(submitted by email, without knowledge of or reference to John Root's post)
I am intrigued by this idea and have signed up to be a future depositor. I must say, however, that for all its intended simplicity, the communication on how the system works is woefully deficient. The Gilligan approach places the concept outside of the context of how a Common Good Bank would work in a real community, which leaves it to our imagination to create an analogous scenario in our own communities. Why not lose the Gilligan video and construct a viable illustration using a real world example…in fact, several real world examples applied to different cultures.
For example, why not illustrate a small town USA scenario that uses a local hardware store, specialty food shop, flower shop, medical facility, et cetera, plus a credit union, local depositors and investors. Create your illustration showing "real life" scenarios and interactions that your organizers can use to take to local shop owners and other interested parties to get them on board. Play out the scenario to show businesses and individuals benefiting, and to show how the math works for growing assets on deposit, loans and investments to local non-profits and schools through retail rebates. Right now, despite your Gilligan example, it is all very abstract. I can see that it might work, but I have to imagine how it actually will work…i.e. just how many people have to be involved, how many transactions have to take place, et cetera, before this idea gains a critical mass at a local level that allows it to have meaningful and sustainable impact? In other words, give me a compelling case study to convince me to pull my $25K out of a BoA savings account earning next to zero interest and into my local CGB.
You should then create a series of other scenarios and illustrative interactions based on real situations in other countries where circumstances are significantly different.
Just a thought from someone who thinks this is a great idea ( emphasis on thinks) whose time is now but is having trouble making it "real" based on an analogy drawn from a bad 1960s sitcom.
…
If you need help constructing an animated PPT presentation like the one you did using Gilligan, I can certainly be of some assistance. The first thing to do would be to draft a script. You could begin with the Gilligan script. Strip out the references to island currency and the show's characters and replace it with a real life scenario. Since I'm not completely sure I understand how you intend the system to work, I don't think I can write the script from scratch, but I might be able to help once I have a draft script and a better understanding of the dynamics.
For example, the way you talk about the island economy in your current video, it sounds like their currency is their own, like Ithaca Hours, if you're familiar with that community currency initiative http://www.ithacahours.org/. But I don't think that's what you really intend. If I understand correctly, a CGB in the US would be US dollars-based, correct? In other words, it would operate like a traditional bank in its basic structure – assets on deposit; loans against assets, etc…- but would have community ties and a governance model that varies from a traditional private banking model – like the Building & Loan in It's a Wonderful Life. Am I close?
If I were to draft such a script based on my local community it would include a cast of initial depositors who form a Community Division. It would show how the basic bank assets under management grow (including interest from loans) and how that money supports the bank infrastructure (virtual and brick & mortar if applicable). It would also include a list of merchants with a motivation for driving locals to do business with them: Rick, the guy who runs the small hardware store, Susan, the chiropractor, John, up at the bicycle shop, Geoff, with his handmade furniture, the folks at the Hungry H Cafe…these folks would generate the Merchant Contributions. It would include some examples of recipients of Local Currency Grants – an explanation of how the grant fund built up, how the recipients were selected and brief stories explaining how they are benefiting the community.
Anyway, you get the idea. If you could use some help, let me know. I have been in the communications business for 30 years and run a small firm that includes a visual design team. If I had a clear script, I could approach them to see if they have any spare time to help me out on this.
1: Yes, the word ordinary should be deleted. If it was to be replaced, I think "everyday" or (better yet) "all" would be much nicer words. Otherwise, deletion would be fine. "Ordinary" is kinda insulting.
2: I like John's second point. The islands a little corny. But Gilligan is a funny parable…
3: is good, too. There should be a fictional symbol. There are communities which have made up their own currencies.
4: Four is a good point as well; Christine also raises a good concern: the CGB will not END poverty, war, hunger, or global climate disruption. But it will hopefully help. I have a list of problems and questions about the movie myself…
5: One of my problems was the announcement that MONEY was the problem. Maybe it shouldn't be blamed quite so harshly (though, in so many ways, I think it's sorta true). However, I do think it is the solution… I was thinking: the nation-state is a pretty new concept and used to be the biggest group people were a part of and where the majority of power was concentrated. They were dictatorships, too. Now, corporations are the dictators and the controllers of power. What we did to erode the dictations of the nation-state was make a democracy with checks-and-balances; now we should make a corporation with checks-and-balances.
6: Perhaps… Though I still argue that the search for PROFITS, without rest is the problem. We CANNOT grow indefinitely! Nothing can.
7: ATMs should be mentioned. I, however, like the building-less model. Maybe it should talk more about having a building for those who want one.
8: Yes.
second 8: I like the logo. The suggestions are so… cliché. But perhaps we could redesign it. It should be catchy, though, not so industrial as nesting letters in each other. To Christine: I think logos and advertising is very important. To use an allegory: it has been used for 'evil' for a long time. Those for 'good' refuse to use it. But sometimes, using a 'power of darkness' for a 'good cause' can be useful.
I also agree with Christine that we are making too big a deal about the "global warming" thing. We might not, after all, affect that much ourselves. I hope so, for it is the most important issue to me, but when I first looked though the web-site, I failed to see how. It comes off as too hopeful and not practical enough. Like she says, CGB has lofty goals… but is stalled and is continually failing to meet its goals. But, sometimes talk is action… It spreads the ideas. One person can't do much of anything. We must have an "army of the enlightened", so to speak.
But I do think voting makes a difference. Especially if more people would freakin' vote 3rd party!
To Juliet: Diddling with the video too much could be a waste of time. But we do need to attract people who are not initially interested. To do that, I think re-making the video is actually real important. But I think the most important thing to do to it is make it an actual VIDEO. The transist ing picture thing is going to turn away a lot of investors. They will assume that we will fail, we can't even make a video! We sure as a heel don't look professional.
My problems with the video:
It's melodramatic. It's not a video. It doesn't explain very well why a business would offer a rebate.
Also, banks don't just create money when they loan. You owe them back. Going on and on about creating money is sorta immature and irresponsible.
Post edited 11:19 am – October 16, 2009 by wspademan
While I think a more "real world" story might well replace gilligans' island, and different narrators might be nice, like the previous commentor, I don't think either are important enough to warrant the time this would certainly take – and one thing about a more "real world" parable — it can quickly become hard not to ge tlost in the details and multiple possibilities and lose the really very simple point that gilligan makes so clearly.
While I agree with a few of John's concerns about the video, I don't think you should be spending precious time diddling with it and making it more politically correct. I think the current incarnation of the video explains the foundational concepts pretty clearly and that's its main purpose. I know how much time can be spent refining this sort of thing (ditto the logo) and it just seems like there are more important fish to be frying at this juncture. I'd be very surprized if having a male narrator and using the (quirky and likeable) gilligan's island parable is really going to turn away someone who's seriously interested in the ideas that CGB is offering.
John, you've obviously given this a lot of thought, but are you aware of the BIG PICTURE?
"4. Should the video explain in more detail how CGB's can end poverty, war, hunger, global climate disruption?"
If you actually think that the CGB can accompish this, you haven't seen the documentaries The Money Masters, Endgame, TerrorStorm, etc. — all linked and available online free of charge at http://creditfactors.com/resis…..um.php?f=2
And I hope that advisor Ellen Brown's Web of Debt is REQUIRED reading for anyone associated with the CGB.
The CGB could certainly help many people SURVIVE or live a little better or at least have more money, but when you talk about ending poverty, war, hunger and global climate disruption, it sounds like American Express, MasterCard or ACORN — we all know it's not going to happen.
As I just looked at the documentary links page, I noticed my post "Sign up for the COMMON GOOD BANK and DEMOCRACY" and this forum is certainly a step in the right direction. I was so excited when I first read the CGB site about 1.5 years ago and I found all these wonderful democratic proposals. The proxy voting is just so cool. I spent a lot of time looking for software, but found nothing free, only expensive software for corporations.
I wouldn't worry about whether the CGB is for "ordinary" people and what the logo looks like. Sure, most people are clueless, gullible and easily manipulated and we know that advertising and promotion works. Is that how it's SUPPOSED to be? How about just being truthful and skipping the lies and deception?
The "global warming" statement absolutely needs to go.
The CGB isn't going to turn the sun down to cool the solar system. Instead, we need to ensure that corporations stop polluting, stop producing toxic food, prohibit GM foods, animals and people, REGULATE the pharmaceuticals after firing everybody at the FDA, research and promote alternative medicines, etc. etc. etc. Until people understand the extent of the corruption throughout all branches of government and the courts in the so-called "civilized" nations, nothing is going to change.
Once the American people understand that it makes no difference who they vote for because the international bankers, arms manufacturers and oil companies control the European and American governments regardless of who is elected we might see some changes. The CGB COULD be an example of how a bank should operate and it could demonstrate how a different voting system works.
I understand that it takes a lot of money to open a bank, but there's so much more than banking to life and so much COULD have been done YEARS ago.
It seems that the CGB wants to be everything to everybody and has lofty goals like ending poverty and wars, yet it is doing NOTHING.
If the CGB is concerned with the environment, why hasn't it formed a co-op for organic and GM free foods, solar panels, etc?
Why the emphasis on talk, promotion and advertising instead of ACTION?
Post edited 8:12 pm – October 10, 2009 by wspademan
Hello, everybody -
Here are some ideas I had about the CGB video that William has asked me to share. We would both be interested in hearing your feelings/reactions as well as your ideas, either about these issues or others that you would like to address, about maximizing the effectiveness and professionalism of this vital first-impression educational tool.
1. Should the word "ordinary" be deleted (see text below from the CGB homepage – it is in the video narration as well)? "Common good banks will be the cornerposts of a new economic system — a democratic, community-based system that can support and empower ordinary people everywhere to put an end to war, poverty, hunger, unemployment and global warming, before it is too late. This is not just another bank with a social mission. This is A SOCIAL MISSION WITH A BANK!"
People might not like to think of themselves as "ordinary", and might rather be honored as being special Even wealthy folks have the opportunity to promote and participate in CGB's as organizers, depositors, borrowers, and investors; and will have as much of a say as anyone else in the bank's democratic processes. Can "ordinary" be deleted without diluting the democratic image and reality of CGB's?
2. Should the parable of the tropical isle be scrapped and replaced with a fictionalized but realistic account of a contemporary 21st century community in a developed country and/or a community in a relatively undeveloped country creating a common good bank? This might be more believable and culturally acceptable than the Gilligan's Island scenario in which a small band of (Caucasian) people has to start from scratch to create both the technology and financial institutions that they need to meet their needs, with a male at the helm coming up with the ideas and directing the rest of the community. The alternative of watching how a CGB would grow, compete, function, create wealth, and make decisions about allocation of common good funds and stimulation of its economy in sustainable ways while dealing with real-life social, economic and environmental conditions might be more instructive, credible, and compelling.
Images of American bills and dollar signs would be replaced with the (fictional) money and symbols of the hypothetical community's national currency. This would make the video more "globally inclusive", which is advisable since we are inviting communities anywhere in the world to create common good banks. (The video is already being translated into other languages to inform people in countries that don't use dollars about CGB's).
3. Should the video be narrated with a variety of voices (male, female, white, Afro-American, Latino, and other) in order to portray CGFC and CGB's as culturally inclusive?
4. Should the video explain in more detail how CGB's can end poverty, war, hunger, global climate disruption? Making this claim without backing it up can too easily trigger "too-good-to-be-true" resistance, while fleshing it out and making a compelling case for how this is possible could excite and inspire the kind of participation and consumer loyalty that we are hoping to create.
5. Should the video avoid identifying money as both "the problem" as well as "the solution"? Many people might take issue with either claim, citing instead such factors as spiritual evolution of individuals, cultural transformation, and democratic control of institutions. The alternative is to be more explicit about how undemocratic financial institutions are currently controlling our economies and societies in non-democratic ways that serve the short-sighted aims of the elite and powerful members of our society (ultimately, no-one's interests are ultimately served in a materialistic and unsustainable culture).
6. Should the video avoid using the term "profits" in ways that might imply that any individual or business that seeks to make a profit is exploiting the rest of us and therefore part of the problem? For the time being, all businesses need to make a profit to produce goods and services and pay their employees. The CGFC is not trying to shut down for-profit businesses, but to encourage their sustainablity and responsibility by being selective in CGB loan policies. We may want to encourage the formation of worker-owned cooperatives, but a rapid transformation of our economy to wholesale worker control is neither possible nor necessary in order for CGB's to open and start doing "common good" in communities.
7. Should the portrayal of CGB's as being independent of the need for buildings be dropped? CGB's might well be "adopted" by credit unions, in which case they will be located in buildings from the start. Also, many people might want both the convenience and the security that a building offers, and merchants and nonprofits might be unable or unwilling to assume the roles of bank tellers and officers. Starting a CGB without a bank building can still be represented as a possible way to get it up and running quickly until it generates enough capital flow to allow it to be housed in a building for efficient and convenient operations. Perhaps the availability of CGB ATM machines should also be mentioned.
8. Should the Transitive Proxy Voting system (illustrated on page 2 of the brochure as well as in the video, showing one person entrusted with 11 other people's votes and thus having effective control of deliberations of that CGB) be modified so as to prevent any one person from having inordinate influence over Common Fund donations and CGB investment policies?
8. Should the Common Good Finance Corporation logo in all promotional materials, including the video) be changed to a different design? In the original design, the white spiral is intended to be seen as the G in Common Good, and the entire logo is meant to represent the earth as seen from space (with the white G as clouds, the blue C as the sea, and the green as the earth). My guess is that few people recognize the the white spiral as either a G or a cloud, and that the image of a spiral might be seen as being counter-cultural due to its "pseudomagical" associations. I would suggest a more conservative style for our logo so that people will perceive the CGFC as stable and firmly rooted in reality.
One alternative design could be a capital C slightly preceding and overlying a capital G so that the C touches the inner bar of the G and oriented so that these two letters create a continuous platform. Another idea is to nest the capital G inside the C, with its horizontal bar resting on the C beneath it so that both letters together form a continuous partial oval, with the inner part of the G's horizontal bar eliminated so that the inner oval is also continuous.
print page
Login 
Register 
Search 
Home
Add a New Topic
Reply to Post
Quote and Reply 
Print this Post 
Topic RSS 
