JAK Interest-free Banking in Sweden

Part 1 - Ethics

This part introduces the JAK bank in a very simple way, and then mostly makes an argument (which we already understand) about why our virtual (exponential, interest-based, debt-based) economy is unethical and ultimately unsustainable.

"Money is produced as a loan, mostly. In the OCD countries, only 3% of the money is produced as coins and notes. The rest of it is debt. And debt has to be repaid with interest. To avoid getting inflation, everything you use money for also has to grow at the same pace as you increase the money. And money has to be increased, because you need to repay the earlier years' debt with interest.

What are the problems linked with and interest based-economy?
The main problem is that it forces people to borrow more money each year in order to pay the interest on the loans they already have. If you dn't do that you have to cut your other expenses in order to pay thie interest, and this means you have to choose between exponential debt growth or a rapid increasing unemployment.

Now in September (2007) the ECB is going to raise again the interest rate on moeny, they say to counteract inflation. But this is quite wrong. I've done some statistical researches that analyze Swedish society over a perioud of 20 years. It very clearly shows that about 4 months after you have raised the interest, you get an increase in invlation, a price increas. And then between 8 and 9 months after a raise of interest, you get an increase in unemployement. And this will ahve an impact on the prices downward, but this downward is not so big as the initial rise of the prices. if you rise the interest by 1%, you will get an increase in inflation about 0.5%."

Part 2 Techniques

0:45 Begins the explanation of the bank. I would like to discuss this, why it works out equivalent to a 2.5% interest rate on the loan.
2:06 Post-saving, or after-saving: The member pays back the loan, and then is allowed to withdraw the resulting savings. It seems that in a way, she gets the money twice.
3:11 Savings are not the same as savings points.

Since there is no interest given to members, won't a member who only saves and doesn't borrow lose money?
Answer at 4:22. The point is supporting the community. When the community is wealthy and stable, everyone benefits. So saving your money in this way is not about individual profit, it's about profiting the whole group, and making the community viable. The JAK bank is mostly staffed by volunteers.

"Loaning as a mutual service among people, that is the financial heresy of JAK bank."

The Basis of Trust

Last week's conversation, Ants, Control and Hierarchy, ended with a short discussion about trust:

-Trust? Why is it hard for people to trust each other?
-Evolution!
-Is it natural? Is a genetic thing? Is it about education? Is it culture and subroutines?

Since people wanted to explore this further, today's question is:

What is the basis of trust between human beings?

Here are some answers gleaned from the internet, let's see where this takes us! Click on the headlines to find the article from which the quote or synopsis was taken.


A Definition of Trust

Rousseau and her colleagues offer the following definition: "Trust is a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another."[1] Similarly, Lewicki and his colleagues describe trust as "an individual's belief in, and willingness to act on the basis of, the words, actions, and decisions of another."[2]

討論逐字稿 Ants, Control and Hierarchy

This is the transcript from our Ants, Control and Hierarchy discussion.

Discussion
So can someone summarise our article today?
It talks about ants and human beings.
...aaaaand?
Okay, the story is about an experiment about how ants' networks work, and compare it to human beings' society.
The first part, the short story is, if Argentinian ants eat the same things as other ants, they think they're friends.
I think what they eat matters so much because they communicate by touch and smell. So maybe for some human beings, they focus on how people dress, in that case what you wear and how you carry yourself is more important than what you eat.

Ants, Control, and Hierarchy

Last week we we spoke about control, and people wanted to continue this discussion. Since some of what we touched on was control within society or a social group, I thought we might look at this article in the Boston Review on ants. Ants are often held up as an example of good social organization, they're thought to be hard workers, and often what we perceive as the organization of ant colonies is used for exploring ideas about human societies, so it might be fun to look at organization and control through this lens.
Here's the transcript from the discussion.


Whether ants fight is determined by whether they share food.

In the early 1990s a group of scientists at the University of California, San Diego introduced the notion that Argentine ants form a super-colony, one enormous colony stretching throughout California. … The force of the idea of the super-colony came from the observation that Argentine ants from different nests rarely fight with each other. The super-colony evoked an image of huge numbers of small brown ants pouring into California from Latin America. The fact that the ants didn’t fight with each other suggested that somehow they were all linked together, and that united they could defeat all the native ants in their path.

But the lack of fighting among Argentine ants does not reveal a collective purpose. Like all ants, the experience of an Argentine ant is largely olfactory and tactile; most of the 11,000 species of ants have very poor vision. An ant is coated with a layer of grease (cuticular hydrocarbons) that carry its colony’s odor, and ants of some species react aggressively to the odor of a different colony. Argentine ants, like some other ant species, are not very sensitive to small differences in odor.

However, scientists recently have discovered that, with sufficient differences, Argentine ants will fight after all. In a laboratory working to develop pesticides, a technician fed some Argentine ants a German cockroach. The result was both unintended and exciting: the cockroach’s odor was incorporated into the ants that ate it, and they were attacked by other Argentine ants that had not eaten the cockroach. When it comes to fighting among Argentine ants, what matters may be whether they have been sharing the remains of Big Macs, not their genetic origins.

Kara

Let's discuss this video:

Jealousy, Envy, Harmony

What is jealousy?
What is envy?

These two words are so similar in Chinese and English, even though they don't translate exactly directly in terms of how strong an emotion they convey. What's the relationship between these two emotions?

What does jealousy feel like?
What does envy feel like?
Are they similar or different feelings?

Do you ever feel that if others are doing well, you are less likely to have the same happen to you?
Could fear of envy bring about social harmony? (See story and examples below)
Was that how things worked in any experiences you've had?

Jealousy/Envy and Harmony
Is jealousy or envy based on a fear of not being good enough, to work for or keep something valuable? Is jealousy or envy based on a fear of losing something valuable?
Do these fears have a common root?
Are these fears going to influence group harmony?

Group Harmony and Sense of Self
Is it more important to take care of yourself before others, or others before yourself?
Does taking care of others first, or taking care of yourself first, have any relationship to your sense of your own value?
Does your sense of your own value influence your ability to work well in a group?
Our society values selflessness, and our society also values harmony. Are these two attitudes compatible?

"This sort of serves a useful group function," says van de Ven. We all think better off people should share with others, "but that's not something we are inclined to do when we are better off."

Do you agree or disagree?
What kind of attitude does this quote seem to be talking about?

Harmony & Conflict, Experience & Knowledge

We're continuing our discussion of Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. Previously in this series we discussed Apathy & Compliance, Dignity & Participation.

"…Madison Avenue public relations, middle-class moral hygiene, which has made of conflict or controversy something negative and undesirable. This has all been part of an Advertising Culture that emphasizes getting along with people and avoiding friction. If you look at our television commercials you get the picture that American society is largely devoted to ensuring that no odors come from our mouths or armpits. Consensus is a keynote—one must not offend one's fellow human; and so today we find that people in the mass media are fired for expressing their opinions or being "controversial"; in the churches they are fired for the same reason but the words used there are "lacking in prudence"; and on university campuses, faculty members are fired for the same reason, but the words used there are "personality difficulties."

"Conflict is the essential core of a free and open society. If one were to project the democratic way of life in the form of a musical score, its major theme would be the harmony of dissonance." -Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals p.63

What does 'harmony' mean?
What are the most common contexts in which you hear the word 'harmony' used?
What do you feel when you hear the word harmony? What's your first association with this word?
Chinese culture is historically about harmony. Can we talk more about this?
Why is harmony valued? What about harmony makes it an intrinsic good?

討論逐字稿 Apathy & Compliance, Dignity & Participation

This is the first discussion about Saul Alinsky's book, Rules for Radicals.
Here's the quotes and questions we were discussing.


Discussion:
I think if people want to do something, they will organize the thing by themselves, when they have the feeling of responsibility.
I totally agree.

What's the main thing happening in these two quotes? What state of being is the author describing?

In my opinion, it's about the…in a group, if you don't do anything, it's a benefit for you, so if someone says we can cooperate together, then maybe you can do it. But before that, everything thinks it's not my business, and maybe someone else will do it.
And it occurred to me, there's a tv show from japan. In that show, there's a group of people, they need to serve a mission together, but it's free for everyone, you can join or not. So you can see people are enthusiastic to solve the mission, but other people will think, that's not my business, and there must be someone else to do this, so those people will not do anything. But if the rules of the game changed, that everyone has to solve the mission together, then at that time people will solve it together.
So you have to force people to join it?
Or you have to make it so that if they don't join it, they will lose money.
Many years ago, I joined a conference, and Tsai Yingwen had a presentation at the conference. She said that for government, or political people, if you want to change the situation, you have to make people think it's a big problem, it's everyone's problem.

Apathy & Compliance, Dignity & Participation

Last week we talked about boundaries and compliant children. This week we're going to start a series of discussions about ideas from this book Rules for Radicals. The book is only about 300 pages long, and in very normal english, so I highly recommend giving it a peek.

The transcript of the first discussion is here.

Today, I want to first talk about a couple of ideas from the chapters, Policy after Power (p.106) and "The Process of Power" (p.113):

"One of the great problems in the beginning of an organization is, often, that the people do not know what they want. Discovering this stirs up, in the organizer, that inner doubt shared by so many, whether the masses of people are competent to make decisions for a democratic society. … These reservations can destroy the effectiveness of the most creative and talented organizer. Many times, contact with low-income groups does not fire one with enthusiasm for the political gospel of democracy. This disillusionment comes … because when you talk with any people you find yourselves confronted with cliches, a variety of superficial, stereotyped responses, and a general lack of information. In a black ghetto if you ask, "What's wrong?" you are told, "Well, the schools are segregated." "What do you think should be done to make better schools?" "Well, they should be desegregated." "How?" "Well, you know." And if you say you don't know, then a lack of knowledge or an inability on the part of the one you are talking to may show itself in a defensive, hostile reaction: "You whites were responsible for the segregation in the first place. We didn't do it. So it's your problem, not ours. You started it, you finish it." If you pursue the point by asking, "Well, what else is wrong with the schools right now?" you get the answer, "The buildings are old; the teachers are bad. We've got to have change." "Well, what kind of change?" "Well, everybody knows things have to be changed." That is usually the end of the line. If you push it any further, you come again to a hostile, defensive reaction or to withdrawal as they suddenly remember they have to be somewhere else.

The issue that is not clear to organizers, missionaries, educators, or any outsider, is simply that if people feel they don't have the power to change a bad situation, then they do not think about it. Why start figuring out how you are going to spend a million dollars if you do not have a million dollars or are ever going to have a million dollars—unless you want to engage in fantasy?

討論逐字稿 Boundaries, Trust, Consent

We discussed 'Boundaries, Trust, Consent' the second discussion in the 'Boundaries' series.

Discussion:
Why was it okay (according to the parents) for the boy to repeatedly knock down the girl's castle?
Boys are supposed to be like that.
Like what?
To be naughty. To damage things, to create some damage.
Because other boys do the same thing.
They prefer the boy can show the power or to dominate or control the situation.
What do you mean by naughty?
Not behave.
So boys are supposed to break the rules.
Uh-huh. It's okay for boys to break the rules.
Most of the time, boys are more aggressive. This is what I think.

Do you personally feel it was okay that the boy kept knocking down the castle?

討論逐字稿 Boundaries, Trust, Community

This is the transcript for the first of our 'Boundaries' discussions.

Concluding Statements:
I think normally groups set the boundaries for the individual in the beginning, because it is easy to have the order instead of chaos. What I can think if, is, for example, when a group of people joins a summer camp, and the organizer, or workers will try to make the members follow certain rules, and if most people follow the rules of the camp, and actually all the members can get the most benefit from it, and they will learn more, and also enjoy more. I think the group has its own boundary, and most of the time, I need to follow, because I am a part of the group. But if that boundary influence my private life, or have too much of an impact on me, it's time to step out, or adjust or actually set my own boundary there. So I can be in that group for the longer term.

Boundaries, Trust, Consent

Today we are continuing our conversation about boundaries. Here's the transcript from a previous discussion of this article.

In general, most cultures encourage boy children to be more unruly, and girl children to be more cooperative. In this article she describes how in her daughter's playgroup, a boy would daily destroy the castle her daughter built. Frustratingly, the boy's parents did nothing about their son's behavior. They didn't try to discuss it with him or even point out that there was a problem. Instead they say things like this:

"You know! Boys will be boys!" 
"He's just going through a phase!"
"He’s such a boy! He LOVES destroying things!"
"Oh my god! Girls and boys are SO different!"
"He. Just. Can't. Help himself!"

She goes on to critique their response to the situation.

Not once did they talk to him about invading another little person's space and claiming for his own purposes something that was not his to claim. It was, to them, some kind of XY entitlement. How much of the boy's behavior in coming years would be excused in these ways, be calibrated to meet these expectations, and enforce the “rules” his parents kept repeating?