July 2012 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fw: Fw: Info
by Natalie Golovin 10 Mar '26

10 Mar '26

Mark: You and your compatriots on P2P view the world from revisionism. Go ahead and keep looking through your microscope-provided by your "teachers." Or take the time and read some very old documented evidence available at a library near you= but you may need to stay there awhile on microfiche. -----Original Message----- From: Mark Janssen Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 4:39 PM To: P2P Foundation mailing list Subject: Re: [P2P-F] Fw: Info On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Natalie Golovin <10natalie(a)cox.net> wrote: > The European Tribes treated the Natives no worse than they treated each > other. Whoa. You should really stop talking. You have NO idea what you're talking about. How about forced acculturation, not allowing them to speak their own language (which hold the record of their own history), confined them under threat of violent force into reservations, among other things. But, really, that's probably not even the worst of it -- the worst of it is that for reasons they couldn't ever understand is why you were doing all of these cruel things when they were willing to share it it all with you. Why, when they handed out their hand to be friends, you chopped it off. Remember, they're the ones who gave us Thanksgiving which is still "celebrated" in this nation today. Read the reports made of making first contact with the Native peoples here. You really should read up before propagating the attitudes of conquest. Sorry.... marcos _______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

3 4

Re: [P2P-F] Feral Honey & Bee
by Michel Bauwens 12 Feb '14

12 Feb '14

thanks Bryan! On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Bryan Hugill <bryan.hugill(a)gmail.com>wrote: > http://feralhoney.com/ > > Bartering honey for whatever they need from people in their area...pretty > neat idea that takes cold hard cash out of the immediate equation and > transforms the exchange into more of a social venture. Sounds like damn fine > honey too, which obviously helps :) > -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

4 7

Low energie nuclear reaction #lenr
by olivier auber 18 Feb '13

18 Feb '13

Something big is hapenning.. http://e-catsite.com/2011/11/22/mr-rossi-goes-to-massachusetts/ http://e-catsite.com/2011/11/21/defkalion-nearly-ready-nasa-files-patent-pi… Olivier Auber Le 25 nov. 2011 05:00, "Michel Bauwens" <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> a écrit :

3 9

Fw: Save the Arctic - Save the Planet
by robert searle 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Iain Keith - Avaaz.org <avaaz(a)avaaz.org> To: "dharao4(a)yahoo.co.uk" <dharao4(a)yahoo.co.uk> Sent: Friday, 27 July 2012, 22:45 Subject: Save the Arctic - Save the Planet Dear friends, An epic struggle for survival is unfolding in the pristine Arctic – but instead of finding a plan to save it, the US is allowing Shell to go in and drill for oil. Click below to urge US Environmental Protection Agency chief Lisa Jackson to stop Shell and save the Arctic! The biggest company in the world is days away from drilling for oil in the Arctic, a breeding ground for whales and polar bears. The US Environmental Protection Agency can stop them, but it’s up to us to demand they do and save the Arctic now. The head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, can right now withdraw Shell's Arctic permit because the company is unable to meet air pollution controls for their ships, violating the terms of the permit. Environmental activists are raising the alarm, but unless we make it a huge global scandal, Shell will use its muscle and the Arctic will be open for the oil business. Lisa Jackson has stood up to the energy industry before, but Shell is a Goliath that won’t be easily knocked back. We are running out of time -- let’s make this decision the line in the sand that protects this great wilderness from becoming an oil field. Click below to send Lisa Jackson a message and share this with everyone -- let’s flood her with global encouragement to save the Arctic:    http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_arctic/?bkJXjab&v=16670  The Arctic is melting faster than most scientists predicted. Climate change is driving dangerous temperature rises -- just last week, a chunk of a glacier nearly 40 kilometres long broke off Greenland. Some estimates predict that in just 4 years, the Arctic will be completely free of ice in the summer months. The warming Arctic ocean will accelerate the loss of the Greenland ice sheet, which would raise sea levels by 6 metres.   Yet for some this planetary disaster is the 21st century gold rush. Companies and countries who hope to make billions are lining up to frantically grab their share of oil, gas, and minerals. To them the Arctic is not a home to whales and polar bears, it is a new frontier, and it’s one of the reasons why nations like the USA, Canada and Russia have spent years blocking global climate treaties. This is a simple decision: the people and planet’s future or increasing Big Oil’s profits with a 40% possibility of a catastrophic oil spill. If Lisa Jackson gives Shell the permit now, then Exxon, Chevron and the rest of Big Oil will cover these beautiful icy landscapes with dirty rigs, pumps and pipes. Let’s now urge Lisa Jackson to stop Shell before it’s too late. Click now to send a message and share this with everyone:    http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_arctic/?bkJXjab&v=16670  Arctic drilling has already been condemned by the British government, Insurance companies, and the US Coast Guard, and in the last week, Greenpeace and others have been taking to the streets. But to stop this madness we all need to join together to target the one person who can stop it. Let’s ensure that the Arctic is saved from the danger of drilling and instead protected as a global treasure.   With hope,   Iain, Alice, Sam, David, Aldine, Diego, Ricken and the rest of the Avaaz team  More information and sources: Rolling Stone: “Global Warming's Terrifying New Math”http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-n… The Guardian: “Arctic wilderness faces pollution threats as oil and gas giants target its riches” http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/22/arctic-ice-melting-oil-drilling Dutch News: “Shell is 'world's biggest company'”http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2012/07/shell_heads_global_500_list.php New York Times: “Shell Seeks to Weaken Air Rules for Arctic Drilling”http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/shell-seeks-to-weaken-ai… LA Times -- “What if an oil spill happened at an Arctic well?"http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/06/nation/la-na-oil-arctic-20100506 Support the Avaaz Community! We're entirely funded by donations and receive no money from governments or corporations. Our dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way. Avaaz.org is a 15-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people shape global decision-making. ("Avaaz" means "voice" or "song" in many languages.) Avaaz members live in every nation of the world; our team is spread across 19 countries on 6 continents and operates in 14 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz's biggest campaigns here, or follow us on Facebook or Twitter. You are getting this message because you signed "The World in Action" on 2007-08-02 using the email address dharao4(a)yahoo.co.uk. To ensure that Avaaz messages reach your inbox, please add avaaz(a)avaaz.org to your address book. To change your email address, language settings, or other personal information, https://secure.avaaz.org/act/index.php?r=profile&user=2b7c8c2a98a8e68f564b2…, or simply go here to unsubscribe. To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email. Instead, write to us at http://www.avaaz.org/en/contact?footer or call us at +1-888-922-8229 (US).

1 0

Fw: [gang8] The American Monetary Institute's views on monetary issues
by robert searle 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

p ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Michael Hudson <michael.hudson(a)earthlink.net> To: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, 28 July 2012, 14:49 Subject: Re: [gang8] The American Monetary Institute's views on monetary issues Dear Richard, We’re certainly on the same page. What remains to be done is to separate that portion of “money” used for commodity transactions (the CPI) -- probably currency + checking accounts — and credit used for asset transactions. This turns out indeed to be “savings,” in one form or another. The issue can’t be settled until we sit down and say just WHAT lines from the Federal Reserve’s flow of funds accounts are going to be “money,” and what asset-price indices we take. Do we separate mortgage credit from other forms of credit (leveraged buyout credit for stock prices, or pension fund savings and assets). Can this only be done ex post? I wish you had been in Split to discuss these. Any chance of your coming to Chicago or Kansas City in September? Or Berlin in October? Michael On 7/28/12 1:40 AM, "Prof. Richard Werner" <werner(a)profitfund.com> wrote: > > > > >Hi Arno, > >Am a bit surprised by your comments. I thought we have had a consensus on these matters…? > > >Werner’s Quantity Theory of Credit: > >Consider money used for transactions. > >All that money is credit and can best be measured by credit data. > >Hence the old textbook MV=PT, which is nicer to write I think as MV=PQ >becomes > >CV=PQ > >Now we need to separate credit money used for GDP transactions and credit money used for non-GDP transactions: > >C = Cr + Cf > >Cr Vr = Pr Qr >Cf Vf = Pf Qf > >Whereby we can approximate PrQr with nominal GDP. > >Add to this the recognition that there is unlimited demand for credit, and hence the credit market is perpetually rationed and supply-determined, and you also have the direction of causation. > >My simple quantity theory of credit explains everything we need to explain: economic growth, cycles, asset price booms, banking crises, how to get out of banking crises etc. > >As to the definition of credit, it includes all forms of credit money, which can in principle also include government-issued money, but sadly we don’t get much of that these days. > >I am not sure talking too much about precious metal money, and a 100% gold standard, is useful, as there is no evidence that such a monetary system has ever existed for any significant amount of time. > >I should look at Stephen’s argument, but am also surprised by the claim that Innes actually succeeded in informing anyone about money being credit – clearly this was a view largely ignored until today. I certainly had not come across Innes in my research on monetary systems in Japan and Germany, as, unlike other relevant authors, he did not seem to have been widely read there. > >Surprised you seem to want to measure ‘money’ using things like M2. Traditional measures of the money supply, such as the M-aggregates, are not money supply measures but savings supply measures, as I have long argued. > >Regards, >Richard > > >From: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gunnar Tomasson >Sent: 26 July 2012 20:45 >To: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com >Subject: [gang8] The American Monetary Institute's views on monetary issues > > > >Dear Gang. >Stephen Zarlenga’s comments of yesterday’s date to Arno – >In the meantime, I'm presenting a paper at our conference on how A. Mitchell Innes has misled the economics profession, back at the founding of the FED, into regarding money as credit. In googling for that theme I found a Gang 8 post on it, and thought I'd ask if you could post my paper on Innes onto the Gang 8? I've attached the paper, in case you can do it. I think it may be controversial there, but many people would like it. > >– led me to reflect – and think out aloud – on the AMI views on monetary issues as summarized on Wikipedia: > >The American Monetary Institute is a non-profit charitable trust established by Stephen Zarlenga in 1996 for the "independent study of monetary history, theory and reform." >The institute is dedicated to monetary reform and advocates taking control of the monetary system out of the hands of banks and placing it into the hands of the US Treasury. Zarlenga argues that this would mean money would be issued by government interest free and spent into circulation to promote the general welfare, and that substantial expenditures on infrastructure, including human infrastructure (education and health care) would become the predominant method of putting new money into circulation. >Research results are published in Zarlenga's 736 page book, The Lost Science of Money. >This book asserts that money did not emerge from barter between individuals, but rather through trade between tribes and as part of religious worship and sacrifice. Though this is not the mainstream view, there are other scholars of money, such as Keith Hart, who agree that money developed in this way. The reason this distinction is believed to be important is because, according to Zarlenga, it is the definition of money which determines how the public will allow the money supply to be controlled. If money is a commodity to be traded, then all that matters is that the money is 100% backed by some commodity, like gold or silver for example. If money is credit, then it makes sense that bankers control it, as they do in the United States today. But if money is an artifact of law, whose value is derived from law (payment of taxes and legal tender laws) then Zarlenga argues it would only be proper for the government to issue, and control the money supply. According to Zarlenga, it is this last definition that is supported by the history and nature of money. Government-controlled money is also postulated to be more stable than credit money or commodity money. >Coins have been claimed to represent an advance over weighing out precious metals with a fixed amount of precious metal being stamped so they need not be weighed and could be exchanged more conveniently than lumps of metal which needed to be weighed[3] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Monetary_Institute#cite_note-2> . However, Zarlenga emphasises the ratio of gold to silver in ancient coinage, and asserts that the variability in this ratio was crucial to understanding trade in the ancient world, the fall of the Roman Empire, and the drive behind the Crusades. > >My reflections and comments. > >I. Three alternative views of money > >1. Commodity money – backed 100% by some commodity, e.g. gold or silver. > >2. Credit money – makes sense for bankers to control it. > >3. Artifact of law money – proper for government to issue and control the money supply. > >*** > >II. Macroeconomic balance-sheet view of money – Dirk Bezemer > >…you need to think about balance sheets – which macroeconomics almost forbids one to do. > >Nothing more intricate is involved than the accounting equality that the financial sector’s assets are the real sector’s liabilities. > >*** > >III. Implications of Macroeconomic balance-sheet view of money > >a. Bank credit is part – but not the whole – of the financial sector’s assets. > >b. Bank loans are part - but not the whole – of the real sector’s liabilities. > >c. Money supply is part – but not the whole – of the financial sector‘s liabilities. > >d. Money supply is part – but not the whole – of the real sector‘s financial assets. > >e. All financial sector assets are the non-financial/real sector‘s liabilities. > >f. All financial sector liabilities are the non-financial/real sector‘s assets. > >*** > >IV. Ratio of M2 to GDP in selected countries > >United States = 83 >France = 152 >United Kingdom = 171 >Netherlands = 226 >Japan = 236 > >See: >http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FM.LBL.MQMY.GD.ZS > >V. Comments > >To control an economy‘s money supply is not to control the assets/liabilities of its financial/real sectors. > >Hence, US Treasury control money over supply would affect only a part of US financial assets/liabilities. > >There is no “ideal“ or “normal“ ratio of M2 to GDP. > >Hence, there would be no benchmark values of M2/GDP to guide US Treasury control over money supply. > >Gunnar > > > > > > > > > __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group The gang8 list is devoted to Creditary Economics. To unsubscribe, email: gang8-unsubscribe(a)yahoogroups.com Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use . __,_._,___

1 0

Fw: [gang8] Quantity Theory of Credit
by robert searle 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Michael Hudson <michael.hudson(a)earthlink.net> To: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, 28 July 2012, 14:53 Subject: Re: [gang8] Quantity Theory of Credit Great, Richard. Just what Sir James Steuart said in 1767. Hume also admitted these points in his correspondence with Oswald and others. Michael On 7/28/12 1:49 AM, "Prof. Richard Werner" <werner(a)profitfund.com> wrote: > > > > >Sorry, I should have said > >Hi Gunnar! > >Also, for sake of completion, further elements of my Quantity Theory of Credit: > >Distinguish between >productive credit creation: Cr that is used for investment or productivity enhancement >consumptive credit creation (Cr used for consumption) and >speculative credit creation (Cf) > > >Effect: >productive credit creation: growth without inflation >consumptive credit creation: inflation without growth >speculative credit creation: asset price inflation, always unsustainable; followed by non-performing assets in banking sector (if large enough: banking crisis) > >Developing countries should use credit created from domestic banking system (banks plus central bank) to foster growth, and focus on credit for productive use, restrict credit for consumption and for speculative purposes. >Central banks should use their ‘guidance’ of bank credit to control total credit creation and its efficient allocation. >Credit guidance is the most successful tool in preventing banking crises and delivering high, non-inflationary growth. >Developing countries should not borrow from abroad. > >Regards, >Richard > > >From: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Prof. Richard Werner >Sent: 28 July 2012 06:41 >To: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com >Subject: RE: [gang8] The American Monetary Institute's views on monetary issues > > > >Hi Arno, > >Am a bit surprised by your comments. I thought we have had a consensus on these matters…? > > >Werner’s Quantity Theory of Credit: > >Consider money used for transactions. > >All that money is credit and can best be measured by credit data. > >Hence the old textbook MV=PT, which is nicer to write I think as MV=PQ >becomes > >CV=PQ > >Now we need to separate credit money used for GDP transactions and credit money used for non-GDP transactions: > >C = Cr + Cf > >Cr Vr = Pr Qr >Cf Vf = Pf Qf > >Whereby we can approximate PrQr with nominal GDP. > >Add to this the recognition that there is unlimited demand for credit, and hence the credit market is perpetually rationed and supply-determined, and you also have the direction of causation. > >My simple quantity theory of credit explains everything we need to explain: economic growth, cycles, asset price booms, banking crises, how to get out of banking crises etc. > >As to the definition of credit, it includes all forms of credit money, which can in principle also include government-issued money, but sadly we don’t get much of that these days. > >I am not sure talking too much about precious metal money, and a 100% gold standard, is useful, as there is no evidence that such a monetary system has ever existed for any significant amount of time. > >I should look at Stephen’s argument, but am also surprised by the claim that Innes actually succeeded in informing anyone about money being credit – clearly this was a view largely ignored until today. I certainly had not come across Innes in my research on monetary systems in Japan and Germany, as, unlike other relevant authors, he did not seem to have been widely read there. > >Surprised you seem to want to measure ‘money’ using things like M2. Traditional measures of the money supply, such as the M-aggregates, are not money supply measures but savings supply measures, as I have long argued. > >Regards, >Richard > > >From: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gunnar Tomasson >Sent: 26 July 2012 20:45 >To: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com >Subject: [gang8] The American Monetary Institute's views on monetary issues > > > >Dear Gang. >Stephen Zarlenga’s comments of yesterday’s date to Arno – >In the meantime, I'm presenting a paper at our conference on how A. Mitchell Innes has misled the economics profession, back at the founding of the FED, into regarding money as credit. In googling for that theme I found a Gang 8 post on it, and thought I'd ask if you could post my paper on Innes onto the Gang 8? I've attached the paper, in case you can do it. I think it may be controversial there, but many people would like it. > >– led me to reflect – and think out aloud – on the AMI views on monetary issues as summarized on Wikipedia: > >The American Monetary Institute is a non-profit charitable trust established by Stephen Zarlenga in 1996 for the "independent study of monetary history, theory and reform." >The institute is dedicated to monetary reform and advocates taking control of the monetary system out of the hands of banks and placing it into the hands of the US Treasury. Zarlenga argues that this would mean money would be issued by government interest free and spent into circulation to promote the general welfare, and that substantial expenditures on infrastructure, including human infrastructure (education and health care) would become the predominant method of putting new money into circulation. >Research results are published in Zarlenga's 736 page book, The Lost Science of Money. >This book asserts that money did not emerge from barter between individuals, but rather through trade between tribes and as part of religious worship and sacrifice. Though this is not the mainstream view, there are other scholars of money, such as Keith Hart, who agree that money developed in this way. The reason this distinction is believed to be important is because, according to Zarlenga, it is the definition of money which determines how the public will allow the money supply to be controlled. If money is a commodity to be traded, then all that matters is that the money is 100% backed by some commodity, like gold or silver for example. If money is credit, then it makes sense that bankers control it, as they do in the United States today. But if money is an artifact of law, whose value is derived from law (payment of taxes and legal tender laws) then Zarlenga argues it would only be proper for the government to issue, and control the money supply. According to Zarlenga, it is this last definition that is supported by the history and nature of money. Government-controlled money is also postulated to be more stable than credit money or commodity money. >Coins have been claimed to represent an advance over weighing out precious metals with a fixed amount of precious metal being stamped so they need not be weighed and could be exchanged more conveniently than lumps of metal which needed to be weighed[3] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Monetary_Institute#cite_note-2> . However, Zarlenga emphasises the ratio of gold to silver in ancient coinage, and asserts that the variability in this ratio was crucial to understanding trade in the ancient world, the fall of the Roman Empire, and the drive behind the Crusades. > >My reflections and comments. > >I. Three alternative views of money > >1. Commodity money – backed 100% by some commodity, e.g. gold or silver. > >2. Credit money – makes sense for bankers to control it. > >3. Artifact of law money – proper for government to issue and control the money supply. > >*** > >II. Macroeconomic balance-sheet view of money – Dirk Bezemer > >…you need to think about balance sheets – which macroeconomics almost forbids one to do. > >Nothing more intricate is involved than the accounting equality that the financial sector’s assets are the real sector’s liabilities. > >*** > >III. Implications of Macroeconomic balance-sheet view of money > >a. Bank credit is part – but not the whole – of the financial sector’s assets. > >b. Bank loans are part - but not the whole – of the real sector’s liabilities. > >c. Money supply is part – but not the whole – of the financial sector‘s liabilities. > >d. Money supply is part – but not the whole – of the real sector‘s financial assets. > >e. All financial sector assets are the non-financial/real sector‘s liabilities. > >f. All financial sector liabilities are the non-financial/real sector‘s assets. > >*** > >IV. Ratio of M2 to GDP in selected countries > >United States = 83 >France = 152 >United Kingdom = 171 >Netherlands = 226 >Japan = 236 > >See: >http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FM.LBL.MQMY.GD.ZS > >V. Comments > >To control an economy‘s money supply is not to control the assets/liabilities of its financial/real sectors. > >Hence, US Treasury control money over supply would affect only a part of US financial assets/liabilities. > >There is no “ideal“ or “normal“ ratio of M2 to GDP. > >Hence, there would be no benchmark values of M2/GDP to guide US Treasury control over money supply. > >Gunnar > > > > > > > > > > __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group The gang8 list is devoted to Creditary Economics. To unsubscribe, email: gang8-unsubscribe(a)yahoogroups.com Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use . __,_._,___

1 0

Pdf - Suppressing Protest: Human Rights Violations in the U.S.
by Dante-Gabryell Monson 28 Jul '12

28 Jul '12

http://www.chrgj.org/projects/suppressingprotest.pdf http://www.chrgj.org/press/docs/release_suppressingprotest.pdf *Suppressing Protest: * *Human Rights Violations in the U.S. Response to * *Occupy Wall Street * * * *The Global Justice Clinic (NYU School of Law) and the Walter Leitner International Human Rights Clinic at the * *Leitner Center for International Law and Justice (Fordham Law School)*

1 0

rehabilitate large-scale damaged ecosystems
by Dante-Gabryell Monson 27 Jul '12

27 Jul '12

*found via Sepp* on fb... *Green Gold - Documentary by John D. Liu* *rehabilitate large-scale damaged ecosystems* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBLZmwlPa8A and *Hope in a Changing Climate* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK8z0qDtE2g Published on Jul 19, 2012 by IntPermacultureDay<http://www.youtube.com/user/IntPermacultureDay> "It's possible to rehabilitate large-scale damaged ecosystems." Environmental film maker John D. Liu documents large-scale ecosystem restoration projects in China, Africa, South America and the Middle East, highlighting the enormous benefits to people and planet of undertaking these efforts globally. More information: http://eempc.org/ What If We Change social media project: http://www.whatifwechange.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- International Permaculture Day is an ongoing celebration of all things permaculture happening around the world, culminating in a global day of celebration on the first Sunday in May annually. The next global day will take place on SUNDAY 5TH MAY 2013. In the meantime, please send us your permaculture news, stories, photos and other media to share with the international community! Website: http://www.permacultureday.info Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/InternationalPermacultureDay Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/permacultureday You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/user/IntPermacultureDay

1 0

What's with the Russian Spam?
by Kevin Flanagan 27 Jul '12

27 Jul '12

Hey Folks, Correct me if I'm wrong but we seem to have a spam problem. Who's moderating the list? Best Kevin

1 1

Инструменты эффективного управления
by georgiytarasovich＠sbt-nbc.info 27 Jul '12

27 Jul '12

Знания-основной капитал компании. Дата проведения Название 9 августа. Стратегические продажи. Повышение эффективности работы с клиентской базой. 11-12 августа. Финансовый учет и ключевые показатели бизнеса для нефинансовых руководителей. 15 августа. Мастер-презентаций: принципы и правила создания запоминающихся презентаций 16 августа. Тренинг для специалистов по продажам Влияй. Воздействуй. Достигай. И продавай! 17 августа. 7 ключевых навыков руководителя. Как стать действительно эффективным? 18-19 августа. Маркетинг в социальных сетях. МОД (механизм образования дохода) 6 сентября. Продажи по телефону: новые подходы в дистанционной работе с клиентом. 6 сентября. Самовольное строительство (реконструкция, перепланировка): легальные способы узаконивания объекта 12 сентября. Возврат долгов: психология и технология работы с должниками 13 сентября. Руководитель и его сотрудники - как повысить эффективность взаимодействия 13 сентября. ПРОВЕРКИ ПО-НОВОМУ: К ЧЕМУ ГОТОВИТЬСЯ. Защита интересов предприятия от противоправной деятельности представителей контролирующих органов. 19 сентября. Современный мерчендайзинг в Украине. 20 сентября. Психология ведения переговоров – ваше тайное оружие победы 20 сентября. Построение системы оплаты по результату KPI – мотивация 20-21 сентября. Построение системы продаж 25 сентября. Школа руководителя. Эффективный руководитель 26 сентября. Бюджетирование, KPI – мотивация для руководителей 28-29 сентября. Управление проектами. Управление проектным циклом по методу Логической структуры Вся программа www.seminar1.com.ua Its simple text. Switch to HTML view!

1 0