 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Here <---it is again.
I started watching that report again, to get back into the topic offered in the report.
I left off with my response on the topic of debt.
Debt is a way that people can gain the power to purchase before people create surplus wealth.
This debt stuff can be seen in this way, and the reader can try this way of viewpoint debt, to see if it works for them, to see if it makes the pieces fit better when looking at the overall picture.
Debt can be a method by which people can produce the power to purchase before people produce surplus wealth - and there is a very good example for this in historical reality.
When people are threatened with an imminent calamity and these people have not yet produced more than they consume, or these people have already suffered through a calamity that wiped out all their stores of surplus wealth, then, at that time, those people can create a power to purchase, a credit for things to be produced, things not yet produced, sort of like, or actually being, tickets to give permission to each other to do specific work.
Here is an example:
Permission slips
Here is another example:
Specific work to be done - if you please
Example A reports the method by which people fleeing English oppression, landing on a nation of loosely federated native tribes, and needing permission from each other to work together - equitably. They created something called Stamp Script.
Example B reports the method by which people suffering through the great depression managed to give each other permission to work together, equitably, and pull themselves into a condition of prosperity, before the Nazi "government" squashed that effort.
The idea here, if you like this idea, is to see how debt can be a method by which people gain the power to purchase so as to begin working toward a specific goal, to gain the power to invest, and to do without having to create surplus wealth beforehand.
The idea, with debt, is to gain the power to create surplus wealth before surplus wealth is created.
The permission to work can't be misspent or malinvested, and that is why the permission to work must be specific - not ambiguous.
A person creates permission slips and on the permission slip is a request for something to be produced by someone. The idea works when the thing asked for is produced, the ticket is then used up in the purchase of the thing produced - roughly outlining the concept.
To say that this way of producing debt, by this method won't work, if that is what someone says, is to say that when this type of thing did work things were "different" and this idea won't apply to our current condition - which is demonstrably false. People have an interest in keeping things as they are, this is easy to understand.
Better ways do work. Debt does not have to be an enforced requirement whereby many people are forced to work so as to make few people wealthy.
Example:
Absurd example A
Debt can be a voluntary social agreement, without secrecy, without deceit, and without violence.
People who obviously can't, or won't, honor a debt are people who find fewer, and fewer, and fewer voluntary associates willing to agree to offering debt, or credit, or permission to work; permission to build something specific.
People who obviously can't, or won't, honor a debt can include people who depend upon actual charity (not enforced "charity") and criminals.
When needed people received charity the needed people don't use that increase in wealth to take more wealth, by deceit, or by violence, from the givers of charity - that is what criminals do.
A homeless shelter can be seen, for example, as a wealthy thing to build, something that helps people produce more wealth, in the future, offering a place for needy people to go, when they are clogging up efficient commerce, having no where else to go, to seek charity - or turn to crime.
Who gives anyone permission to build a homeless shelter when no one has any surplus wealth other than the people who have no inclination whatsoever to build a homeless shelter? Who gives homeless people permission to build and run their own shelter? Why can't they give each other that permission?
Look at the report offered by Real News, and connect the dots, please.
Who had permission to build Hover Dam?
Could the same amount of power invested in Hover Dam be spent on many homeless shelters?
Who benefits, what are the real numbers?
Who has to pay the cost for building Hover Dam, who has to pay the cost of electricity produced by Hover Dam? Does the amount of electricity produced by Hover Dam amount to more wealth than the wealth used to built it?
If so, then it was a wealth producing investment, and who benefits from the surplus wealth?
In context of the report by Real News, at this point, there is a missing piece of the puzzle as such:
1. Equitable, productive, cooperation, and the power to produce surplus wealth
2. Debt, investment, and the power to begin producing surplus wealth without having to have surplus wealth already stored.
3. The missing piece: control over what is produced.
What form does surplus wealth take, and what form does debt take, and who controls these cooperative human activities?
The missing piece is politics, and if politics has become a synonym for deceit, then law has become crime, and no wonder, knowing this much, that law has become crime, no wonder that the things being built are things that eliminate competition.
Competition is another piece of the puzzle, a vital piece, but a piece that is not demanded by criminals. Criminals must destroy competition.
Competition forces (without violence and without deceit) the production of things toward higher quality and competition forces the production of things toward lower prices.
That brings me to a point of discussion that may be worked on in my next effort; whereby the price of labor is looked at more closely - less ambiguously.
Who controls the power to set labor prices?