The Reintroduction Of Globanomics

After going back and forth this past week with one of the very competent editors from Talkmarkets, I have decided to shift my recent focus away from the coronavirus pandemic back to Globanomics, the heart and soul of most of my earlier writings for Talkmarkets.

For those that have not been following my writings, Globanomics is the name I gave to the theory and philosophy that I introduced for global economic behavior that I believe is necessary for optimum global achievement.  When I first introduced Globanomics in an article I wrote for Swift Economics back in 2010, I envisioned the United States of America being the lead player in the implementation of Globanomics.

Although I still feel that way, without a change in U.S. leadership, the inevitable implementation of Globanomics will be delayed. And yes, Globanomics is inevitable. The acceptance of Globanomics is not a question of if, but when. Regardless, the sooner the better for everyone. That is why this upcoming election in the United States is so important to Americans and to the rest of the world.

Globanomics is not an “America First” philosophy like that espoused by the current administration. In fact, “America First” is antithetical to Globanomics, as much so as would be a “Europe First” or a “China First” philosophy.  In the Globanomics world, nations do not work independently and selfishly solely for themselves, but instead, they work cooperatively together for the good of the entire global community—somewhat in the manner that the fifty states work cooperatively together for the good of the entire United States.

Call me a dreamer and I will respond that you have your head buried in the sand. Call me a fool and I will tell you that I am on the right side of history. Call me a traitor and I will say no I am a patriot.

I have been tracking a large set of Globanomic indicators (e.g., wealth, food, housing, security, freedom, etc.) for the last several years and Globanomics is working on its own even without a focused effort. Trying to stop its implementation is like trying to row upstream against a raging current after a storm. Nothing outside of Armageddon is going to stop the downstream flow of Globanomics.  

So, what is this Globanomics that I espouse? Here is how I introduced it nearly ten years ago. 

Globanomics is a fully integrated philosophical, economic, and scientific discipline that is based upon global rather than nationalistic perspectives. Whereas, the foundation of Globanomics is based upon a clearly defined, commonly accepted, the core set of world principals, the building blocks that shape the discipline come from the latest concepts and theories from the science of economics.

The core foundation of Globanomics is based upon the following principals:

  1. Do no harm.
  2. Love is the highest knowledge.
  3. The ethic of reciprocity.
  4. All human beings are created equal.
  5. Freedom is preferable over subjugation.
  6. An individual’s right to pursue happiness.
  7. The protection and wise use of global resources; and
  8. Exponential reality.

The economic building blocks that shape Globanomics are:

  1. Global Pareto optimums..
  2. Friendly competition preferring perfect competition over monopolistic control.
  3. Investment strategy preferred over debt strategy preferred over rape/pillage strategy.
  4. Increasing gross global product per capita through productivity enhancements while narrowing the relative gap between high and low nations..
  5. Rewarding positive creativity; and
  6. A single monetary unit of currency.

The military war between national entities does not fit within the framework of Globanomics. Instead, Globanomic Wars are fought on the following fronts:

  1. War on hunger.
  2. War on poverty.
  3. War on disease control.
  4. War on prejudicial hatred; and
  5. War on the misuse of global resources

In my next article, I will show some of the early research findings on how some especially important Globanomic indicators have changed in the short eight-year period between 2010 and 2018.

In case any of you would like to read a more whimsical, light-hearted explanation about the development of Globanomics, I would recommend something I wrote that was published in Mobius, The Journal of Social Change called The Love of Economics, subtitled The Economics of Love.

Until then, stay safe and vote for change. For the last four years, the United States has been trying to row upstream against the current and it is time we begin leading again.No one is going to follow a leader who is rowing against the current when the final destination is downstream. And no one is following us now, nor should they.

Disclosure: No positions.

How did you like this article? Let us know so we can better customize your reading experience.

Comments

Leave a comment to automatically be entered into our contest to win a free Echo Show.
Or Sign in with
Gary Anderson 4 years ago Contributor's comment

While I support globalization and global cooperation, Globanomics goes too far. One world currency is an attack on legitimate national sovereignty.

Jim Boswell 4 years ago Contributor's comment

You could possibly be right. I had not thought of that. Yet, the dollar will still have to be the measure. Globanomics may need some minor adjustments, but i will argue you down on just about every other point if you wish.

Gary Anderson 4 years ago Contributor's comment

Interesting article. Single currency would be my only concern.

Brittany Lacey 4 years ago Member's comment

How so?

Gary Anderson 4 years ago Contributor's comment

I believe nations should be sovereign. Not the ugly nationalism of Trump. A more cooperative form of national sovereignty. But a single currency would take away that necessary economic freedom for the nations.

William K. 4 years ago Member's comment

I should remind folks that on the average only half of all changes are improvements, which means that the other half of all changes make something worse. Thus I suggest thinking very carefully before jumping on the change truck. Secondary results of actions are not always clear, and tertiary results even less obvious.

Getting rid of a loudmouth may be a relief, but if the replacement is one who never considers the price of things the problem may be far worse, unless the goal is to be broke.

Thus careful, considered, and informed thought is in order.