 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
So the argument is, if we control inflation, we control the world economy, and everything will just be prosperous.
Anyone,
I just started the Real News Report and I am going to introduce my viewpoint before I comment on the viewpoints reported in that report.
That quote above is a confession.
CONTROL INFLATION and CONTROL THE WORLD ECONOMY
In your face.
There is no "if" and the "we" is exclusive.
One power controls inflation, not two, not three, and certainly not "we".
To understand this, please, I am begging, please, please, please, use an illustration by which these facts can be easily understood.
In 2008 the ONE power that can inflate did inflate and the reports I get, and the reports reported by the ONE power report, confess, a significant event, in 2008, where that ONE power inflated, on the books, and perhaps that ONE power did some extra, off the books, or on the second set of books, inflation, then, and up to today, now.
The event is recorded in history, and it illustrates that exclusive power: the power to inflate.
The event can be roughly illustrated, quickly, so as not to get bogged down with exact numbers, and dates, and to get to the point, get to the principles involved.
Early 2008 the total number of legal dollars were X (a known quantity).
Late 2008 the total number of legal dollars becomes 2 times X (twice the earlier known quantity).
The principle here is factual. One legal license enfranchises ONE legal entity with the exclusive power to add (or subtract) from the number of legal dollars, in this case U.S.A dollars, or American money.
Those are the facts. The illustration is factual. The one legal entity, run by an unelected, or quasi-elected, ambiguously elected, appointed, person, or a few people agreeing upon decision making, but none-the-less, ONE group, doubled the number of legal dollars in 2008.
Suddenly adding double the total number of dollars to THEIR bank account is a powerful, exclusive, power, a power "we" don't have.
For the sake of understanding, it can be offered, put on the table, that the actual number of the actual increase, in 2008, was 3.3 Trillion dollars.
The principle here is called Monopoly Power, exclusive power, and the reason why this is a principle, is the cause and effect force that works against Monopoly Power, which is competition.
A. Monopoly power (no force forcing quality up and cost/price down)
B. Competition (forcing competitors to satisfy consumers or go out of business for failing to do so)
If there were two franchises, and not one, then the force of competition would force quality up, and cost down, and without two franchises, and without the force of competition, the Monopoly Power has no force forcing quality up, and cost down.
If you have a brain left in your head, see this, please.
If the U.S.A., America, were in competition with China, to see which money was better, than we would spend that new money, created in 2008, at home, by using that money, to make more power here at home, to make us more powerful, and therefore our money empowers us to use money to make more wealth, at home.
We would use that money to improve transportation, for example.
How?
Could that money be used to subsidize the production of Electric Cars, here, not China, and could that money be used to decommission the entire fleet of government gas guzzling cars, and have all government employees driving electric cars by Monday?
Could that money be used to subsidize the production of Solar Panels, here, not China, and could that money be used to add to the electric power grid power, by installing Solar Panels on all government buildings, where all the government employees could charge their government cars, and pay less per mile (80% less) compared to using gas guzzling cars, by Monday?
3.3 Trillion dollars went somewhere.
Did it go to the Middle East to bomb innocent victims in the effort to control vast fields of sweat crude oil?
If it did, wouldn't the ONE monopoly power want to keep that a secret from you?
No, you don't care?
OK, I'm going to imagine, I'm going to use my power of sympathy, to get in your shoes, and I'm going to imagine that you have no problem with aggressive wars for profit, so long as you don't have to pay so much for gasoline.
If the aggressive war for profit works, and the excuse for it allows me to avoid guilt, then I get to pay less at the gas station, and I can upgrade my T.V. with that savings.
I have news for you. The bombing in Libya is done to stop, not add to, the flow of oil. The result will be higher gasoline prices. You have been had, again.
Is it about time that you questioned your own confidence in knowing the truth?
The ONE monopoly power has to destroy the competition, failing to do so, forces quality up and cost down. Islamic finance may be the only competitor feared by the ONE monopoly power, and therefore, it may make sense, that the targets are now the Muslim people - with their no-interest mortgage systems.
Perhaps not.
There is a need to know, where the 2008 dollar double down power went, for any rational human being, who may want to know what will happen soon.
On to the Real News Report, for me.
But as you try to bring it down from, you know, 5 percent to 2 percent, 4 percent to 1 percent, we have to do a lot of things which depress demand, which translate into job losses. And, you know, of course, I mean, everyone as a consumer might benefit, because their grocery bill is 1 percent smaller, but don't forget that a lot of people are paying for this in the form of being unemployed.
If that confuses you, or even if my words confuse you, then your power to avoid having your power stolen from you is measurably powerless, by that confusion.
That quote confuses me, as to why those words are chosen by that person, the subject does not confuse me.
Inflation is simple, but to know the simplicity of it, the viewer must understand the difference between inflation during an enforced monopoly and inflation during a competitive force.
Falsehood, lies, deceit, secrets, double dealings, threats of violence, and actual examples of brutal violence upon the innocent, are the necessary things required to enforce a monopoly.
Higher quality and lower prices (more benefit for less cost) are the forces that force competition in force.
If you do not understand that distinction, you may very well be very confused, because you may very well confuse a monopoly force (falsehood and violence) with competitive forces (higher quality and lower cost = more benefit for less cost).
A monopoly force moves power from the many to the few, that is the object, the goal, and the design, the purpose, and the effect, of a monopoly force, and it works that way measurably, when it works.
Competitive forces move benefits up and costs down for all the competitors.
Which is better? Which is better for whom?
Monopoly forces are better for the very few who profit by their enforcement, as they trick other people into enforcing them, for a low wage for their work in enforcing them, and monopoly forces are something for nothing schemes, pyramid schemes, frauds, cabals, organized crime rings, for the few who receive the benefits at the expense of the victims who work to perpetuate them.
Competitive forces are better for both producers and consumers, at the expense of no one, except the criminals who no longer have their monopoly power in force.
Those are the two discriminatory distinctions that accurately identify which path can benefit which people and who has to pay for their share of surplus wealth.
Surplus wealth is created as people agree to work toward that goal.
Competition forces people to improve quality and lower cost, failing to do so does not destroy anything, a failure by one is a success by another, and anyone failing at one thing, may then move to another thing, and succeed at the new thing, since surplus wealth becomes abundant, and since labor becomes scarce, that type of systematic focus reaching for the goal of more benefit, for less cost, increases the opportunities available to work toward that goal, since no one is left working in the work of eliminating competition.
If the Real News Report is focusing attention upon monopoly power systems, then that is what it is doing. If it is focusing attention on a free market, where competition is the power in force, then that is what it is doing. If the Real News Report is confusing one with the other, than that is what it is doing.
Inflation, in a free market, must improve benefits (higher quality) and lower cost, or that example of inflation will go out of business, because some other producer will improve benefits and lower costs.
Which leads to the question, the answer is vital, as to why the inflation was ordered, and then produced, and what was purchased with the purchasing power created by that inflation?
Did China inflate? If so, then what did China purchase? Why did they inflate? Did The Federal Reserve inflate, as they did in 2008? What did they purchase with their exclusive increase in the power to purchase?
If the Real News Report is suggesting that the people at The Federal Reserve inflated for a reason, then what is the reason? What was purchased?
Why proceed with any "theory" on politics or economics, without the vital facts?
If the money created, the inflation, is invested productively (creating more power, more wealth, more purchasing power), then aggregate (average) prices go down, not up.
If the money created, the inflation, is malinvested, used in the work of destroying wealth, then aggregate prices go up, not down.
Is that too simple?
If China invests while The Federal Reserve malinvests, then China wins that competition, and The Federal Reserve people may be out of a job, because China increases quality and lowers cost, while The Federal Reserve people lower quality and increase cost.
Does that sound too simple?
So if you're sitting on assets, if you have a lot of money and a lot of ownership of things, you want to protect the value of those assets. You don't want them to depreciate through inflation. And so if people lose their jobs, that's not your problem I suppose.
An asset is valuable as wealth. A barrel of oil, for example, contains power in it, measurable as power, watts, or measurable as force, newtons, or measurable as energy, joules. The asset is valuable, or the asset isn't valuable, and the money value of the asset is a separate thing. Paul Jay should know that fact.
The change of value of a money can change the value of an asset for reasons that are specific to the money and the asset.
Example:
Gold prices tend to go up as malinvestment occurs with legal money value. The change of the value of gold is minor compared to the change in value of the legal money value because the change in the value of the legal money (caused by malinvestment) is inversely proportional to the change in the value of gold, because the change in the value of money causes the change in the value of gold.
To see that more clearly, the viewer can look at actual current reality.
China is inflating their legal money and using that legal money to buy up as much gold as they can.
The Federal Reserve group of people are inflating their legal money to do secret things that may include aggressive wars for profit, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
If China buys all the gold in the world, then they can demand payment for gold in Chinese legal money, and by that strategy the gold they have monopolized will add to the power their money has, as a power to purchase, because anyone who needs, or wants gold, in the world, has to buy Chinese dollars first, before they can buy gold next.
If the Federal Reserve group of people gain control of all the oil in the world, they can demand payment for oil in dollars, and then anyone in the world that needs oil, will be someone needing dollars first, so as to buy oil next.
As soon as China starts selling gold, gold flows to other people, and then other people can buy things with that gold, or use that gold to make things, and then sell things. What happens if someone uses the power they have to find a new gold mine, where the cost of mining the gold is minimal, suppose someone on an island just happens upon a gold source that is the size of a mountain, and all that is needed is the work of chipping the gold off the side of the mountain, and packaging it up, and selling it for money, selling it for a new money, a money demanded by the new gold producer, call it gold island mountain dollars.
Imagine that, a new Country called Gold Island Mountain, a new Central Bank printing new Gold Island Mountain Dollars, and anyone wanting to buy new gold has to buy new Gold Island Mountain dollars first, and the illustration works if you imagine that the pile of gold is twice the amount of gold already known to man. The one guy, and a few employees, on the new Gold Island Mountain, a new country, a new Federated Republic of one person, and a few low wage workers, doubles the supply of gold over night. The illustration is useful.
The people at the Federal Reserve would hire people to advertise an excuse for invading gold island mountain, supposedly to find the weapons of mass destruction, to help or aid the terrorists, to spread democracy, and, of course, while "we" are there, we get the gold, in our national interest - of course.
I can then upgrade my T.V.
The barrel of oil, unlike the gold island mountain, actually contains real power, and that real power can actually be consumed in the process of making more power, such as the production of food, which is also a power product, a product that has a measurable quantity of power within it, measurable as calories, or newtons, or watts, since power, force, and energy are all measurable with measurements that can be converted to the other measurement - one way or the other.
The point here is to point out how the power of legal money is different from the power of actual power. Actual power remains actual power even if a person chooses not to appraise it as high as someone else. This point is well illustrated in Joe's Law.
Power produced into oversupply reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases because power reduces the cost of production.
Gold is not a power product when compared to oil, and therefore oil is a much more competitive currency compared to gold, but not as competitive compared to a more powerful source of power.
Illustrate the difference with Joe's Law, and see for yourself, and I hope that Paul Jay is reading my work here.
Try out five things, and plug these five things into Joe's Law, and see if political economy becomes much more understandable and much less confusing:
1. Chairs
2. Gold
3. Oil
4. Solar Panels
5. Accurate knowledge
Start with chairs, and plug chairs into Joe's law, and then understand how things work with Gold.
Chairs produced into oversupply, reduce the price of chairs, while purchasing power decreases (inflation), because chairs do little to reduce the cost of production.
What happens if chairs are produced too much? The condition of oversupply, or too many chairs, is reached soon, and if everyone kept producing chairs, no one would have time and energy to produce anything else, and so the power supply would be all used up in chair production, and food supplies would drain out, and only chairs would be available, and chairs would be worth nothing, and although you could buy a chair for nothing, you may even have to pay someone to store chairs that are in the way, but the price on everything else would go through the roof, because all the power available would be spent on making chairs, and no power is left to make anything else, and all the money in the world couldn't buy a hot dog, since no one had any time or energy left to make one hot dog, because everyone spent every once of power on making too many chairs, and, or but, people had to also make more money, print more money, and print enough money to buy all the chairs, not much money at all, but they had to print enough money to by everything else wanted, or needed, and no matter how much money they printed, and no matter how many chairs they made, it was never enough money, and never enough chairs, because the price of all the things not made, with the scarce power available, had been priced out of reach for everyone, including the people who make and sell dollars, and including all the people making and selling chairs. Everyone has nothing but chairs and money, and no one has enough power to make a hot dog, because chairs, and money, does not lower the cost of producing chairs, or money, or hot dogs.
So chairs can be overproduced, reasonably, measurably, obviously, and logically. Don't ever do it, there's no money in overproducing chairs. Who would ever want to overproduce chairs? Who would ever want to stop someone from producing too many chairs? Who would ever make a law that forced people to stop producing too may chairs? Who would ever make a law that forced people to stop looking at the sun? Who would ever make a law that forced people to stop sticking their hands in the fire? Who would ever make a law that forced people to stop being stupid?
Now plug in Gold into Joe's Law.
Gold produced into a state of oversupply reduces the price of gold while purchasing power decreases (inflation) because gold does not reduce the cost of production competitively.
Compared to chairs, gold can certainly be produced more toward overproduction, from now on, until gold reaches closer to overproduction. Gold is now being produced, but gold is very scarce, gold will not reach overproduction soon, compared to chairs, but compared to oil, or compared to solar panels, or comparing gold production to the production of accurate knowledge, gold will reach overproduction very soon, because gold does not contain actual power. Oil contains actual power. Solar Panels convert actual power. Accurate knowledge is actual power. Gold does have a power called conductivity, but the point here is a competitive power scale. At some point: gold reaches an obvious over-supply, too much gold, too much power misused unproductively, and not enough power used productively, when too much power is used in producing gold, there is not enough power left over after consuming scarce power in the work to get too much gold, not enough scarce power left to be used to make other, more valuable, things; as gold becomes worthless, as more and more gold is produced after that point, when overproduction of gold is reached, as gold is not a competitive power product. Too much gold, like too many chairs, is bad, measurably bad, stupid, worthless, a malinvestement, poor.
Not good.
Now compare oil.
Oil produced into a state of oversupply reduces the price of oil while purchasing power increases (DEFLATION) because oil, unlike chairs, and unlike gold, contains actual power, and actual power actually reduces the cost of actual production - competitively.
A gold miner must use labor, or gasoline, or a more beneficial power, a lower cost power, to mine, to transport, and to produce gold. Gold doesn't power up, or fuel, the dump truck. Chairs don't fuel the dump truck, or the other equipment, or the other people, used to make chairs, or mine gold.
Oil can be forced out of the competitive power business by a better source of power, but oil remains a source of power, even if a better source of power takes over the power business.
A. Non-power products (no power, not competitive in the power product business)
B. Power products (the best power product is more powerful and therefore more competitive)
One oil producer can be forced out of business by a more competitive oil producer if one oil producer charges more for the same thing compared to the more competitive oil producer, but both are in the power business, not in the chair business, and not in the gold business. Competitive oil power businesses increase wealth, and power, by producing and selling more power, more power flowing into the economy, and if it is competitive it will be flowing into the economy at the lowest price, lower than the competition, so long as there is no monopoly on that oil power, no cabal, no consortium, no lies, no force, no legal crime. Oil power increases total power, total wealth, it does so itself, therefore purchasing power increases (deflation) accordingly. Oil remains a power product,and therefore oil is a more powerful backing for monetary currency, oil is a monetary currency, because oil is power. Oil power can even increase the power of legal money even if a competitor has a more powerful source of power, just not as much of an increase in legal money power (deflation).
Power produced into oversupply INCREASES purchasing power.
Power produced into oversupply causes DEFLATION of the monetary currency.
You have just used Joe's Law to accurately identify the difference between a power product and a non-power product. A power product produced closer and closer toward overproduction does not result in a decrease in the power to purchase, the opposite occurs, and that is significant, and that is overlooked, and that is confused, and that is important, and that is powerful, because the goal can be to reach for more, and more, and more power, until such time as power is abundant, and therefore the price of power is as low as it can get, and at that time money purchasing power increases (deflation) to the limit it can get. A non-power product that is overproduced will not increase the power to purchase with money, and that is because actual power reduces the actual cost of production, and things that are actually not powerful don't reduce the cost of production.
Still confused?
What happens in America if chairs or gold become so abundant that the price of chairs and the price of gold is negative? People are paying other people to store unwanted, and unused chairs, and people are paying other people to store unwanted and unused gold? What happens to the economy in America when those non-power products are overproduced?
What happens in America if oil becomes so abundant that the price of oil is negative and people are paying other people to store oil, so much oil is everywhere, so much that the price goes negative, and oil runs like water or oil runs like sunlight on a cloudless summer day?
Obviously the price of a barrel of oil goes to the floor, but what else happens?
Chair and gold overproduction causes chair and gold prices to drop to nothing, and what happens next, as a result of that overproduction?
Oil overproduction causes oil, and gasoline prices, to go down to the bottom, the minimum, down to the cost of bringing the product to the consumers of the product, and what happens next?
Today chair prices are 100 dollars a chair, and gold prices are 1000 dollar an ounce, and gasoline prices are 4 dollars a gallon.
Tomorrow chair prices fall to 1 dollar per chair, gold prices fall to 1 cents an ounce, and gasoline prices are down to 50 cents a gallon, or less.
What happens? If you see food prices going down, while your monthly pay stays the same, and you no longer spend 100 dollars to fill up your truck, to get to work, then your cost of living goes down, considerably, and your work load stays the same, and the cause was an increase in power flowing into the "economy", not more money, more power.
Now plug in Solar Panels, or food, or any competitive source of actual physical, measurable, power into Joe's Law, and see what happens?
Power is abundant, overproduced, and deflation occurs.
When actual power becomes scarce inflation occurs.
What happens if accurate knowledge, brain power, reaches a condition of oversupply?
Would anyone vote for a liar again? Would anyone ever send another watt of power to a torturing and mass murdering cabal of legal criminals again?
What happens to the amount of benefits earned when the expense, or costs, of producing those benefits lower?
Power reduces the cost of production.
Are costs going up or down? Are benefits going up or down? How much power do you have, what does it cost you to get more power?
In whose best interest is it to keep you from gaining power?
What is a powerful way to move toward progress? What is needed?
There is power in numbers.
Free-market policies rarely make poor countries rich.
I covered that too. Confusing crime with the free market process is a choice, or a plan of attack, and that plan, that choice, to confuse crime with the free market process, when executed, will transfer power from the confused to those who profit from those who are confused, or from those who are ignorant, from those who are powerless. Why do it?
There is an obvious answer.
Capital has a nationality.
Capital can be understood as physical matter, of, and belonging to, the physical world, and the concept of economy can be understood in the same light, as physical, measurable reality - separate from perception. Objective reality.
Capital is a barrel of oil, for example. A chair is capital. A bar of gold is capital. A solar panel is capital.
An asset is a assessment of capital. A judgment. A perception. Subjective observation.
Nationality can be understood to be psychological matter, of, and belonging to, the world of ideas, perceptions, judgments, evaluations, assessments, etc.
A Nation is the way someone views a place on earth. If a person claims a place on the moon, or a place on mars, is a part of a place on earth, a person does so with ideas, not physical matter. If the place on the moon, claimed to be a part of a place on earth, belonging to China, or belonging to America, and in doing so, the next thing done is to connect the place on the moon to the place on Earth, by sending people and machines there, and by removing, say, a quantity of gold, or a quantity of matter, a new powerful substance, He-3, from the moon, to the Nation, on earth, then there is a combination of physical matter along with psychological matter, or economy and politics mixed, subjective and objective connections, the earth connected to the moon. The idea drives the work that causes the physical matter to move from one place to another place, and the perception can be such that the Moon is now a part of the Nation, if that is what the person claims.
A person may claim that it is in the Nation's interest to claim the moon as part of the Nation. Other people may believe that claim. Why?
Capital has a nationality.
Capital = physical matter = economy
Nation = law = psychological matter = perception = politics.
Capital can exist within a geographical place on a planet where people share an idea that the place claimed is a nation. We live in this Nation. They actually live where they live. What they agree to call it, is what they agree to call it.
A Nation is a legal fiction, as is a corporation.
Nationalism, like Fascism, and like Despotism, is a political idea, one I do not
share. I know why they are created, and I know why they are maintained, I know the purpose, and I know the consequences, and I call them what they are, with a more accurate term, a term that exposes their true color, their true purpose, which is crime, so I call nationalism, fascism, and despotism by the accurate term Legal Crime.
Capital has a nationality according to the legal criminals and their ignorant, or confused, victims.
I mean, you know, the World Bank every year publishes these statistics showing the proportion of high-tech products in your export. According to this number, the Philippines is second most high-tech economy in the world after Singapore. But why then does the Philippines have only $2,000 per capita income?
Does the above intend to quantify something worth knowing?
A group of people cooperate and intend to produce wealth. That combination of effort consumes wealth and the end result is either more wealth or not.
Is that what is being reported?
the Philippines is second most high-tech economy in the world
What does that mean? What is the intention of reporting that measure of things?
Is that not the same thing as saying that a group of people agree to cooperate and use their power to create more power, and that plan succeeds, and those people are the second most successful in the world, by that measure?
Who is credited with that accomplishment?
"The Philippines"
The actual people who have actually agreed to begin working toward that goal where those people succeed in reaching that goal are not listed, rather, the whole of them, they, are credited with the credit of having done something.
Who is credited with that success?
Whose bank account increases?
What is the process by which power is used to create more power?
What is the process by which power flows from the many to the few, and then to even fewer?
And also, don't forget, I mean, the countries like Switzerland that you think live on taking care of dirty money deposited by Third World dictators and selling things like cuckoo clocks and cowbells to American tourists actually, in per capita terms, is the most industrialized economy in the world. It literally has the biggest manufacturing output in per capita terms. Of course, they're only 7 million people and they tend to specialize in--.
The Swiss Republic was the example used by the people who removed the British Monarchy, as the goal to reach, to reach the goal of a Swiss Model Republic, by getting rid of the British Monarchy, get rid of the control by the British Monarchy, over the "colonies", and start using a Swiss model Republic instead.
That was the plan back before The U.S. Constitution. It was a political and economic plan shared by many volunteers.
A Swiss model Republic was tried, in the form of The Articles of Confederation, where separate and sovereign State governments voluntarily combine into one Federated Republic, and that was the form of government in mind during the defeat of the British military invaders, the invaders who invaded to enforce a Monarchy, and the defenders began to use a Swiss model republic, and a volunteer army, and use help from the French military, and that group of people, working toward that state of abundant power, to be powerful enough to no longer be overpowered by the British Monarchy, could have kept the legal criminals out of business, after they threw out the legal criminals, but it failed to work, when more legal criminals, such as Alexander Hamilton, and Robert Morris, to name just two, set about to overthrow that voluntary association, and place a Nation, using nationalism, in place of the federated republic that was based upon the Swiss model.
In a federated republic, the separate and sovereign State governments compete against each other for the favor of the tax payers, by offering the best government, at the lowest cost, and so the people can vote with their feet, from one Canton, to the next State, if one State begins to move toward despotism, and if voting by ballot doesn't work, the citizens within, and protected from without, can move, they don't have to love it or leave it.
Each state, in a state of competition, must deliver the best government, at the lowest cost, or their citizens walk over to the next state, where they can get the best government, at the lowest cost, and everyone knows that this will work, because it does work, and it does work, because people know that governments are best when they are forced to compete, by the force of competition, to deliver the goods, or else, they go out of business, for lack of customers.
They don't have to love their chains, and they don't have to lick the boots of their oppressors.
And such a model, as the Swiss model, avoids the leap from defensive power to offensive aggressor power, no crime power, no legal crime power, because the states are not conglomerated into one single monopoly power, and the federated republic becomes the most powerful defensive power, having not wasted valuable power on failed aggressive wars for profit, as proven by the Swiss model, note, the Swiss managed to stay out of both WWI, and WWII, as those examples of legal crime went on all around them.
Which model is the most stable economically? Which model is the most stable politically? Which model is the most stable militarily?
The Nation State model, the one Alexander Hamilton and his cabal coerced into existence instead of the working Swiss model federated republic, is, as anyone can now see, exactly what the opponents of it said it would become, which it did become, and it became a legal crime business before the ink was dry on the last signature on that legal crime recipe.
The nation state was formed, and the Swiss model form was overthrown, and now the citizens are all slaves, party to aggressive wars for profit, doing the same crimes perpetrated by the Nazis, and believing in the same lies that perpetuate the same, or worse, legal crimes.
The power that boomed the Nazi power, was the same power that busted the Nazi power, and that same power boomed Stalin's version of communism, absolute despotism, and it is the same power that busted Stalin's version of communism, and that power is the monopoly legal money power, even if you refuse to know that fact.
There is a gorilla in the room, and pretending not to see the damage done by it, doesn't make the damage any less damaging, the effect of willfully ignoring it, empowers it, and perpetuates it.