Makassar Mall Eviction Notice

After the fire in Makassar Mall, my uncle who got his store ok, not burned by fire, was given an eviction notice without any compensation or whatsoever.
The notice told him to leave his store because of safety concerns. So they're going to rebuild the building regardless of my uncle, who has paid his rent for another 7 years, still using his store for trading.

----

Pihak pengelola Makassar Mall mengusir om saya yang tokonya tidak terbakar. Katanya demi alasan keamanan. Jadi tidak ada ganti rugi walaupun tokonya masih utuh tidak terbakar dan masih bisa dipake berdagang oleh om saya yang sudah membayar sewa untuk 7 tahun lagi.

Makassar butuh Keindahan

Makassar butuh monumen yang indah. Kenapa hal seperti ini penting / berguna?
Karena di dalam keindahan ada kesepakatan.
Kesepakatan akan administrasi-administrasi yang dapat memecahkan masalah.
Hal-hal yang indah adalah formasi yang dianggap membawa kepada pemecahan-pemecahan masalah.

Karena keindahan gunanya adalah kesepakatan, jangan bikin monumen yang bernuansa agama, jangan bikin monumen yang bernuansa adat, jangan bikin monumen yang bernuansa eksklusif.
Bikinlah monumen yang diterima oleh semua orang.

Permasalahannya adalah banyak bentuk yang indah, tapi kalau setiap orang punya pemikiran yang berbeda di benaknya, butuh waktu yang lama, dan administrasi yang mahal untuk mempersatukannya. Kalau ada monumen yang indah, maka setidaknya banyak orang dapat memiliki keindahan yang mirip di benaknya, dan mereka dapat cepat untuk membentuk formasi karena sudah saling mengenal satu sama lain.

Lihat Jakarta, monumennya begitu sederhana, monas... kurang begitu indah. Mereka butuh banyak monumen-monumen kecil, yang kurang begitu menarik juga. Menurut saya mereka akhirnya dapat sinkronisasinya hanya setelah ada formasi tata ruang yang indah.

Singapore, New York, London, Paris, telah menerapkan monumen-monumen yang indah.
Makassar mungkin dapat membuat monumen juga, dalam bentuk yang universal, seperti pohon tua yang terkenal. Rimbun, Kokoh, Berbatang Ganda, Berdahan-Dahan yang Subur, Berbuah banyak.

Deflation oriented Bank new procedure v.05

To make the deflation oriented bank at least plausible to be implemented, people could start by implementing these policies:

1. Still give people interests for deposits
2. Give people the option to sign a petition that says they would not withdrew their money while its being used in lending, and the bank has no other alternative to replace the amount.

Now people who agreed to this policy would be given extra interests rate but not much, like 0.3%, and people who disagreed got lower interest rates by the same margin.

People whose money ended up being used, and therefore became binded by the contract, got an increase of interest rates by 1%.
And since the risk of default was a bit lower, the loan interest rates could also be lowered by 0.8%

Now throughout time hopefully this method gets more and more popular. So the true spirit of the philosophy could be implemented. Those that don't put their money at risk would get even less interest, Those who are in the que would get slightly higher interest. And those who got themselves binded ended up deserving for 2% higher interests, like 7.5 to 8%.

--------------------------------

This procedure could have a new advantage: People could get high interest rates without committing their money to 6, 12, even yearly periods like the way it is now. If the bank was rich, had many people queing for lending their money. Binders could withdrew their money anytime and the bank could just bind another person from the que list.
No obligation to wait, but in exchange the risk that the whole bank might default and you ended up giving away all of those money legally.

The role of central bank in this system would also change, the central bank now acts as a mediator. Some banks might experience low demands of borrowing, some high, the central bank borrowed with special rates from the banks that had a lot of reserves of committments and transferred it to the banks that needed more investors.
---------------------------------

Update: Now I think comitters shouldn't be given high interests at all. This will just lead to similar banking system than before. I don't want that, so, comitters could be rewarded for their comittments, but only as much as marketing expenses, or, very little interests.
The nice way of making money out of money is to work the money, not piling credits over credits, it's just too dangerous and unethical. People should always be able to withdrew their money without feeling guilty.

Limit of Priority in Reality

Here's a question, is it reliable to say that if there were events that previously percieved had very little chance of happening, actually happened in real life, then there must be a reason behind it.
The reason would be an event that had high chance of occuring.
Therefore there's no such thing as low probability events ever took place, it's always a high probability events that took place in reality, we just didn't have the point of view yet.

For example: The probability of me falling from my bed without anyone pushing me is 1:1000000, but I did fell. There must be something that triggered my fell, there must be factor that's supposed to be included in the calculation but didn't.
Apparently if anyone observed the geological activity around my town, they'd figure out that the there was 90% chance that there going to be an earthquake at the night, and in case of an earthquake, the chance of me falling from my bed became 1:15.

Therefore, it'd be useful to find this limit or range of qualification of an event to be prioritized in reality. If a probability was too small beyond the limit, let's say maybe at about 1:1000000, but the event took place, then there must be a variable that we failed to took account. And it's an opportunity for us to learn about it.

George Reisman on Deflation

http://georgereismansblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/falling-prices-are-antidote-to.html

Now in this blog, I kept on using the term "deflation" instead of "price lowering" because I want to emphasis the Anti-Inflation attitude of my idea.
I disagree to have the value of money constantly deteriorating, price increasing, and instead of having all the values distributed to sources of solutions, they got distributed to people who are the closets to the central bank. Which are the bankers.

NO! we must have a system that's sided with humanity, not with the betrayers. Let the first hand receivers of money be people in the rural areas. Lets have "Deflation" or Anti-Inflation oriented Banks

Recent condition of pasar sentral (Makassar Mall) v.02

Pasar Central is one of the center of trade in Makassar, my uncle has a shop there, but currently they have to trade in another place since Pasar Central was on fire, and after people came and took away all of the metals of the buildings. My Uncle's shop is at the ground floor of the building and is at risk of any mishap that might occured after all that.

Following are photos proving of what they've done and that the government has done little to counter this actions:

Deflation oriented Bank v.04

The concept is to adjust all principals of investment and return of investments to inflation/deflation level. So if you borrow 100 dollars, and the inflation rate was 1%, you should return 101 dollars of principals plus interest. But if deflation occured 1%, you should return only 99 dollars plus interest

In deflation oriented banks, depositors would be given two accounts. The first type only saves money but yields any/no interests. The second one was an investment account, whenever someone borrowed money, the bank would transfer depositor's money from the regular account to the investment account, in which then the depositors would earn interests. The interest given as the reward for providing liquidity to borrowers. When the time is due for the money to be returned, the principal return would be adjusted to inflation/deflation rate as well.

In a strong bank, depositors should be able to withdrew money from the investment account anytime, because the system could access enough cash to replace the lending. In even stronger banks, all of depositors' money could be put in the investment account, because the bank had a lot of borrowers and has enough liquid capital of its own, to support the lending.

Now if the system was widely adopted, banks that experienced more borrowing demands than the cash that were available for them could request deposits from the central bank. The central bank then would look for other banks that had surplus of deposits, negotiate, and transfered the money to the previous banks after they agreed of a terms and conditions. If all banks experienced too much borrowing demands, the central bank could provide for them from its reserve.

If this system works well, governments could reduce or even not collect taxes from their citizens. To fund their projects and expenses, they would just print money. Printed money could also be distributed to remote areas, or to farmers, so people in more prosperous places would venture to the remote areas and brought with them goods and services or even infrastructures to improve their welfare.

Our scarcity is not of time nor energy nor money, our scarcity is of solutions, mutual solutions. And solutions are unlimited, people could keep on creating solutions and therefore create deflations, good deflations, one that improve the level of ease of access to essentialities.

Ofcourse government should not print money based on deflation made from consuming unsustainable products. Deflation of gas prices should not initiate the printing of money, unlike lets say an invention of a variety of rice that could consume sea water productively.