- Cities are about people. That should be our first and foremost consideration.

- Community participation and engagement are key. Listen to the people and you will find out what they want.

- Sustainability. We need a city that is built to last. That means thinking ahead to what the future will bring.

- Innovation. This is a time to embed innovation into the new city. With so much creation ahead, it’s time to really bring this to the fore.

- Branding. It’s time to look beyond the Garden City. Let’s be known for something different, something new. Anything.

I’m going to start with Christchurch: the City of Innovation. That’s what we do. We are a city of ideas, inspiration and invention. We attract the best and smartest to live in our amazing city. We are a talent utopia.

What’s your branding for the new Christchurch?

As Yogi Berra said, “if you don’t know where you are going, any road will lead you there”.

The film follows the theme of the previous two movies, namely the issue of debt slavery and the monetary system that underpins it as well as the Venus Project (TVP) which envisions a different societal structure. What is different to ZA is the structure of the film: it splits into four parts: human nature, the market, inequality and the resource based economy. This gives the film, and ultimately the proposition, more depth and more connection for viewers. I know some people still grapple with the explanation of the money system (though my 16 year old son saw the logical answer as quite obvious: why doesn’t the government create the money. doh!) so a look at our innate and determined nature helps to provide some context to the discussion.

Why do we behave the way we do? Does poverty, racism, inequality drive our behaviours? Is our society sick from its institutions and structures? Why does the monetary-market structure treat the well-being of society as irrelevant. Going back to Locke and Smith we see that racism and inequality within the market system was well anticipated. The drive to individual success at all cost (especially social and environmental) was paramount as a system based on cyclical consumption and demand for product was created.

The film posits, quite correctly, that we are stuck on a spin cycle of consuming to be happy even though we must work like slaves to be in this position, that slavery defined by the debt we must accrue in order to enjoy the products paraded before us. That the production process is almost anti-economy, building in obsolescence and focusing on the short term simply puts my pressure on both resources and available money. In essence product sustainability is inverse to economic growth. Yet politicians keep saying they will speed up economic growth. They never say we will build a more healthy society. Perhaps that is because they have swallowed too many blue pills.

So if efficiency, sustainability and preservation are enemies of the current economic system the we have a problem. Crime, war, terror are positives for the economy. Does any of this make sense? Certainly it feels like the US has been gutted by the corporatocracy and inequality is at an all time high. ZMF draws a picture showing how our monetary-market system and socio-economic structure has raised inequality to never before seen levels. The rise of the super-elite is complete.

So far so good. I don’t disagree with anything in this film. In fact I’ve been aware of it for many years now….so whilst I appreciate the diligent work that Peter Joseph has done on these films, what do we do about it? The answer, as alluded to in ZA, is The Venus Project. TVP lays out a move to a resource based economy with no institutions, laws, money and a world based on abundance for all based around the very smartest of technology. Think of it as a techno-utopia. It’s certainly visionary and I leave it to the individual viewer to imagine it and see for themselves. It’s certainly not unachievable.

My main question would be “how do we get there?” This isn’t dealt with in the film but the general suggestion is to somehow opt out of the current system and to move to a more localized and transition based economy. This is all good stuff but the most important message of the film for me is still that we must take back control of our money supply and issue it interest free.

That is the first and most important step on the road to a people centered world.

Let’s start with the obvious. There is no such thing as a risk free investment. Even sovereign bonds (those issued by governments) can turn into wallpaper….look at the US Treasury market now, the world’s safest place to park your cash. Ultimately it’s just an IOU, generally backed by commodities or in the case of the US by a fairly large military and lots of nuclear rockets.

Having got that out of the way the first question you need to ask yourself is why am I investing? Is it for regular income or the hope of generating a huge pile of cash for future income generation (retirement for example).

Let’s start with the income piece by looking at what is available:

- Cash deposits.

- Term deposits.

- Government bonds.

- Corporate bonds.

- Shares that pay dividends.

- Property.

Generally, as in all things, you pay for what you get. The main issue any investor should consider before making an investment is liquidity:

How quickly can I get my cash and what will I have to pay to get it?

As many investors found to their cost in recent years, liquidity is the single most important issue.

Which draws the question: is there a market for my investment?

In the case of cash that is not a problem (actually that’s not true but for the sake of this exercise we will pretend that cash is always available – see Northern Rock for further details).

Stocks can generally be sold on the spot and cash received quickly (of course stocks can be suspended at anytime which means you can’t trade it, well not on the exchange).

Bonds have a market you can trade on but liquidity can be an issue sometimes.

Property you can forget. That’s a highly illiquid asset.

Managed funds as we see all to often can be very hard to get out of and the fees can be severe. If the fund holds any kind of assets other than plain stocks then redemptions may force suspension of the fund (we’ve seen that).

Baring all that in mind cash seems like the best place to have your money if access is an issue and you are risk averse. Second up would be quoted shares with high liquidity (shares on the major index e.g. Telecom in NZ which pays a good dividend). Bonds would be next and then managed funds and property bringing up the rear.

Anything that offers these with a twist is to be avoided unless you’re a professional. Like guaranteed capital return plus 100% of the 5 year blah blah return on some index. Avoid. There are huge fees and margins built into what is a simple option structure.

I’m sorry but there’s no free lunch in the investment world. But it’s very easy to lose money or receive poor returns whilst paying out large fees and charges.

My advice is start with cash and spend some time learning about basic stocks and bonds. Believe me it is not difficult.

Armed with a little knowledge most people could construct a portfolio of cash, stocks and bonds in a few hours.

Also don’t be lulled into the idea that you are a long term investor and won’t be pulling down the cash for 20-30 years. Look at how fast the world is changing…….planning that far ahead may not actually make much sense.

As with most things in life, keeping it simple can pay off. Also spending a little time learning about investment can save you a lot of money as well as enabling yourself to take charge of your own financial destiny.

Politics has long been missing the simplicity of both hope and intention. Sure it’s easy to sell change but I was left with the impression that he realises that the job is just starting and that everyone must pull together.

John McCain too made a speech full of integrity and dignity. What a lesson they both provided for our politicians in New Zealand who noticeably changed their demeanours in tonights final debate.

Could this be the remaking of the US? That’s hard to say but the reaction around the globe will be ecstatic, knowing we can move on from 8 ridiculous years. Watching Obama take Florida so easily just reinforces the injustice of Gore’s loss.

The Lord, however, moves in mysterious ways. Gore may not have been that great a President. Obama may have never been elected. In a way Bush laid the path for Obama. So destitute of ideas and principles the country, nay the world, was holding out for a hero.

Tonight Obama looked like a man who knows he is in for the long haul.

Let’s hope he can take the US in a new direction and build bridges to the world instead of blowing them up.

And with that in mind here’s something to mellow out with on a very special evening.

For me it is the democratic nature of the web that excites me. For now i’ve just focused on the delivery of the architecture that will make us form the web around us rather than having to shop through designated ports.

I think that is well on the way to happening.

I’m also thinking about the impact on governance. By this i mean the way we allow ourselves to be governed: our electoral processes, our engagement and involvement in political systems and how we make ourselves heard.

The coming versions of the web will not just make business more efficient, or general life but our political systems, our governments who eat up 30-50% of our GDP depending where you live.

The ultimate political feedback and citizen engagement system is going to rise up from the web. The powers that be are not likely to embrace this as many of them will be out of a job.

E-government is a web 1.0 framework. Imagine what it could look like in future versions. Maybe we can set up a  dream team for that?

It didn’t take me long to realise that search is going to replaced by receive. How annoying is that to all those businesses involved in SEO

But seriously if we are still searching in 2010 i will be surprised because by then the web should be evolving into a living and breathing system. This system will not be a library which we dip into hoping that we will find what we are looking for but will be part of us.

Simply put we will become the system.

We won’t need to search anymore as we will be the filter through which information, that we both want and may be interested in, will flow.

Search is an external process: Receive is an internal process.

Relevance technologies will be key to this evolution as will as filtering systems. Receive will be an intelligent learning system. I’m looking forward to this.

Which is the best receive engine?…..that will be the question.

What is the future for print? Murdoch seems to be thinking that at some point the major papers will shut down. I agree with this though the time frame in uncertain.

This article confirms that the squeeze is on(thanks Jason!) noting that the San Francisco Chronicle is taking a major bath and should be shut down. Much of this is driven by falling advertising revenue but i think there is something else at work here.

People are generally using the internet for news and general media information. Who wants the hassle of buying a paper of which you may only read 20% of the content.

Murdoch senses something more economic. The costs of running a print media are enormous and the savings he could make by putting the Wall Street Journal online could be hefty. No distribution or printing costs. Imagine all the trees that could be saved

But think out further. Why do we read a newspaper? to get news, find out stuff, see what’s on etc.

Do we read it for editorial? Not anymore. Who cares what some editor thinks when there’s a million blogs all talking about the same thing. The blogosphere may be a holy mess but over time it will sort itself out into various structures and frameworks. Over at VortexDNA we have MyBlogDNA which will be rolling out soon where you can match your blog to others who share your DNA.

We are all editors now!

But imagine if you had the ability to create your own “paper” drawing from the net stories that you were interested in and were relevant to you. So order your subjects and away you go.

But you still want to hold something to read. Ok just print it off at home. With the printer technology we have now and no doubt coming soon, home printers will be able to handle a myriad of tasks. Have your own paper delivered and printed at home.

Now that will save a lot of money and energy too. No more wasted papers, sections of papers or rubbish i don’t want to read about.

Relevant advertising can come with it or without it.

Could this extend to magazines as well? Glossy Vogues printed out at home? Maybe that is a stretch too far but who knows?

What is for sure is that Murdoch seems to be ahead of the game here as he was with MySpace. I wonder how far ahead he has really thought.

Thoughts anyone?

What interest me further is whether all finance can move to a P2P platform and seriously eat into the major lending markets currently controlled by the commercial banks.

I think it could do. This crosses the web with money and complimentary currencies.

Remember that anyone can create “money” if they really want, it just can’t be in the form of bank notes issued by the Reserve Bank. Commercial banks create bank loans by a simple bookkeeping entry. Only 2% of the money supply in NZ is in the form of notes and coin so banks don’t actually hold any money other than a bit of cash.

My point is that P2P finance could take off in a very big way once we get the hang of it. My guess is that the firms currently involved don’t realise how big this could be.

Expect the central banks to cast their beady eyes over these operations once they get a roll on. For now it’s just some web bizness but this feels like 1694 all over again.