updated insight
Peak oil will occur when it is too expensive to
bring oil to the surface and not when reserves reach their limit. Companies
must make a profit to be able to extract oil and stay in the oil business. However, that endeavour is becoming more and
more difficult because of diminishing returns. They have to dig ever deeper to
get to the oil at ever increasing costs,
and the oil they find deep down is of a lesser quality. We have now reached a point where the price
needed by oil companies to make a profit and stay in business is far higher
than the price the market can bear. That
price is probably about $ 100 per barrel - and rising every year! A market
price o $ 100 will almost certainly cause a sharp recession and cause the price
of oil to fall back beyond the point of profitability. For example, the combined
profit of ExxonMobile, Chevron and Conocophillips fell from 80.4 billion in
2011 to only 3.7 billon in 2016 - see URL below. What the market can bear depends
on the spending power of the mass of non-elite workers. The CLD shows the negative
feedback loops that prevent oil prices to rise above the level of affordability. If non-elite workers cannot
afford the goods and services offered, then there will be no demand for them and by
extension for oil. In this situation the
market price will not the cover the cost that oil companies need to extract
oil. Oil supplies will decline and so will economic activity!
This model attempts to illustrate a Strong Towns' perspective of municipal financing of our communities based on a development Growth Ponzi Scheme. http://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme/
The communal economic investment by the community to help generate future economic prosperity and improve the community's quality of life.
If the community generates greater economic prosperity as a result of the Near Term Cash either directly through increased Municipal Revenue or indirectly through the enhancement of Community Wealth Generators and Place Making improvements within the community then it is a desirable investment.
If, however, it leads to ever increasing debt and the chasing of outside investments with the community as the means of collateral then it is a Growth Ponzi Scheme and the community needs to create some new paradigms to find a different path.
