 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Why I’m betting on people who will kick ass and take names
Honest Productive Americans,
Bait and switch is at play when a person claims that Gold is Honest money, and I can explain.
Money has no capacity to be honest. Money has no capacity to lie. Money can be an accurate account. Money can be a fraudulent account.
The Bait is money.
The Switch is the actual people who invent, produce, and then maintain the money.
See?
Gold is honest money.
Ok, I get the bait, thanks, let's, by all means, use gold as money. Let US do that, thank you very much, I really like Honest money.
"We" used gold, for awhile, because "it" is honest money.
What happens if the producers of the legal gold money supply remove as much of the supply of gold from circulation because they can, because they have the power to do so, and suppose you are keen, and you find out what they are doing, while they are doing it, instead of you finding out too late?
Did gold magically, randomly, get up and walk itself out of circulation and do so secretively, quietly, and so as not to alert everyone all at once?
Did the producers of gold tell everyone in advance, voluntarily, announcing by all means within their power to do so, no matter the cost of doing so, warning everyone, well in advance, of their honest plan to honestly remove most of the honest gold out of circulation, and did those honest Gold Bugs explain honestly why they would hatch that plan to remove as much of the one and only legal currency they can remove out of circulation, warning everyone, before executing that plan?
The answer is no, because those types of plans don't work if everyone knows about them, they work best if very few people know about them, in advance, so as to clue the insiders in on when to sell at the top price and when to buy at the bottom price as the manipulations of supply cause booms and busts, on purpose, on schedule, for profit, at the expense of the victims, or just for fun.
Gold can't be honest. Gold can't be dishonest. People who willfully plan on producing deception are dishonest as they define dishonesty, by those decision, with those plans to produce deception and while they execute those plans to follow through with deception upon their targeted victims.
Bait: Gold
Switch: People manipulating gold once gold is the only legal money.
Two groups:
A. Those who favor competition as a force that will or will not allow gold to become the highest quality money at the lowest cost.
B. Those who favor a legally enforced single money, gold or anything, so long as it is the only money allowed by law.
Same two groups:
A. Those in favor of voluntary association, and therefore in favor of defense against involuntary association - without which there is more involuntary association by default.
B. Those in favor of involuntary association, typically claiming, by willful deceit, or by willful ignorance, or just following the herd, that involuntary associations are necessary, because without involuntary associations forced on us by us there would be involuntary associations forced on us by them.
On to quotes from the article:
It’s easy to be pessimistic on a day like today. Forty years ago on this very day, Richard Nixon put a bullet into George Washington’s face, cancelling the direct convertibility of dollars into gold and once and for all ending any hope of an honest money system.
Systems cannot be honest. I don't know who can claim to own the patent on that invention, but clearly this author is parroting it, or reinventing it, and it is false.
A system, or a gun, or a pointed stick, or a lie, can't be honest. People in command of the power to decide can decide to communicate known facts or decide an opposite path, to fail to communicate know facts, or to communicate known falsehoods, and people are, by that power to decide, and by those decisions, either honest, in each case, or dishonest in each case.
A lie, or a choice to be dishonest, can be defensive.
Honest Criminal calling on the phone:
"Hi, I'm stopping by later and when I get there you had better be ready for me, get all your young women ready for me to rape, have them bathed, naked, and ready, and get all the money you have ready for me to steal, and don't even think about defending yourself with any weapons of any kind, do not even question my schedule, I will be there at 9 o'clock, you will have everything ready for me then."
Dishonest Targeted Criminal;
"Yes sir, everything will be ready as you command, on time."
Lies can be as powerful for the intended victims as they are for the criminals, so even lies are not necessarily immoral, or bad, just as guns, or pointed sticks, or Louisville Sluggers, are not necessarily bad, by default, where the thing is bad, which is false, as the thing is inert, the thing is a tool, the thing is separate from the human being who uses the thing willfully. The thing has no will. Why would someone ever willfully confused the thing with the person using the thing?
You may have to guess, few people confess. Actions confess motive, in cases where the person planning and executing the act are not willing to confess their true motives.
It’s easy to be pessimistic on a day like today. Forty years ago on this very day, Richard Nixon put a bullet into George Washington’s face, cancelling the direct convertibility of dollars into gold and once and for all ending any hope of an honest money system.
Money systems cannot be honest. Money systems can be accurate. Why ask for something that can't exist, when you can invent, produce, and maintain something that can exist?
Why go down a false path, when a true path is much less costly, and a much higher quality path?
Back to the article.
Over the past four decades, the dollar has fallen 98% against the price of gold. Politicians and central bankers pretend that inflation is not a concern, but the rising cost of living around the world has prompted people to such extremes that they’re willing to light themselves on fire to protest government bungling.
In simple terms:
Inflation is a measure of the failure to use the power that is available in the work that results in more power being produced. Even a shrinking supply of money can't keep up with an even faster reduction in the supply of things to trade for money. Inflation can occur while the money supply is being cut in half, if the supply of things to trade for money are reduced by 90%.
Money = 1000 today while things to trade for money = 1000 today.
1 thing costs 1 dollar today.
Money = 500 tomorrow (the supply of money is cut in half overnight) while things to trade for money = 100 tomorrow (reduced by 90%, war for example).
1 thing costs 5 dollars tomorrow.
In one word: Malinvestment
Who measures the value of an investment, and by what standard is that value measured?
Group A = investment is accomplished by way of destruction, so long as power continues to flow to Group A from Group B
Group B = investment is accomplished by using available power in the work necessary to increase available power - which includes the cost of avoiding Group A
Group A may appraise the use of available power in the work of destroying things, like destroying all competition where ever, and when ever, competition arises, as a solid investment, and the result of that use of that power is less total power, while, not by coincidence, the lower total quantity of power is transferred to Group A the Legal Criminals, from Group B the Honest Productive People.
Total power declines, but power still transfers from those who make it to those who steal it, and the rate of transfer increases, and the rate of increase of transfer increases, while Group A uses power to destroy things, such as using power stolen to destroy all competition, and by employing a particularly effective deception whereby Group B sends power to Group A in the effort to disconnect Group B from Group A, and that power is then used to accomplish the opposite goal - which is not news.
Not news:
http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
Note the words in the Article linked at the top of the page - please:
Over the past four decades, the dollar has fallen 98% against the price of gold. Politicians and central bankers pretend that inflation is not a concern, but the rising cost of living around the world has prompted people to such extremes that they’re willing to light themselves on fire to protest government bungling.
"bungling"
That is more falsehood. Why travel down a false path, that is very costly, and very low quality, when a true path is much higher in quality, and much lower in cost?
The ignorant, and stupid, victims, are driven down the false path. The legal criminals are not on that path. They are on the true path, they are on the legal crime path, but they are not "bungling", they are using the power they steal to gain more power, and to do so they have to use the power they steal to destroy things, resulting in a net loss of power, and who pays the bills?
Who cashes the checks, as the steadily shrinking supplies of power are transferred to the legal criminals, as they tell the victims that "we are broke"?
Who pays the bills?
Who is the stupid one?
Blame me, if it works for you, and I'll know your true color. Either you desire to be a victim too, or you somehow manage to be one of the legal criminals, and I won't hold my breath for a confession, blaming me is good enough of a confession.
Note the words:
"government bungling"
A government, or a system, or money, or a gun, or a pointed stick, can't bungle. Why would anyone confuse the thing with the person using the thing? What would be the point of willfully traveling down a false path?
Whose idea is it to race to the bottom, while it is much easier to go the other way?
Back to the article:
I’m eager to invest.
I don't know who is reading this article as I do, and what goes on in their minds. In my mind I see the measure of a legally enforced scarcity of legal money competition; whereupon a select few powerful people gain the legal license to transfer power from producers of power and that power is then transferred to a select few who produce monetary products, and that causes one competitor to be more powerful than another competitor by that exact measure, at least that exact measure.
Monetary competitor A, by that exact measure, pays "taxes", and those "taxes" are then sent to monetary competitor B, and in so doing: monetary competitor B gains power, at the expense of, monetary competitor A.
Once that happens a competitor has to ask permission to compete, failing to gain license, by asking permission, is exclusion from the club of competitors, you are written off, you can't compete, and the price charged to the competitor seeking admission into the club, is the tax, the price of admission, the tax is then transferred to the competition, by way of subsidy, so that exact transfer of power causes the competitor seeking admission to start at a disadvantage, and that subsidy causes the established competitors to gain advantage by that exact measure.
Why does a new competitor have to seek "investment capital", why can't a new competitor print their own start up capital, and the answer is, they can, and they do, and some of those people using that business model are able to bypass the "price of admission" by that method, but they have to specialize in that business, in addition to whatever other specialty they offer in competition.
Examples:
One of our students, Philipe from Brazil, came up with a great idea to address a real need in his home country: elderly care. Brazil’s rapidly growing middle class now has the disposable income to provide better in-home care to its elderly parents, and he devised an elegant solution that is just screaming to be deployed. I’m eager to invest.
A person seeks to begin working as a competitor in the business of elderly care, which is a specialty, someone who can specialize in providing higher quality, and lower cost, care for the elderly, and as such, the customers will choose his higher quality care, at a lower cost, over someone who offers lower quality, and higher cost, elderly care.
Why can't that person start offering a competitive specialty right away?
That person specializes in elderly care, and that person does not specialize in inventing, producing, and maintaining a competitive legal monetary product.
So that person, failing to specialize in two things simultaneously, seeks to pay for someone who does specialize in inventing, producing, and maintaining a competitive legal monetary product.
What are the chances that the legal monetary product business is a working monopoly?
What is the price of admission, what is the price of a license, who pays whom to begin dealing in the legal money business? Who is most certainly not allowed to even begin inventing, producing, and maintaining legal money?
The person specializing in elderly care can't start his business without the means to pay the bills that must be paid before the customers start paying for the higher quality and lower cost elderly care, because the person specializing in elderly care does not invent, produce, and maintain his own legal money.
If the person specializing in elderly care did specialize in inventing, producing, and maintaining his own legal money too, having two specialties, then there would be no need to pay for the legal money services offered by lower quality, and higher cost, competition, in the legal money supply business.
How much does it cost a customer who is unable, or unlicensed, to invent, produce, and maintain their own legal money, as that customer buys a legal money service from the monopoly legal money power?
A.
Special Interest payments transferred from the person starting an Elderly Care service to the monopoly legal money service provider.
B.
No alternative encouraged by those operating the law power, or the "free market" proponents, and no application of inventive use of common sense, reason, logic, or moral conscience, driving the person to cut out the costly middle man because all such competitive thinking is willfully censored by those who perpetuate the legal money monopoly fraud.
I don't know what your thoughts are, but I know mine. In that example the practice of printing Elderly Care dollars, with a simple, freeware, open source computer program, could be a competitive, inventive, method of producing, and maintaining the start up capital needed to start that competitive business, and as such the other legal monetary producers will be forced to offer their services at a lower cost, or they go out of business.
Example 2:
Another student, Julian from New Zealand, came up with a creative solution to personal security challenges that plague both travelers and worried parents of small children. His idea makes a twist on GPS tracking, and if he takes the necessary steps to build this business, I’m convinced it could be worth $20 million to a big satellite company in a few years.
If the idea sells itself, investors want a piece of the action, so what constitutes the demarcation line between an investor that has the power to invest and an investor that does not have enough power to invest? In this case consider the word choices used by the author to communicate a powerful investor.
A.
Big Satellite Company ($20 million is the measure of big)
B.
Travelers
C.
Worried parents
What is the power that causes A to be more powerful, as an investor, than B and C? What causes the demand for a middle man between the traders B, C, and the producer of something that sells itself well enough to attract "investors"? B and C invest in the product by buying it. The product traded to B and C is an investment in that which is traded by B and C. Why is there a need for an additional investor, what does the additional investor sell: interest in the business? What is this "interest" in that business?
The seller of the idea, product, or service can sell directly to the customers, and therefore the customers are the only investors needed, and the price is determined by the exclusive arrangements between the producer of the idea and the consumers of the idea, and in so doing the producer of the idea buys whatever the consumers of the idea are selling, which can be anything, gold, silver, tickets for Elderly Care Service, dollars, cooper, oil barrels full of oil, watts of electricity, anything. Everything can be converted to everything else, accurately, and by mutual agreement, with very little added cost, due to modern technology.
How much of what you are offering is worth what I am offering? For lack of employment of an easy to maintain conversion, a legal money monopoly is invented and fed every scrap of excess power while it devours everything in sight?
Why is A in a position to "invest", as a middle man, between those who trade GPS tracking for whatever is being sold by those who get GPS tracking during that mutually beneficial, equitable, exchange?
Why is A raised to a position above B, C, or the potential seller of GPS tracking?
Who elected the employers of the money monopoly power dictators for life?
Why does the potential seller of GPS tracking have to pay someone else to start a business selling products that will sell themselves, since the product is a high demand product or service?
That is what I think. I don't know what you think.
Example 3:
Another student, Kim from Germany, recognized that the growing appeal of precious metals in the broader consumer market warrants a higher level of quality in portfolio tracking services. His team came up with some extremely clever ideas for a precious metals portfolio app, and given where we are in the commodity’s growth phase, the idea has significant merit.
That reminds me of Pay Pal Wars. I can link you to the book, you can read it too.
http://www.amazon.com/PayPal-Wars-Battles-Media-Planet/dp/0974670103
Two of the people involved in Pay Pal are Elon Musk, and Peter Theil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel
There are competitors in the legal money markets. The idea that one legal money, such as The Dollar Hegemony, is powerful, is the source of their power, the idea is the source of power, and it is false. Their source of power is deception.
That should tell you something.
Something like this:
It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.
Henry Ford
Example 4.
Government is what creates the problems to begin with; they are not the solution. We are the solution. Nurturing those skills to become self-reliant and create value in the world, or investing in others’ capabilities to do so, is a much more productive way to fight.
When "government" is the word used to describe Legal Crime, or "involuntary association", it can then be known that that is the definition of "government", in that context.
Government:
The willful enslavement of the many, by the few, into an involuntary association.
The few invent, produce, and maintain that definition of government, as they carry out their willful plans, as they exploit their targeted victims, and in so doing, government is defined in that exclusive way.
When that is the only definition of government, the exclusive definition of government, without any higher quality, and lower cost defining government, of any kind, it can be known, then, that there is a monopoly government power - and it can be known, exactly in that way, that there is no competitive government whatsoever.
Is that true? Is that an accurate perspective? Is there only one government power, and is the only government power defined as an enforced, involuntary, association between the enforcers and those who are targeted for enforcement?
That is what I think about that link.