 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Listening to Alex Jones,
I arrived late, it is now a commercial (I do not like commercials), I just missed the context of a reference by someone concerning "filling the void" and Alexander Hamilton (the Nationalist hiding behind a false Federalist front) warned George Washington (the leader of a rebellion against criminal government and then the leader of the suppression of rebellion against a criminal government), and the context of the reference had to do with the money power.
I hope I can hear this whole exchange later.
Bill Still, is speaking about the money power, speaking about examples.
Here is one form of money that Bill may not offer as a competitive example of money:
http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=904
Here is another one:
http://utopianist.com/2011/01/stimulus-writ-small-tiny-california-town-prints-its-own-currency/
Another:
http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf
I hear the argument between "free market" and "government".
That argument tends to ignore the obvious problem.
How can government pay for government if government does not enforce a legal tax money form?
I recognize the voice of Bill Still now. He is the guy who put out the Money Masters Documentaries - I'll get the link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6076118677860424204#
This is monumental, the meeting of Alex Jones with Bill Still. I'm on the edge of my seat to hear what Alex Jones makes of the facts brought to light by Bill Still.
Alex Jones is hedging his bets, thinking, which is very, very, very, good.
There is a split within the Austrian Economics group and I can help anyone know that division with a link and a quote. It is important to know this division. I'll explain later:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north512.html
WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?
In theory, there are two possible solutions, neither of which has any possibility of being implemented in my lifetime or yours.
One solution is free banking. This was Ludwig von Mises' suggestion. There would be no bank regulation, no central bank monopolies, no bank licensing, and no legal barriers to entry. Let the most efficient banks win! In other words, the solution is a free market in money.
Another solution is 100% reserve banking. Banks would not be allowed to issue more receipts for gold or silver than they have on deposit. Anything else is fraud. There would be regulation and supervision to make sure deposits matched loans. This was Murray Rothbard's solution. The question is: Regulation by whom? With what authority?
There would be no government-issued money. There would be no government mint. There would be no legal tender laws. There would be no barriers to entry into coin production.
The question of how to pay for government is inescapable. Before that can be answered the purpose of government, the form of government, and the definition, the actual defining of government, must be answered, there is no way to get around that work, failure is not an option. That is the void, failure to define government, failure to finance it, is a void that will be filled by criminal powers.
There are many possible answers to the question of what will fill the void:
1. Crime (involuntary association)
2. The complete and utter refusal to commit crime (voluntary association)
3. Minimum crime, such as, a Federated Democratic Republic
Option 3 can work, and knowing how it works, and what works to over-power it, is important information.
If the void is filled with crime then the money power will be a tool that transfers power from those who create it, and power will flow to those who are the most powerful criminals, by whatever name they choose to print on their stationary, that is what will happen measurably.
Here is the measure:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
If the choice is 2, or the absolute refusal to employ an involuntary association (crime), then, you have in place, to fill the void, something that goes by the name "The Free Market", and the problem there, is always the same problem, and that is that criminals do plan on, and then criminals do, execute their plans, and power does flow from those who produce power, to those criminals, and "The Free Market" may, or may not, work to minimize the profitability of crime, but who can convince anyone that it will?
If not enough people will believe in the absolute necessity to stop thinking that it is a good idea to use crime (involuntary association) as a method of fighting crime, and I have tried, then option 3 may work, again, for some time, again, and it will certainly be a step in the opposite direction from absolute dictatorship, which is a euphemism for hell on earth, just read Alexander I. Solzhenitsyn if you have no way to measure what will happen when things really, really, really, go bad, down this path.
Again:
1. Crime (involuntary association)
2. The complete and utter refusal to commit crime (voluntary association)
3. Minimum crime, such as, a Federated Democratic Republic
1. Crime
Crime finances itself, the criminals use whatever works to enslave the productive people, allow the productive people a minimum supply of power, just enough to keep just enough of them alive, while they take all the rest of the power, and each criminal will be fighting each other criminal, so forget about this fantasy of a single conspiracy group of elites who agree to be nice to each other, if that is what you think. It must be hell to be near the top of that food chain, within that criminal network, where each power hungry criminal will do anything to gain more power, without limit, certainly without moral conscience as a limit.
Criminals tax each other, with an involuntary tax, that is their invention, that is their Method of Operations, that is their world, that is what they do, they involuntary tax each other, and they involuntary tax their victims, and they involuntarily tax good old mother nature, and they would tax God if God can be taxed, and they would involuntarily tax the Devil if the Devil was similarly powerless to avoid being subjected to such an involuntary connection to a criminal.
2. Absolute refusal to resort to crime (involuntary tax) as a means of survival i.e. The Free Market
No one taxes anyone else - involuntarily - not by way of deceit, not by way of threats of violence, and not by way of actual violence, not on purpose, for profit. Government, if it exists in any form at all, will exist as a voluntary form. So, naturally, a skeptic will want to know how government will be funded, as the natural reaction is to assume that criminals will run amok, having no one hired to catch them, and then punish them. As much as I would like to champion this choice, the power of falsehood has grown way too powerful, and people are just too stupified by falsehood to let go of this false viewpoint, whereby "we" have to force "us" to be good.
Suffice to say that the only logical solution to the crime problem is to stop being one. People are weak, that is the way it is, so they are easily fooled into believing that the solution to the criminal problem is to hire the criminals to protect us. That is just the way it is, check out any discussion, anywhere, and see if you can find one, one discussion somewhere, anywhere, where the people speaking about how to solve the criminal problem are not resorting to the mistake of making stealing legal (involuntary taxation). It is not ingrained in "our" DNA, but it is ingrained into our culture, and has been for over 200 years, here in America. It was imported.
The method of taxation in The Free Market is easy to know, just think in terms of an open competition among insurance companies seeking to offer the highest quality crime victim insurance policy, at the lowest cost to the policy holder, and I can add that one of the first policies could be an legal crime victim policy where a policy holder buys into a fund that will pay back to the policy holder a sum of money, a power to purchase, a measure of restitution in case the policy holder is victimized by criminals with licenses.
Example:
The survivors of the Waco massacres, having such a policy, would get a check in the mail, since they were victimized by government agents. Call it Anti-Despotism Insurance. Use your own brain, you may like it, if you can get used to it.
This voluntary association option can be studied, because it has existed in various forms.
3. Minimize the use of crime as a means of fighting crime, or, a form of involuntary association such as a Federated Democratic Republic.
That option can be studied because it existed, and even exists, in various forms, one of which was the example offered during the period between the enforcement of British law (legal crime) and the enforcement of The Constitution (legal crime), under The Articles of Confederation (less legal crime). The idea is to preserve competition among dictatorships so as to force one dictatorship to be less dictatorial or failure to be less dictatorial will result in victims moving to nearby dictatorships that are less dictatorial.
The tax structure is a competitive developing, adaptive, process whereby each competitive dictatorship invents a better tax structure to entice more tax payers to pay into their fund.
I hope that helps you understand the money power question.
I can add that whatever choice forces a single money power monopoly will also be the choice that removes the force of competition. If you pick that choice you will get what you deserve. You will, by that choice, remove the force of competition, and competition is the force that forces producers to improve quality, and competition is the force that forces producers to lower the cost to the consumers.
Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. The point is to reproduce, which must happen, or the human species ends in one generation.