 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
When people meet at these places I call fences there is little to be gained if there is no desire to gain anything.
You wrote:
As for the Menger quotes I don't know what to say. except i guess i need you to tell me in your own words what they mean.
As far as I am concerned you need to be the best that you can be while you occupy your human existence, and other than that my intentions are to help you if you want my help, and other than that I trust that you are like a security blanket to me, and a very welcome one since I have already lost my father and mother.
I chose to read further, despite having other things the choose from on this conveyor belt called life.
I read these words and interpret them to mean if there existed more stuff than a society required for everything we required there would be no need for an economy or wealth. They wouldn't exist. Am I wrong?
You chose to ask a question. I think that the question you ask is vital, and that is why I offered those words to you.
Will an inaccurate answer be good enough for government work?
I can offer a competitive interpretation of those words and as far as I know your version is accurate to a point, but what is the point?
Is there any power in knowing the meaning of the sentence? Is there any use in knowing the meaning of the sentence? For example: is the sentence accurate or is the sentence inaccurate? Does the sentence offer a more productive way to view political economy in a general sense, as in the sense that all human beings can gain from this sentence, or does the sentence offer someone a way to gain as an individual human being at the expense of other individual human beings?
So I have many more questions than answers offered to you, at this fence.
If you care to know, I have competitive answers to the questions that are inspired by your question.
Joe's law states that if you have more power supplied than is needed the price of power goes down. An infinite supply of power and there wouldn't be a need for an economy or wealth.
Here is where my discovery makes the most sense to me and I read your question concerning your ignorance and in light of my own ignorance I am not in a good place to be judging yours.
I can report to you my findings on this subject at this fence, and at this point in time right here at the end of this sentence with this period.
As soon as any person needs or wants anything there can be a signal, a communication, an advertizement, from that person, and that person signals to other people such a need or want and that constitutes an economic demand.
How much power is in the Sun?
Do you still want sun screen?
I do not know how to express how truly lost I am right now. I feel like I worked all weekend long on a project for the teacher at school and I thought I was delivering exactly what he wanted and instead I am scolded and given a big red "F".
I can pretend to be the teacher, if that works for you, but I now have an example of how discussions can work with me, and the experience has led to a book, and I can send you a copy of the book soon, if you want a copy. There will be 25 copies made in the first printing, so far according to the plan.
I don't see this as me being a teacher unless the student, in such a relationship, is agreeable to the understanding I have that I am as much a student as is the student.
I can elaborate on that a lot, in many ways, on many paths, and which path picked is not up to me, when the goal is to know better, and the goal is mutually shared by those engaged in discussion.
As to the confusion, before I forget, concerning a sentence I wrote, and your use of the sentence I wrote, where I get an idea as to how poorly I communicated the intended message to you, I can elaborate on that perceived confusion some.
This sentence:
The United States of America, which is a corporation, a Legal Fiction, a nebulous thing to be held responsible, accountable, so as to allow the actual criminals to be untouchable, unknown, and free from any power that might compete with their exclusive monopoly of crime made legal.
A Legal Fiction is at least existing in two forms currently. One form is the genuine form, whereby there is a list of names of people, and these are all honest, responsible, and potentially held to account for their actions, people.
There may be 100 people on the list of people who constitute a Legal Fiction.
An illustrative example could be a person named Mike who wins the lottery, buys a bunch of Solar Panels and Electric Cars and takes over the Taxi business in another Legal Fiction called a City, and he hires a bunch of drivers, and manager, and then he sits back and collects the Surplus Wealth being generated competitively.
On that list is Mike, the manager, and the drivers, and they form a Legal Fiction for accounting purposes, so that anyone, anywhere, wanting to deal with the drivers, the manager, or Mike, or all of those people on that list at once, anyone, at any time, can conveniently refer to Mike's Taxi Service instead of naming each name on the list of people.
That is the genuine article, the honest employment of, a Legal Fiction.
If the City where Mike's Taxi Service is operating is run by a False Front version of the Legal Fiction, then there will be people hired to go to see Mike and demand from Mike a piece of the action, and Mike will pay that extortion fee, one way, or the other way, and Mike cannot hold anyone to account, save for himself, each time he pays the extortion fee, since Mike will be sending his earnings, in the form of Legal Purchasing Power, to the criminals that injure Mike.
The reasoning for the False Front version of a Legal Fiction is to misdirect accountability away from the actual criminals and place that focus of willful defensive effort upon an imaginary being called The City, in this illustrative case.
You, Mike, can't fight City Hall.
That is the tune.
That is a very brief and very potentially inadequate explanation of what I mean when I wrote that sentence that did not convey to you what I meant, obviously, since your comments when using my sentence, as far as I can tell, are off the mark.
This sentence:
The United States of America, which is a corporation, a Legal Fiction, a nebulous thing to be held responsible, accountable, so as to allow the actual criminals to be untouchable, unknown, and free from any power that might compete with their exclusive monopoly of crime made legal.
The United States of America is a False Front, a crime in progress, and that crime that is still in progress started in 1788.
That is what the Study Work Report following is all about:
Update Liberty Day Challenge
If you meet me at this fence, I have over 20 years of information gathering, and other things, to offer at this fence. I do need a teacher. I do need to be schooled. That is why I am here, but how can I know when I'm being schooled?