Individualism

A lot is being spoken of excessive Facebook et cetera use but it seems there is evidence on the health benefits of usage for older People. Perhaps that is the correct direction to think in next, regarding social media. What Entrepreneurial Teenagers could do is help the Gramps make their best first impression as they step on the “digital ship”. If I had the time, I’d start by gathering groups of Elders to start in simultaneity as a group: “Beam us in, Scotty” -style.


Individualism is going on everywhere around the Planet at an increasing rate. It’s everywhere on the news, all the Circles in-the-know are discussing it and their relation to it. I think it’s a good thing, individualism, since it is the outcome of what has become possible in modern Human life. We just need to learn to control it: balance it with the other side, the group. 

One good example of this everyday balance that I’ve loved using is from the film-version of the Swedish TV series Solsidan. I’ll admit to not having seen the series much at all but the movie is fantastic. There are social awkwardnesses and clashes and all manner of Swedish silly craziness: the thing that pulls it together is the Finest Lady who flashes both middle fingers and shouts out ”Fuck off!” as a lesson to us all in claiming our own space. 

I’ve really seen this attitude on the ground more and more (or has the movie caused me to realise it more?): Finns and other Northerners, Greta Thunberg United and onwards, starting to push back and claim their right to their own future. The ”fuck off!” -mentality, through which I’m sure many rights will be gained, is clearly the voice of the Digital Kids Generation using what they have to claim what is theirs to be achieved.

So, to reiterate, I think individualism is a good thing. Individualism allows us to experience that part of life as who we are.

But it needs to be controlled: there is a lot of potential power in ”fuck off!” It is easy to forget the beingness of other People. In the Northern context (at least), I think right now what we should be thinking is how do we help balance and rebuild the entire stability of the Middle East. My current approach operatively is to start thinking about whom amongst the current diaspora are fittest to lead the home transmission of learnings from their Northern stay. I do not mean this in any discriminatory way: quite the contrary.

Planning a resurgence of knowings in the source lands of mass migration is the mass healing of the land itself. I believe it should be taken as a granted token that all land should want to be in a good state. During my studies in Copenhagen, Denmark, at the Copenhagen Business School, I have, for example, studied the Indian diaspora and their return to India, People who have been leading entrepreneurial growth surges and bringing prosperity to their returned homes. I think there are learnings available from that and other similar trends going on in Asia from which Finland could learn, helping position it better regarding the Middle East, and the whole on-going situation on that front of straightening out societal imbalance.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen

Supremacy Over the Tool

“At work, time is money (never question that). Outside of work, the exact opposite seems to be true (that time is anti-money).

Well: unless you’re gaining on capital, which you should always try to be, in my opinion. It’s the smart, long-term thing to do fiscally, and a measure of freedom is the ability to do it: however it happens. There are many trust mechanisms that can be deployed to operate a fiscal layout into the future.”


Ultimately, supremacy over the tool comes down to whether or not you have notifications turned on.

I’d say it is smart to consider why you’d want to be at least partly submissive: the primary value of automated notification is speed-to-outcome regarding the information.

That in turn forces the consideration of the desire to obtain the outcome. Must everything be carried? That is to say: notifications have time-cost weight, and not all information is worth the carried effort.

So it’s like: “Babe, what’s your Notifications-policy? I’m all outta digital whack and gotta clean up this screenplace.”


The proper way to ask the question is “Witch came first: Chicken or the Egg?” then she decides what she’ll have.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen

Democracy

Captain on an Internet Bridge, next day: I am once more happy to report that the 50/50 balanced mixture of Pink A.F. (As Flamingos) (Pinot Grigio Rosé from Italy) & Sugarless Sprite works mycket bra during a mid-Wednesday dog-and-rest.


Captain on an Internet Bridge: I am happy to report that the 50/50 balanced mixture of The Damn Wall (Chenin Blanc from South Africa) & Sprite sans sugar works fine and dandy for a post-Tuesday sit-at-home.


When it comes to Russia: the flip from the USSR to today is just insane to even begin to think about. We’ve been brought up with the amaze-story of Finland growing from an agrarian state to today in less than eight decades, but what’s gone on across the border to the east during the last three reaches a whole other level of whack.

To be honest I think Yeltsin, drunkard as he was, is the main pain behind modern troubles yet to be overcome: that said, I don’t think it was naturally feasible to expect anything else than a Human-packaged Vodka Bomb to be able to crash through the gates of the USSR at such a pace that the resulting impact would turn it back into Russia. I mean that with all due respect, of course: no matter the style, the change was accomplished and the Cold War ended. What I’m saying is that perhaps the natural equity fallout could have been handled better should it have been someone less intoxicated at the helm: allow us to continue being honest, in full respect, there was a combination of own tank and own Parliament (which just very easily translates into own goal).

Russia, what was before 1917 (the year that brought us in Finland our independence, for which we are ever thankful); its essence is only now starting to rise above that of the Soviet Union. I’ve hung out with Russians my age travelling the world on high corporate pay, dreaming of making big money in graphic design (great market opportunity in Russia).. so much stuff yet to see happen in Russia. Though I acknowledge that things are still tougher there than here, noting in particular that I personally consider local politics to be the political form of the highest calibre, then forgive me for being honest and saying that I, truly, have faith in the leadership skill of President Vladimir Putin. He turned me with his interview on MSNBC with Megyn Kelly in the spring of 2018 by saying: “It is not important to project power. It is important to manifest it.”

To me that sounds like the drive to help people grow further into their fuller capacity, which is what the Russians (to my perception) are doing, as I imagine they will be for quite some time yet.

But, indeed, won’t we all.


Audio sample for mood-setting

The answer to macroeconomics is land(ing). There is land and it is functioning in some way, as an outcome of contracts created prior. Upon considering a blank map we can see how power condenses itself into zoning rights. Of course, it is the cloud(ing) that controls that: we know what we study, and tend to act accordingly.

For Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth II, who hath asked but almost a decade ago, right after the financial crisis: something along the lines of “what didn’t we know?”

I say to You, Madame Queen: I do not see it as such that we can expect People to know what People don’t know until they know it. It is my theory that what was learned from the financial crisis was a valuable lesson in checking in with the fundamentals, the primary value being that we now understand that they (the fundamentals) have some (value, that is).

It is proper to recap the fundamentals, briefly. The productivity and productivity potential of land is what, ultimately, drives housing prices. The productivity and productivity potential of land and housing prices cannot be separated from each other: the People working determine the People buying, when confining an economic consideration into a local area.

A primary limiting factor of a local area is its entrepreneurial propensity, for example: a boom arising from the arrival of one big employer can only sustain itself if it can be met with the required entrepreneurial support network, meaning everything from culture to hospitality, which sustains a local area by feeding the resident Society. This creates a strengthening bond to the local area, over time.

A factual, ground-based knowing of this type of events in a local economy are what determine the potential of a Financial Institution to lend, alongside the study of the business-to-be-located. What we can learn is that there should never be too much of a distance between the asset and the Lender. Every kilometre from a location, every added dimension to the contractual structure of a derivative, is distance.

Banking is and always will be a local job, because that’s where the assets, ultimately, are. Even if You mostly look at them on paper: out there on the ground they are, somewhere. It then becomes a matter of relativity as to your position of power as to how you define “local”: if you’re the CEO of a global bank, it’s the Planet for you.


Audio sample for mood-setting

Democracy is not the greatest thing since sliced bread: it is what created sliced bread. That is because democracy is the organised process of listening, and it exists on the market side of the societal system through the customer feedback mechanism just as it exists on the political side of the societal system through the vote.

Somebody listened to someone to figure out to slice the bread.

The thing that is problematic about modern society as it stands is that the position of democracy, not only as a term but as the behaved manner of practice that stems from it, rests fully on the political side of the spectrum, wherein lies a world of governance that opens up into a state of lockdown once every election season. Whereas the market practitioner faces the feedback every single day, the political operant stares into the gauntlet once every few years: the differences in the frequency and amplitude of listening defining the gap between these two opposing poles of society. As the position of democracy stands on the political side of the spectrum, we often forget the direction being taken in the market: day-in, day-out.

When considering democracy we see time only in election seasons, even if what it is is that it is going on every single day.

Despite their natural placement in opposition, like the different ends of a magnet, the two sides of society need to work together through their respective leaderships. So when we modernly talk about democracy, we need to overcome the problem of simply looking at one half of the societal whole: at politics. Democracy is going on beyond politics: it is the organised process of listening, and it need not be confined.

What I believe the market practitioner needs to highlight in the modern discussion is the dynamism of the modern Human. Given an unsatisfactory situation, the abundance of choice modernly available allows for rapid progress towards something more satisfactory. As the modern Human has, through the smartphone and other technology, become more and more accustomed to a fast reception into satisfaction, the stress placed upon the slower political system grows. How does the big ship keep up?

The work of the respective leaderships of the societal system needs to bring together some mutual understandings about operation that can be accepted as axiomatic truths about reality. First there is listening, yes, but then there is the making it happen. Indeed, democracy is the organised process of listening, but it is not the entire system: it is but a component. Surely it is the morally fundamental component, as central as the steering wheel to the car, but the pedals need to then become used, as well. I think the market practitioner can definitely help the politician here.

Infinite listening crowds out action. It must be accepted with a humble yet straight face that leadership is, eventually, always allowed. That does not ever mean that the listening stops. Obviously it must go on, alongside the commencement of the action by leadership.

So, ultimately, what I’m saying is that democracy is naturally balanced-out in reality by the power of authority, and vice-versa. That’s why all the Dudes in the past did all the signings on the contracts and that’s why we’re all livin’ the highering qualities.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen

The Towers

“On tärkeätä osata käydä ilmiömäistä keskustelua käytännöistä. Toki pitää myös osata käydä käytännöllistä keskustelua ilmiöistä.”


Based on the observation of reality as it stands, any given modern Society, from East to West, North to South, is built upon a fundamental separation of two institutions of power:

The Bank and the State.

The State exists to provide official identity and protection for it. The Bank exists to provide equity and protection for it, operating on the basis of the primacy of the State, which provides the official identities that our holdings are attributed to.

Together these form the foundations that allow the Individual to exist in a state of everyday freedom, brought to them by the logically created capacity to capitalise on opportunities and own assets as Self. Until there is a capacity for the Individual to capitalise and own as Self, there is no everyday freedom. There is a polar difference between being handed a chocolate bar at a certain time in a certain place as compared to being able to choose one, as preferred, across type, time, and location.

Obviously the moral and rational responsibility of Leaders is to ensure that everyone has a chance: simultaneously it is important to understand that there will always be a spectrum of those with more and those with less. A healthy market means for healthier business. Ergo, what’s important is making sure that the spectrum doesn’t stretch out too wide: practically all revolutionary history shows us that that is when the fan starts to get hit.

I like to think that the fan is the symbolic transmitter of equity from top to bottom: if the fan is spinning at the right frequency (correct fidelity & speed), it won’t get hit as it becomes its own protection. Ultimately, it comes down to a matter of capability in responding to and acting upon Citizen and/or Customer feedback by Leadership.

ps. what I am not saying is that there are not any more Towers. What with the being of the Media, the Churches, the Academies et cetera


“Money creates money. When it comes to a broken economy: spend it to mend it. Make sure that the aggregate supply chain is clean: all growth becomes quantum net-positive, as in both moral and numeral. The political reality of the infinite seeking of this balance: define clean and remember to ask: do I control all of the equity? To which the answer is, obviously, no I do not. But so yea: the economy. It’s definitely goin’ on!”

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen

Merkityksellisyys

“Nykymyyjä on kykymyyjä.”


Viime vuosina vellonut keskustelu työn merkityksellisyydestä on yksi nykypäivän ilmiöistä jonka kanssa olen joutunut taistelemaan vähiten: työn merkityksellisyys on minulle niin itsestäänselvä keskusteluympäristö ettei siitä juurikaan synny keskustelua kanssani.

Työllä hoidetaan oman talouden ylläpito. Työllä rakennetaan ja ylläpidetään pääomaa jonka päällä eletään valumatta ajassa taaksepäin. Työllä saavutetaan itsenäisyys – suvereniteetti – sekä Yksilöinä että Yhteisöinä.

Ytimekkäitten ilmaistuna: työllä elätetään Itsensä ja Lähimmäisensä.

Kutsukaa minua 32-vuoden iässäni vanhaksi, sillä sitä taidan jo olla, kyetessäni taaksepäin katsoessani näkemään elämäni aikana vallinneita aikakausia ja niitä yhdistäviä itsestäänselvyyksiä. Lieneekö nuorempien digitaalinen katkos luonnosta rakentanut heille kyvyttömyyden nähdä elämän yksinkertaisimpia todellisuuksia.. ken tietää.

Työ ei ole itsestäänselvyyttä kummoisempi asia. Työ on itseasiassa yksi elämän suurimmista itsestäänselvyyksistä. Hengittämisen ja veden juomisen tasolla oleva hommien homma, joskaan ei niin automaattisesti hoituva.

Suosittelen, mitä totisimmin: jos haluaa kaivautua työn merkityksellisyyteen yhden askeleen verran enemmän – mielestäni maksimin verran – niin ei tarvitse kuin katsoa Asiakkaitaan tai muita Palveltavia. Mitä heille tapahtuu jos sinun työsi katoaa?

Vuonna 2017 olin työtapaamisessa LVI-alalla toimivan suhteellisen suuren osakeyhtiön markkinointi- ja viestintäjohdon kanssa. Keskustelu merkityksellisyydestä kesti noin kahdeksan sekuntia: jos Te ette toimita ilmastointia rakennuskohteisiin, on helvetin kuumia bileitä luvassa. Ilahduin Naisten superlämpimästä reaktiosta: hommiin ja himaan taisi resonoida heissäkin.

Onko oman työnsä edessä/takana/ympärillä olevien Ihmisten ajattelu niin vaikeata? Sieltä se merkityksellisyys löytyy.


“Elämän tarkoitus ei ole työ. Mutta työn tarkoitus on elämä.”

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen