 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Anyone (or nobodies),
The powerful criminals who have seized the power to take power use that power to take more and more power and they must because failure to do so will threaten their power to take power.
If the powerful legal criminals who have seized the power to take power, by law, from the tax payers, which are, by definition, the people who create power, wealth, value, and excess power, power left over after power is consumed, and failure is on the horizon, for them, for the legal criminals, then they will increase the rate at which they siphon power, take power, steal power, transfer power, from their target markets, from their tax payers, from their victims, so as to empower them sufficiently enough to regain, reestablish, and perpetuate the power to take power.
The victims cannot be allowed to be more powerful than the power required to maintain victimization.
As soon as the victims are allowed to gain power, the very moment the victims gain power, power that could have been stolen, power that could have been transferred by law, by the legal criminals, is the very moment that the power to take power, by law, is threatened.
The victims cannot be allowed to have control over power, in any way, in any form, whatsoever, to allow that to happen will threaten the legal criminals power to take power.
This is the fundamental, base, and accurate viewpoint of political economy.
Tax payers < law enforcers = political despotism
The competition between political economies, such as despotism versus republicanism, can then be seen, from that base understanding, as the force that transfers power back to the people who create power, the tax payers.
Taxes go from the people who create wealth to the people who enforce law by a mechanism, call it whatever you wish, call it Fried Chicken, and it remains in place, and working, so long as the people who create wealth grow weaker and the people who collect taxes grow more powerful.
The force, or the power, that moves power from tax collectors back to the people, is the force of competition. People choose something better.
political despotism < political (choice) universality = political competition
political despotism > political universality = competition is effectively against the law (despotism)
Why does economic power flow from the victims to the victimisers - in the first place?
In nature such a transfer of power occurs as a parasite feeds off of a host. At what point does a host become weaker than the parasites that consume the host?
A tax payer can employ a parasite, or pick off the parasite, or fire the parasite, once the parasite begins to threaten the host, once the parasite is no longer useful to the host, assuming that the parasite did manage to convince the host that the parasite was useful to the host,in the first place.
That power to choose is competition. Competition is very powerful.
If the parasites are able to convince the host that the parasites are the hosts brain, the host will never expend any power toward the avoidance of being connected to the parasite. The parasite becomes the hosts brain in actual practice.
When the tax payers are convinced into a false belief that their power to think belongs to the people they pay taxes to, the affect at that moment, that tipping point, is the creation of the power by which power flows from the victims to the victimisers perpetually. It is a significant moment, and some say it is a point at which there can be no return.
I disagree.
Who thinks that the democrats are our only hope against the wrongs done by the republicans?
Who thinks that the republicans are our only hope against the wrongs done by the democrats?
Who thinks that the payment of taxes to the tax collectors, no matter who they are, democrats or republicans, criminals or saints/gods/benevolent dictators, are necessary payments, and anyone failing to pay, is cause for vehement punishment rained down upon that criminal tax evader?
Who thinks that war is good for the economy?
Who thinks that the failure to bring about Armageddon is a failure to fulfill the prophesy, and therefore eternal damnation?
Where do people get these thoughts? What is the source of these lies?
When the legal criminals gain the power to be the brains of their victims, effectively think for their victims, their victims will no longer command the power to avoid victimization by those victimisers.
Discussion is against the law.
Competition is outlawed.
The only thoughts allowed are the thoughts that maintain the power by which competition is against the law.
That is a Utopian Fantasy, for a legal criminal, someone able to create legal money whenever they want, without limit.
If one network of people, anywhere on the planet, or in the universe for that matter, regain their control over their own brains, and by that power are able to avoid victimization, that one network of people will prosper, grow in power, exponentially, and present, to the human species, to the world, and to the universe, a competitive example that will render any criminal network powerless by that force of competition.
Competition is very powerful.
1. Network of people held together by voluntary association
2. Not #1
Which group will anyone choose to join?
Which group gains the most market share?
Which group gains more power?
How many people are dying to get into North Korea?
How many political enemies were dying to get into Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia?
How many people went to America once America became a competitor on the world stage, as a voluntary association, a voluntary association in competition with less voluntary associations?
Who decided who can join the voluntary association and who decided who cannot join the voluntary association - ever?
Once inside the voluntary association: who decided what the volunteers can do and what the volunteers cannot do, once inside the voluntary association?
At what point does the voluntary association become less voluntary compared to the competition?
What do the volunteers do at that point, if they have a powerful choice, a competitive choice?
At what point do the people no longer have a choice to seek and gain a voluntary association to join, on earth, when the place where they exist is less than voluntary compared to the place they can live?
The only way that legal crime can work is by effectively removing the power of choice from their victims. As soon as the victims have the choice to join a more voluntary association, one that does not cost them as much, the victims will vote no to the less voluntary, more expensive option, and the victims will no longer be victims, by voting yes to a more voluntary association.
If the choice is never known by the victims, the legal criminals are not threatened.
A. The Dollar
B. The competition
Not one person in millions of people think about choosing a better option - why?
Dollar by de-fault
The dollar is thought about, by millions of people, as if the dollar was air, or Uncle Sam, or America, or The good ole' U.S.A., apple pie, freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of property, or even happiness.
Why?
I ask many people that question and I have yet to get an answer.
What happens if money becomes a legal competition, like automobiles, computers, cell phones, or restaurants?
People I ask: visibly short circuit.
I can offer a few illustrations of what can happen, and the wheels in the brains of the people I ask stop turning.
I ask the unthinkable.
See if your brain short circuits. Be competitive - please.
Suppose that the legal criminals allow 3 competitors, only, and this can be seen this way:
A. Republican based money competitor - License to produce legal money #1
B. Democrat based money competitor - License to produce legal money #2
C. One more license based upon a competition between competitors who submit a bid to win one more license to produce legal money #3
1.
Legal money license #1 could be a legal gold standard money.
Whatever the Republicans can dream up, or the republicans can offer business as usual and they can choose to keep their Federal Reserve System of fraud.
2.
Legal money license #2 could be a legal stamp script money such as the example in history found in Worgle Austria before WWII.
Whatever the Democrats can dream up, or the democrats can offer business as usual and they can choose to keep their Federal Reserve System of fraud.
3.
A National referendum, run on a Web Site, encrypted voting, one vote per American citizen, view and choose between the bids offered by various people, and companies, bidding for the one remaining license to produce money.
Possible companies that could put up bids include:
1. Skype
2. Google
3. Paypal
4. E-Bay
5. Verizon
6. Microsoft
7. The Real News Network
8. Power Independence
I can't speak for any other person, but I can speak for myself, and I would place a bid whereby I offer 2 new monetary products to the people of America.
Here then are illustrations of the possible choices offered in competition to the people of America once competition is no longer against the law in the market of money:
1.
Gold standard or The Federal Reserve System of fraud offered by Republicans
2.
Negative Interest, or subsidy money, or The Federal Reserve System of fraud offered by the Democrats
3.
Any one of a number of choices including but not limited to the following 2 products offered by one bidder seeking the third and last choice offered by national law enforcement.
Product 1:
No interest home mortgages to any current low risk borrower so as to turn in your current interest mortgage for a no interest mortgage and thereby transfer power back to the honest workers who actually produce wealth in America
Product 2:
A 1 percent interest loan to the same low risk borrowers (high FICO score) for the purchase of power increasing products such as Solar Panels, Electric cars, to name just two products that are proven to increase power production compared to the current competition - in reality.
Supposing, for a wild moment, that someone has not suffered a bout of Pavlov's Dog syndrome, and supposing that someone has not had their brain locked up at this point, the reader may be working at fitting these various puzzle pieces into place, and having a few pieces that won't fit anywhere.
Consider taking just one piece at a time and fit one piece into the puzzle. Take, for example, one person with one choice, as one person decides to vote for one money.
I've set up a scenario above to offer that one choice at one time in one place.
You, for example, are at the computer and you click on the web page that takes you to the National Referendum on Returning Competition in Money Markets, and you can see, much in the same way as seeing who owes whom on the National Debt Clock Web Page, you see which competitors are getting the most votes, and you can vote for the one you want to have the new license to compete in money markets.
You fit this puzzle piece in place yourself, and you do so right now.
You are the authority on political economy right now.
Which do you choose?
Hypothetically:
1.
Legal money license #1 could be a legal gold standard money.
Whatever the Republicans can dream up, or the republicans can offer business as usual and they can choose to keep their Federal Reserve System of fraud.
2.
Legal money license #2 could be a legal stamp script money such as the example in history found in Worgle Austria before WWII.
Whatever the Democrats can dream up, or the democrats can offer business as usual and they can choose to keep their Federal Reserve System of fraud.
3.
A National referendum, run on a Web Site, encrypted voting, one vote per American citizen, view and choose between the bids offered by various people, and companies, bidding for the one remaining license to produce money.
Now suppose, just to move the building of the puzzle, the whole picture, along in one more increment, one more step, fit one more puzzle piece into the picture, and fit the one piece into the right place, just suppose, just for now, that you choose to give a legal license to print legal money to Skype, because you see that they have the best bid, and they will charge the least tax payer money, they win the competition, as far as you are concerned.
You have, supposedly, already talked to other people and other people say to you that they are going to choose business as usual.
You can see that the current number of people choosing business as usual is considerable, as the web page reports the current winners and losers.
Many people are choosing Republican gold standard money.
Many people are choosing Democrat subsidized money or negative interest money.
Many people are choosing Skype money, many are choosing Pay-Pal money, many are choosing Real News Money, but you don't look at that money just yet.
Suppose you begin to entertain the idea that you can buy down your current mortgage, at no interest, and you can buy Solar Panels and a few electric cars at 1 percent interest if you choose the option provided by Power Independence - if they get the last license to offer competitive money.
What goes through your head when you contemplate that option, that option whereby you consider pocketing the savings on mortgage interest payments, electric bill payments, and gasoline bill payments, every month of every year from now on until mortgage interest is even lower, and electric costs are even lower, and gasoline costs are even lower than the current situation in reality?
What stops that choice from being a choice?
How about thinking in terms of the power of numbers?
How much power flows from the people who earn power to the people who collect that power at a central power collection point, such as a Bank?
Each mortgage moves the power cost to build one house from the buyer to the seller, each time, and each time one entire extra home cost is moved from the buyer to the seller of the mortgage. The Bank is paid (over time) the cost of building one extra home, a home that does not exist, as each person buys one home.
If you choose the no interest home the power you pocket is the cost of that one extra home, you keep that power, the bank does not keep that power.
That is one person.
How many people would choose that option if that option was a competitive option?
What power is there in numbers?
How can that power be quantified, and measured accurately?
The next link I link attempts to answer that last question, and I have to ask you, and please be as honest as you can be, and the question is:
Do you trust the accuracy of the following legal authority of the measure of the power of numbers: is the following accurate in your view?
U.S.A. Debt Clock
Do you think my words here are not to be trusted, and do you trust the people who create those numbers?
Mortgages are said to be: Upside Down
Isn't that interesting?