| Moderated by: Joe Kelley | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I am going to begin speaking for the candidates in this topic thread. I've done this on another forum where the moderator ended up excluding me from tha forum (banned). The idea is to Debate the real topics that matter in the real world. I've sent challenges to Mike Gravel, Ron Paul, and Dennis Kucinich. I did so via the normal e-mail channels that those three provide to me (one person amid "The Public"). I am pretending to speak for all three candidates. Allow me to set the stage first. On YouTube (and anywhere on the network called "The Internet" and/or any "Major Media" outlet such as T.V.) a series of Debates occur where Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel debate. The Debate is called Summit by me. Summit 1 part 1 Topic: No More Legal Criminals Dennis Kucinich (DK): No moral human being alive can do nothing while legal criminals are torturing and mass murdering. Dick Cheney (and the NEOCONS) must be stopped now, not later, and this is why impeachment must move on. I (Dennis Kucinich) support No More Legal Criminals – including me. Mike Gravel: I too support No More Legal Criminals; however – I am no longer a Senator in power so I cannot vote on this current impeachment effort as a Senator in power. I can lend my support to stop the legal crime by offering a method of empowering the people directly into the legal process. Ron Paul: If the current power (democrat leadership) can bring impeachment to a vote, then, I will vote on that issue. Summit 1 part 2 Topic: Economy Ron Paul: Gold as legal tender will compete against any other form of currency. Gold as currency will flow equitably (without transferring purchasing power from earners) and this competing currency can empower people with the required tool to prosper. The current legal monopoly on legal currency held by the Federal Reserve Corporation (limited liability) can easily be seen as inadequate by comparison to many examples of more economical forms of currency suppliers. E-gold is one example. The greatest power of Gold as currency in legal terms (legal tender) is the power acquired through economical supply and demand limitations imposed by Gold (as currency). This is simpler than many economists project into the debate. Gold as legal tender will force the Federal Government to balance the federal budget because a direct link will be established between the costs of government and the income of government which, as we all should know, is the earning power of the tax base. Individual State governments may tend toward alternate laws concerning internal currency and do so at their own risk, their own cost, and very likely at their own peril, since, Gold flowing out of one State because of poor monetary legal policy will compete clearly against States maintaining a rich and economical policy. May, and this has always been the case, may the best policy win in a truly free money market. Dennis Kucinich: The currency form is secondary to the currency usage; like the cart before the horse. When blaming the form of currency for the problem there is a diversion of focus away from the abuser of currency. If the abuser of currency is hidden, then, the abuse can continue even if the currency form is changed. Perhaps a truly free money market will reach for the most accurate and least costly currency for any group of people; however – the economy is currently threatened by much more than the inflationary and deflationary insider trading policies of the Federal Reserve Board of investors. When the health of the populace is up for sale and when the highest bidder is given license to profit from sickness, then, the people will be injured for profit. This is really simple. If any organized human effort is moral, then, it spends power toward healing – it does not invest in sickness. Human organization that intends to profit from sickness will be human effort expended toward creating sickness. That cannot be tolerated in a free society. That, my friends, is truly a race to the bottom. Mike Gravel: All of these issues will continue to be unreasonable, perpetual, and self-defeating, on purpose I must add, because the power to act (legally) is monopolized by the powerful against the weak. People have to gain more power. This is as simple as it gets. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I sent out messages to the three candidates and I didn't bother sending any challenges to the morally challenged crimanals who are pining for more war profits at the expense of the tortured and mass murdered. I can't wait long for responses; cause time marches on. How about some "NEWS"? http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/volatile1.html
Ron Paul has yet to endorse impeachment. That is an abuse of power in my opinion. Impeachment is a bringing to account a criminal who has so far been 'above the law'. Where is the whole 'rule of law' principle on that oversight or, if you prefer, that ignorance of complicity? What is not known in this equation? Shouldn't the people be informed accurately? I am a 'people' and there is enough accurate information available to me to justify at the very least an indictment or the least bit of effort to find out the facts in some official manner according to some semblance of law, order, justice, and equitable commerce. How many tortured bodies does it take, huh, Ron Paul? Is there something not known about this whole grisly business of war profiteering? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I have a REPLY to my challenge e-mail from Ron Paul's agent (or program):
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/nicholas/nicholas43.html What can be brought to the table during the summit? I have a few suggestions. When two democrats (Kucinich and Gravel) are actively fighting against torturing mass murderers rather than allowing those torturing mass murderers to go on torturing and mass murdering with impunity, then, credit is due those individuals. It is an error of omission that appears to be a matter of political expedience when one person is raised above another person as the champion of right and good as if right and good was exclusively embodied into one man – alone. See? The Summit idea intends to find agreement where disagreeable things turn into large piles of dead corpses and the deaths were anything but voluntary. Yes; it is a good idea to focus on things that can be done and avoid wasting focus on things that cannot be done. The idea, again, is to be more accurate about the actual discretion or prejudice toward one and away from the other – the idea is to pool resources JUST in case one is missing something that the other may not be missing – at all. See? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/boyack1.html So many people are speaking on behalf of Ron Paul. Ron Paul, and you can correct my error if one exists, speaks on behalf of liberty. I did this too when I ran for Congress in 96. Here is the thing about Ron Paul. Why allow the torturing mass murderers to go on torturing and mass murdering when a measure of support toward the trial of suspected torturers and mass murderers could, possibly, stop at least one more torture session and stop one more murder - or two. This is the part I don't get. If it were me or my loved one on the rack, then, my position wouldn't be any different. See? I would still support the trial of suspected criminals as a means of, at least, slowing down the torture and mass murder. Perhaps during the trial, as I continue to watch the torture and mass murder of me or my loved ones, I may slip into a fit of suicidal rage - perhaps. The pain may become to great. How does the saying go? Waste not Want not |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2225984,00.htmlThe noisy, confusing US presidential campaign marks a focus on serious questions and one that transcends partisan lines The idea with the summit continues: As the Corporate Media Front Runners Splinter off from the 'Fringe' candidates on their way to their Corporate Election and as those Crooks and Liars (torturing mass murderers) spin reality into DOOMS DAY or ELSE (Pay and Suffer) the IDEA is to 'counter' the falsehood with constructive debate where the actual candidates representing honest and equitable human beings (equity is the opposite of torture and mass murder) work toward perfecting a more equitable campaign. See this? The stage can be set where the torturing mass murderers are spinning their webs of deceit on channel X T.V. "NEWS" WHILE a stage is set and billed as "THE REAL DEBATES FOR LIBERTY" or some such "NEWS" item? What do you say champ? It IS past time for a SUMMIT. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/kucinich-booted-from-iowa-debate-2007-12-12.html
Summit MAN! Gravel first now Kucinich and if Paul isn't Next, then, he's INSIDE! |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Orwell certainly was right about the use of meaningless words in politics. If we hope to remain free, we must cut through the fog and attach concrete meanings to the words politicians use to deceive us. We must reassert that America is a republic, not a democracy, and remind ourselves that the Constitution places limits on government that no majority can overrule. We must resist any use of the word “freedom” to describe state action. We must reject the current meaningless designations of “liberals” and “conservatives,” in favor of an accurate term for both: statists. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18951.htm The word 'government' can be confused with the term "State". What is the difference; and if there is no difference, then, why are two words used instead of one word? Why not use ‘voluntary’ association and organized crime or even simpler – association or crime? When the idea is to profit at the expense of innocent people by fraud or force, then, confusing terms, on purpose, is almost a no brainer. The person seeking to have someone else work while that person reaps the rewards of that work performed by someone else can hardly announce his intent honestly and accurately. Example: Hi, I am going to take what you earn. That may work when the person threatens an obviously greater injury with accurate and effective communication. Example: Hi, I’m going to take what you earn and if you resist in any way, then, look here: The person doing the taking may at that point torture and mass murder a few hundred thousand innocent human beings including babies, toddlers, children, teenagers, young adults, adults, and old people. Throw in a number of sick people, retarded people, insane people, and injured people on huge piles of rotting bodies and the honesty rises along with the stench of decaying flesh and blood. Point taken; no need to doctor the message up with fancy words or attractive illustrations; 8 x 10 glossy photos for example – no need to do that in order to get the message transferred with effective accuracy. The stink will suffice in time if the screaming does not accomplish the task currently. I’m not here to defend Mike Gravel or Dennis Kucinich and their viewpoints as representatives of the opposition. They can speak for themselves. I contend with the usage of ‘government’ as a synonym for “The State”. If an association is voluntary, then, the word used to describe that voluntary association can be ‘government’ and cannot be ‘The State’. See this? How do you or I know how to participate in a voluntary association without some form of governing principle that is agreeable to everyone volunteering to abide by the governing principle, and, if someone volunteers to enforce a injury upon an innocent person (in or not in the voluntary association), then, that person volunteers to take away someone’s freedom. Is that someone doing the injury to an innocent a ‘governor’ in or outside the voluntary association? I think not; a governor will submit a possible change in the application of the governing principle. If one, two, three, a minority, a majority, or any one other than the ‘governor’ agrees to the new change (without injuring an innocent), then, those people form a network of users of the governing principle. What is that governing principle? Do I really have to say it? Has that governing principle evaporated from our currency; our usage of language? Do No Harm. How is that done when so many people harm on purpose and do so for profit by deceit and by the application of violence against innocents? That is the problem. Solve it. If the idea is to harm, on purpose, by deceit and force if needed, then, the confusion of words is a given – or it is taken. Confusing ‘government’ with “The State” is akin to confusing The Constitution with The Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. Like this: The Declaration if Independence is the application of voluntary association or self-government. It is factual. I won’t take this crime anymore. I will earn my freedom from now on – thank you very much. The Bill or Rights is like a deal between those who have had enough (want no part of “The State”) and those who cause, lie, fraud, violently enforce, create, and maintain THE STATE. The deal is a deal with the devil. The Constitution is THE STATE. It is a man-made, man fabricated, and man enforced FALSE front for organized crime that is easily known (accurately known) as extortion; or an extortion racket. Pay or pay more. The Bill or Rights intended to derail organized crime. How did it work? Don’t go telling me what words mean according to me. That is either silly or intellectually dishonest – on purpose or at a subconscious level. Either way the lie, if it is a lie, is destructive to me. Que bono? Who gains? Democracy can be defined as no one gains at the expense of anyone else because everyone is as powerful ‘by law’ as everyone else. To suggest that ‘democracy’ can only be defined as involuntary rule by the majority upon the minority is to dictate the meaning of words despite objection. See? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/preston6.htmlIn Defense of Ron Paul, Part Two: Why Left-Libertarians Need Not Worry
I have a problem with the above because none of those 'justifications' are known to me. Who are these people who have a problem with Ron Paul's stance on Abortion, Civil Rights for racial minorities, and immigration? Anyone? My problem with Ron Paul is his lack of support for the constitution as Ron Paul fails to support impeachment against some of the worst legal criminals in history - while they continue committing torture and mass murder on his watch as he commands his portion of The Constitution. He, in fact, is 'they' due to his lack of enforcement of his representative POWER. If he has a legitimate excuse for his failure to support impeachment (his public statement was 'lack of evidence' or some other 'excuse'), then, what is it? No; the 'lack of evidence' excuse is exactly what is done during the trial that is supposed to be started by congress when the 'representative' deems that there is a need for impeachment. Who is the guy who keeps saying that the 'Neo-cons' are going to attack Iran? What were the Nazi's convicted of doing (and hung)? If Ron Paul considers Iraq to be 'constitutional', then, why say it isn't? If he considers the aggressive invasion of Iraq to be un-constitutional, then, why not support impeachment? This is a self-confessed contradiction that (without the 'real' reason stated by Ron Paul) leaves the obvious reason for failing to utilize his power to hold up the rule of law in this land i.e. POLITICAL or without the fancy PC label = LIES TO COVER UP LEGAL CRIME. I have been interested in Ron Paul since my first exposure to his messages on newsgroups awhile ago. His message remains the same. That is worth something. This failure to impeach may destroy all that consistent support for liberty. At least expose the lies. I'm not suggesting that the Neo-Cons need to go to an American Jail or Prison. They may be treated better in Iran where people are civilized. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18976.htm Ron, Mike, and dear Dennis, You may want to read that above and consider stepping outside your skins for a moment to see from our shoes. I mean to say the average Joe's shoes. I'm one of them. Your fans will mourn the loss of your leadership when it passes; meanwhile – who takes your place? Can you see this necessity? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVyEba8xov0 Come on. Start that song link above and read along with me. The neocons have accomplished much for their elite puppeteers, and have been given in return free reign to loot at will, funneling all those billions for the Iraq War into their own corporate coffers and investment portfolios. They for their part have established the foundations of a fascist state in the US and Canada, secured Iraq’s oil reserves, built permanent forward mega-bases in Iraq, successfullly destabilized Iraq and prepared it for balkanization, secured pipeline routes in Afghanistan, restored the profitable opium trade, and made progress toward achieving the first-strike capability that will be needed when the time comes to take on Russia and China. Quite a bundle of major achievements in a very short time indeed. But to our clique, the question always is, “What have you done for me lately, Sunshine?” The primary mission of the Hillary administration, under the banners of ‘doing something about climate change and peak oil’, will evidently be to undertake a massive resource grab in the global South, leading to the selective and massive elimination of certain populations through starvation. In other words, the mission is to expand the starving-Africa model globally, a process that will presumably be helped along by the usual shadowy suspects in their usual destabilizing roles. My big fear with the Bush regime was the likely attack on Iran...or was it the unleashing of the Gestapo? It was a close race in those dark days. Now we are on the verge of a regime bent on genocide on a scale that would put the Nazis to shame. I suggest that we have escaped the kettle only to fall into the frying pan. Say it isn't so - Joe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-wHzlfLKbM&feature=related It is past time - NO MORE LEGAL CRIMINALS Last edited on Mon Dec 31st, 2007 08:26 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/giles/giles19.html Bla, bla, bla, "They" are bad and 'we' shine like gold. No mention of Dennis Kuncinich (who is a congressman actually using 'The Constitution' to slow down the torture and mass murder) nor any mention of Mike Gravel who actually did use The Constitution to end the corporate rape, torture, and mass murder of Vietnamese innocents. What causes myopia? Possible answer: Business as usual How does it go…half the truth is better than no truth or the least of two evils is preferred over the worst evil? The problem with that ‘logic’ is, perhaps, not obvious – on purpose. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/giles/giles19.html Bla, bla, bla, "They" are bad and 'we' shine like gold. No mention of Dennis Kuncinich (who is a congressman actually using 'The Constitution' to slow down the torture and mass murder) nor any mention of Mike Gravel who actually did use The Constitution to end the corporate rape, torture, and mass murder of Vietnamese innocents. What causes myopia? Possible answer: Business as usual How does it go…half the truth is better than no truth or the least of two evils is preferred over the worst evil? The problem with that ‘logic’ is, perhaps, not obvious – on purpose. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/denson4.html
Note: A split occurs in 'capitalism' between those who support 'the state' and those who do not support 'the state'. I am not making this up. Here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north512.html
If a person can step back and view the conflict from a truce perspective where the viewer no longer has a stake in the outcome of the conflict, then, that can be called a disinterested viewpoint. Put down your guns and your words awhile; long enough to see clearly what will happen as the conflict continues to build. If the ‘side’ of capitalism, for example, that supports 100% reserve banking decided to step back and give the other side one day, one week, one month, and one year from Christmas to Christmas a chance to ‘give peace a chance’ and call off the dogs of war, then, the conflict would be a voluntary one. The conflict would then be a competitive race to see who can fill in the vacuum left when ‘the state’ no longer enforced the SYSTEM. If (after one year) the ‘free banking’ experiment didn’t work, then, the truce can be called off and the dogs of war unleashed again. There are many more unintended consequences associated with this type of truce called during a summit during a conflict. People may actually find agreement rather than focus upon disagreement. The removal of the enforced monopolies, for example, could inspire the counter revolutionary reactionaries to lose their target protagonist. Put more simply, for those who may as yet not see this clearly, the involuntary version of capitalism actually creates the involuntary version of socialism or visa versa. The common denominator is, and always will be, force. When ‘the planners’ of capitalism and socialism don’t get their way, then, they turn to involuntary means. Violence alone is bad enough. It is, in fact, evil when it is forced upon the innocent. The twin sister of falsehood creates that ever so ominous choice between the lesser evil. See this? If someone were to step back and look at the reasons why ‘freedom’ can’t work without deception and violence against the enemy, then, they may need to look in the mirror first. The enemy may be reacting to the ‘first strike’ ordered by your leaders many past Christmases ago. That first strike created the involuntary nature of Capitalism/Socialism, Right/Left, Conservative/Liberal, Tory/Whig, Capital/Labor, 100% reserve banking/free banking. Take a look around and find the real enemy first before pointing the finger at them. Do you really fear freedom yourself? Are the ‘socialists’ the enemy always? Have you ever actually heard one speak or did you merely jerk a knee in reaction to the color of the uniform? Last edited on Tue Jan 1st, 2008 01:19 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.newsmax.com/politics/Ron_Paul_Furious_over_Fox/2008/01/01/60958.html?s=sp&promo_code=422A-1 Reading the link above causes me to chuckle. Why you may ask? Did Ron Paul get upset when Mike Gravel was taken out? If Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel start holding their own debates, then, can those examples provide leadership? What is the point - people? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/taylor-j3.htmlTo me, voting for Kucinich, Gravel, McKinney, or Paul makes some sense even though they're unlikely to win. At least we're asking for something honest and principled during the first round of voting. Ron Paul isn't the perfect candidate and his Jeffersonianism is not as full-bodied as I would prefer (e.g., he's too weak on the ecological dimension), but at least he's a step in the right direction and his ability to attract a wide range of grassroots support is commendable. He's not the only good choice, but he's no lunatic and there is some logic behind his campaign. It's not everything, but it is something. In a rigged system with a populace divided by secondary issues and exploited by a bipartisan elite, it may be the best we can do in 2008. See here; the need to BYPASS the PR 'establishment' (I call it the Interest/Profit/Wage Paying/SYSTEM Limited Liability Corporate Nation State) is all too evident in this current 'leadership' supply aiming to meet a demand. Is that too hard to understand (I get people telling me I can't write for shit)? If the idea is to be represented accurately by empowering someone into a position of control over many varied collective forces, then, why play the game of the opposition? Why not work the game in our favor? Why wrestle with rats in a dark cold dungeon? Why attack sharks in the deep water? Move the debate to the internet where the market for information does not exclude accurate information? Leave the dungeon full of rats behind sooner rather than too late. Sure – it may be a small step in this round because the balance of power remains tipped toward the legal criminals (torturing mass murderers for profit) today. It is past time to think ahead for a tomorrow that isn’t apocalyptic – in purpose (again – for profit). Get the real front runners together and showing how real leaders debate. If they aren’t real leader, then, they won’t lead. See? They follow. Don’t Lead don’t follow It is past time. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
But that’s the choice we have at the moment. In Iowa, I think there are steps people could take to start to challenge that system, if they wanted to. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18991.htm ? Last edited on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 10:54 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79IoHFaFTNc ! |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.anarchism.net/forum/board_entry.php?id=21122&page=0&order=last_answer&descasc=DESC&category=0 |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19038.htm No Escape from War and Unemployment By Paul Craig Roberts
Alone their power is wasted against each other; see? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. If both 'sides' refuse to seek an agreement to combine power in defense against evil, then, guess what happens? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12189
What about Mike Gravel? In case you are ignorant (due to censorship or whatever): http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Mike+Gravel+Iran+ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0-wYkob6Kg Who can count? http://www.iranbodycount.org/analysis/ Last edited on Sun Jan 13th, 2008 01:47 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.rawstory.com/news/mochila/Kucinich_OK_d_for_debate_appeal_pla_01142008.html
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/260.html What would have happened if Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich 'went on strike' after Mike Gravel was first censored? What would happen if those three began their own 'legitimate' debates where any candidate was welcome? See? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul431.html That is old. What is the story now? If the idea is Free currency markets, then, any currency is 'legal' (so long as criminals are not injuring innocent victims by fraud or violence with their version of 'legal' currency) and if any currency is legal, then, gold will compete against, say, energy currency and even currencies like the Euro or the Yuan right here in the good ole' U.S.A. Gold is fine, or course, the thing about it is; will it be able to compete in a truely free (free from fraud and violence) market (market anarchism) if a more accurate and less costly currency isn't blocked from the competition? Many well researched and proven competitive forms of currency have rendered gold to be less accurate and more costly in U.S. and world history. One example is what Ben Franklin described to the British before the Revolutionary War. Another is 'labor notes' invented by Josiah Warren before the Civil War. There are also examples of stamp script used in Germany before WWII. Lysander Spooner also described A New System of Paper Currency backed by land ownership. The point here is to point out that the Government that governs least governs best (besides the 'government' that does, in fact, manage to keep just ahead of the criminals to lessen the criminal's injuries to innocents) and if Ron Paul is to 'out-law' outlawing honest competition in money markets, then, why push GOLD down the people's throats? I have a theory that suggests a need to shackle government spending with the GOLD standard; however - why impose that crippling demand on those who would rather not be hamstrung by it? Does Ron Paul suggest that everyone will abuse their freedom to create and maintain free market currency and become criminal frauds and extortion racketeers just like the Fed is now (without his 'help')? In this one detail – the critical importance of the gold coinage – I believe lies the key to establishing a new gold standard. I am reading from the link at the top of this page while I comment. So far the suggested plan to inject the U.S. with a Gold Standard does not 'bar' competition in currency, rather, the suggestion is to employ (with tax revenue, involuntary tax as it currently exists) purchasing power to create gold coins and then use those gold coins as 'legal' tender. I believe that this can also work but only if there is no 'legal' incentive to trade gold for imports where (Gresham's law) 'our' currency leaves the country and 'we' can no longer pay taxes with 'legal' tender (gold) because 'we' no longer have any gold (we now have the imported stuff). If I am not mistaken the problem of gold becoming scarce (and therefore costing more to get) was engineered by people before, during, and after the "Revolutionary War (1776)" as 'legal" paper currency was printed as payments while only 'gold' was accepted as tax payments. No foreign trader wanted the paper in exchange for imports and therefore the gold left 'the people' inspiring the creation of a 'black market' currency called whiskey. That black market currency (whiskey) was soon 'taxed' or 'out-lawed' (it was a competitive currency) where the penalty for failing to pay the 'whiskey tax' (with gold) was jail time (no more ability to earn purchasing power), fines (payable in gold), and forfeiture (loss of the means to earn), which, if you can imagine was the very reason for fighting the so called "revolutionary war" (out with the old bosses and in with the new bosses), so, Shays's Rebellion before "The Constitution" and The Whiskey Rebellion after The Constitution, where, people rebelled against the injustice of taxing people into slavery with a currency pyramid scheme. Paper on one hand and Gold on the other hand is the pyramid scheme and the victims are the tax payers who have to pay taxes with Gold and are paid with paper. The government acts as the check valve between criminals and victims. The government says: You can pay the people with paper (corporations can); however - all taxes must be paid with gold. I will read on with Ron Paul’s suggestion and I will look for that check valve. What must be in place is a protection for corporations where the people running those corporations can issue their own paper currency for payments and non-corporations are penalized for doing the same thing. See? If Joe Blow wants to compete in the currency business, then, the government makes that too costly for Joe to compete with license fees (including required license test studies and costs) while a 'company' can hire one agent to pay these 'fees'. The idea is to 'protect' people from the 'counterfeiters' (Joe wanting to print his own currency) whereas, in reality, if Joe prints too much of his paper I.O.U.s, then, no one will want them. On the other hand; if Joe is allowed to print at his own cost (his own cost in reputation) then Joe can get as much 'investment' power (purchasing power) as he is able to freely. If his 'currency' is good, then, he will be able to compete based upon his own merit - not as a 'government' sponsored 'privilege'. In short the idea is to find out if anyone is out-lawed in the currency business according to the Ron Paul suggestion. What we must first do is get the coinage into circulation, and then build the political base to lock the government's fiscal folly with golden handcuffs. I see exactly what I suspected. Ron Paul does envision the shackling of government with a gold standard and I agree with this so long as it does not out-law competition in money markets outside of the 'government' business. The thing about Ron Paul, one must admit, is that he is in with the theives so he knows how to fix them. What about us Joe Blows? They don't need to agree or even understand the fine points of monetary theory to own gold coins, trade gold coins, or use gold coins to satisfy part of their marginal-utility demand for cash balances. This is speaking to me. I do not understand those 'theories' since I do understand the facts about costs. The cost principle is a fact - not a theory. I can go on and on about how the Gold Standard (with 'marginal-utility') is very poor when comparing that 'theory' to an energy currency fact, where, the greater the supply of energy currency the greater will be the purchasing power of that currency because the costs of production are reduced by that 'over-supply'. This is counter to the Carl Menger inspired Austrian scarce economic 'theory'. I don't think that Mises was infected with that bug. Anyway; there are more ways to skin a cat than energy currency or a Gold Standard and that is why (as Mises points out) FREE MONEY MARKETS are best (so long as 'free' doesn't mean free to injure innocents by fraud or violence). I would love to see a purely private, free-market monetary system with any honest manufacturer able to produce coins, as Americans saw in California from 1849 to 1864. There must certainly be no restrictions on the private production of coins, but I believe that getting the US Mint further into the act, producing a gold coinage with some of the mystique of the government, will be useful in the further political stages of monetary reform. Honest money, after all, is a political objective; it is fitting that people should demand honesty from their government, as well as an economic policy that permits individuals to compete honestly. An official coinage that reflects honest bullion weights is a powerful symbol of the gold standard we support. That is fine so long as Ron Paul doesn't come down with some punishment when an honest manufacturer produced paper currency to be used as paper currency between anyone willing an voluntary partner based upon honest and honorable exchange agreements. If, for example, Ron Pauls suggestion includes a law that punishes anyone manufacturing a 'bill of credit' because (according to his 'theory') he thinks a 'bill of credit' is 'inflationary', the, that is the confession on his part that he is a 'monetary crank' (to use the Rothbardian ad hominem) and a despot. If person A wants to print an I.O.U. and person B accepts it based upon the documented promise written on the I.O.U., then, it isn't any of Ron Paul's damn business. See? If Ron Paul wants to shackle government with the restraints of a Gold Standard, then, by all means do so - please. If Ron Paul wants to shackle everyone else with the same 'penalties' for failing to abide by his version of economic theory, then, he is can do so by out-lawing the competition based upon his 'theory' instead of allowing all competition to compete (so long a no one is frauded or violently injured against their knowledge or against their will) in a FREE MONEY MARKET. If, for example, a law out-laws 'bills of credit', then, there is an obvious fear of the competition and if the justification for out-lawing 'bills of credit' is based upon a 'theory' that suggests that voluntary 'bills of credit' between free traders is 'inflationary' according to the 'theory', then, that is 'future crime' being outlawed by someone who will abuse the power of government to impose a currency monopoly and out- law the competition. It will be the same damn thing under a new false front. Second, as Mises understood, the Federal Reserve and existing banks have to be kept separate from the remonetization of gold until the progress of popular support is broad and deep enough that special interest lobbying will not pervert the system. By avoiding any use of a dollar denomination on the coins, the Federal Reserve System is automatically kept out of the picture during this developmental period. The dollar denomination is today a monopoly trademark for the Federal Reserve System. Warren (Equitable Commerce) and Andrews (The Science of Society) illustrate the need to have a standard measurement too. Not having a standard measurement is like a carpenter or machinist measuring stock with an erasable stick or a dial caliper with a blank face. The carpenter makes a mark on the stick and then uses the stick to cut a new piece at the right length. That works for the carpenter. What happens when the carpenter gives the stick to a helper? The helper says things like: "Is this the outside of your mark or the inside of your mark?" The carpenter says: "I don't remember; most of the time I use the inside of the mark." See? If currency isn't accurate, then, it costs more. If currency doesn't have a 'scale' that is universal (good for everyone), then, there is a whole lot of room for someone to bend the margins and get more for less because the measurement is ambiguous. That is why frauds want 'fiat' currency. That is not a universal attack on any paper currency. Paper currency can be useful, certainly, and it can be standardized based upon THE STANDARD. Gold can be the standard. I prefer to make the standard a NEWTON. That is my idea concerning Energy currency. How long will it take for anyone to adopt my idea? How much time is left before the neo-cons destroy the Earth? The choice for advocates of a gold-coin monetary system, therefore, is straightforward: either we move ahead with a program for US gold coins denominated by weight, with no face value in terms of dollars – thereby starting the transition period immediately – or we sit on our hands, perhaps for decades, debating the fine points of banking theory, until the paper money system collapses around us. Even then, it is not obvious that the collapse of the paper money system would bring about the political pressure necessary to restore a gold standard. We might end up with controls on wages, prices, credit, and exchange controls instead of a gold-coin standard. We are on the same page here - again. It makes no sense to divide actions against the most horrible criminals who have infected the human species since time began, so, find an agreeable defensive plan and go with it. So far I have not seen the killer where Ron Paul out-laws the competition in Money Markets, rather, his 'nationalism' intends to strengthen this thing called The U.S.A. in competition with other 'countries' by creating a standard by which economic trade can measure economic trade. A voluntary standard is preferred over an enforced one; however - I'm not in a position of power to do either and I know, for a fact, that a standard of measure is economically much more powerful than what happens without one. The power of falsehood is unleashed without a standard of economic measure and human beings really need to know this fact sooner rather than too late. So long as the conversion agency performed its role, it would also be impossible for the Federal Reserve System to produce a monetary inflation because the conversion agency, which would be completely separate from the government's banking activities, would be engaged in the process of absorbing excess dollars from circulation, in exchange for the troy-ounce coins that it issues. If the Federal Reserve made the opposite mistake, as it has often done in the past, of overly restricting the money supply, the market could always sell coins to the conversion agency to obtain any dollars demanded. A precise balance would be achieved between the general public's demand for money in the form of coin and its demand in the form of bank notes or deposit accounts with banks by the existence of the conversion agency as something separate from the Federal Reserve. Ron Paul talks about Gresham's Law and please don't get too confused about that because it doesn't need to be so confusing. If you print your own money (think about a 'time card' where you punch in and out at work) and your fellow employee prints his own money (he punches the same clock) and both of you are turning in your money to an employer, then, which one is better than the other? Think about that awhile. You punch the time clock and your fellow employee punches the time clock. You both turn in a card (money) to an employer. Which money does your employer accept and which does your employer reject (supposing, of course, that the employer can only take one and not two time cards)? Well...this is too easy really. The employer will take the one he wants to keep and the employer will reject the one he doesn't want no matter what is written on the card. That is the point. That is precisely the point and don't let anyone else tell you different - please. The confusion of Gresham's Law is confusing on purpose so that someone has the power to reject what he doesn't want and accept what he does want based upon an arbitrary decision on his part. The fix is accurate measuring and reductions of costs. Go back to the time cards and see this clearly. What happens if you produce twice as much in the same amount of time as your co-worker and you get back to the same situation where you and your fellow employee are turning in the same time card (currency). You also know that your fellow employee has someone else punch is time clock in before he arrives at work late. You also know that the fellow-employee spent half his day under the employers desk if you know what I mean. Your time card is good. Your fellow employee's time card is bad. Now tell me how Gresham's Law works? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out. The benefit of a standard measure is a time clock that is honest and universal to all. On the time card, with good, accurate, and cost-less currency would be all the information required for accurate exchanges - not just time. One more point may help brighten the idea bulb over the head. If things move along as the are and human labor becomes more and more valuable because fewer and fewer people MUST work, then, the tables will turn and know this or trust this now just for your own sake and only to peek ahead and see the possibilities. Take the same time clock scenario above and imagine 5 employers knocking on your door looking for someone, anyone, to do some work. The same 5 employers are knocking on your fellow workers door (the one under the desk). You decline to work today because you want to see what happens when your fellow worker spends some time at his new job. Here is the thing: When the work isn't done by your fellow worker, then, the employers return to your door. You earn your living because you are the genuine article - you are not fake. Gresham's law is this: Fake shit is forced and sold (false advertising) into a state of value that does not exist without the lies and without the violence. Strip away the lies and the violence and there isn't any Gresham's law because people are armed with the knowledge of what is genuine and what is NOT. See? The fact that the troy ounce of gold is well defined and the paper dollar has no fixed referent at all should be made the focus of continued education and debate, just as we are now doing. That is a reference to the Federal Reserve paper dollar (inaccurate money). The task at hand, therefore, is to remove every roadblock to the realization of the will of the majority. The sentiment for gold must be mobilized. The question is no longer "Why do we need a gold standard?" but "How do we get it enacted?" To restore the gold standard to its central role in our system of constitutional government, we must lead a second kind of American revolution, a popular movement for honest money. Again - that was an old article and now is now. There isn't any mention of road blocking the creation of paper currency by anyone if someone wants to give it a try. The check valve of gold on the government would then cause the government to spend only as much as it receives like cutting up its credit card. I think a big problem with that plan is the number of people in government who depend upon that credit card to live at the expense of their victims - for nothing in return. People who have grown accustomed as parasites will fight against that plan. People really aren’t stupid. People who earn their living will see the value in it and the question remains to be answered as to their level of support for it. By no means can my support for this plan be synonymous with support for any punishment perpetrated against people creating and maintaining a more accurate and less costly currency voluntarily traded between welcome individuals where no innocent people are inured for profit. That last statement does not apply to the parasitic criminals who will certainly see FREE MONEY MARKETS as an injury to their current flow of purchasing power from those who earn it. Last edited on Sun Jan 20th, 2008 11:55 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.garynorth.com/public/2963.cfm I read it (most of it) and I have to say BULSHIT. The capitalists are arming up to defeat the socialists. Why? Why not fight the criminals? Why do people ignore the facts? If all the Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich supporters began to CO-operate rather than fight each other, then, the criminals will be less powerful EXPONENTIALLY. Gary North likens the political campaign to Paine’s Crisis and I too see this; however – the Crisis starts when the criminals are no longer in power not before. The current situation is more like the days leading up to 1776 before the war starts when the British Royal power still held favor and control across the pond. Suggesting that the Crisis has started is like a little girl throwing stones at a tank and claiming that War has started. The criminals won’t bother wasting the ammo. The REAL chore (the crisis) will be when a non-establishment (legal criminal) is elected into office and the criminals will treat that elected official the same as any other threat; the war will then be on. For wall we know Ron Paul has already be bought, extorted, threatened, or compromised on some manner. This is why the POWER of the non-criminal working and producing (including business owners, managers, and others who earn and produce a living) force (POWER) must set aside PARTY politics and join forces to COUNTER the establishments freak show. Come on Gary! You must know that this whole ‘debate’ (election) buffoonery is a farce on purpose. It is a false front. WHY NOT CONDUCT A REAL DEBATE? Get all the Ron Paul people and all the Dennis Kucinich people and all the Mike Gravel people to invite all the other candidates to a live, real, open, and professional DEBATE and invite any broadcast medium WORLD WIDE to cover the event. Why wait for the criminals to DICTATE the progress whereby THEY LOSE POWER. It isn’t going to happen. Forget about it The power is there to utilize and it is in the people where it always will be until there are no more people. It is past time to bury the old party politics and get down to the business of throwing the rascals out for good. The Crisis will start after Election Day and only IF the legal criminals are throw out of POWER. They know it. Why is this so hard to see? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNXP1djL27A No mention of Mike Gravel "Follow the Money". |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://youtube.com/watch?v=py8cXlLyX18 http://youtube.com/watch?v=EqvzXQLPtMU&feature=related Last edited on Sun Jan 27th, 2008 04:00 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/brimelow3.html
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19243.htmLibertarians preach the morality of the market, and socialists preach the morality of the state. Those convinced of the market’s morality want de-regulation; those convinced of the state’s morality want regulation. On what planet? Why make things harder than they really can be perceived? I am going to link and quote someone who defined ‘socialism’ in 1850 or so and there was no mention of morality of The State. Please note that someone is reaping the rewards earned when divisions are created out of falsehood. http://www.anarchism.net/scienceofsociety.htm What, then, if this be so, is this common element? In what great feature are Protestantism, Democracy, and Socialism identical? I will answer this interrogatory first, and demonstrate the answer afterward. Protestantism, Democracy, and Socialism are identical in the assertion of the Supremacy of the Individual,--a dogma essentially contumacious, revolutionary, and antagonistic to the basic principles of all the older institutions of society, which make the Individual subordinate and subject to the Church, to the State, and to Society respectively. Not only is this supremacy or SOVEREIGNTY OF THE INDIVIDUAL, a common element of all three of these great modern movements, but I will make the still more sweeping assertion that it is substantially the whole of those movements. It is not merely a feature, as I have just denominated it, but the living soul itself, the vital energy, the integral essence or being of them all. Name calling is a function of pre-judgment, so…, why do it? Why, for example, does someone blame ‘socialists’ for this moral justification of The State? My answer is this: “every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.” Carl Menger (1840 -1921) The 'socialists' are the bad guys according to the 'capitalists', or so the story goes, meanwhile the crimnals laugh all the way to the bank. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/perry/perry40.html |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I am going to cut and paste from here: http://www.restoretherepublic.com/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,27/func,view/id,863/catid,34/limit,6/limitstart,6/
MrRekoj, Last edited on Sat Feb 16th, 2008 12:14 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul434.html
Last edited on Sat Feb 16th, 2008 12:19 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul434.html ++++++++++ Last edited on Sat Feb 16th, 2008 12:21 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
++++++++ |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
MrRekoj, |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXCkgz1Y-Bk&feature=related Note: The censorship routine begins as a part of the process. Of many possible candidates there are legitimate efforts to narrow down the possibilities (the opposite would be everyone voting for everyone). Mike Gravel was the first person to be included and then censored from the presidential candidates who qualified to be on the ballot (party ballot) as seen from the two party ONLY system media. In other words; no one spoke up about censorship against third party candidates during the major media debates. However – a new media (internet) offers a connection between people who demand a legitimate election process and candidates. That media has linked many people together with the POWER to pool resources in defense of LIBERTY or for any other reason. The ones who intend to plan out and carry through with the defense of LIBERTY ought to build a bigger tent, so to speak, and avoid becoming that which is abhorrent (censoring legitimate candidates). Example: Ron Paul censors Dennis Kucinich by not supporting Impeachment (purely party politics). Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich censure Mike Gravel as the first candidate (of the two party SYSTEM) to be censored by the Major Media (removed from the debates). |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/case/case13.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/case/case24.html
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.groundreport.com/Business/Confusion-on-Money_1 Last edited on Mon Mar 3rd, 2008 07:21 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_freeThe rise of "freeconomics" is being driven by the underlying technologies that power the Web. It may be time to shed the scarceconomic monetary crankisms being passed off as 'theory'. I'm speaking specifically about the Limited Liability Corporate Nation State Interest/Profit/Wage Paying SYSTEM. From this: “every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.” Carl Menger (1840 -1921) Power works this way: As power reaches over-abundance the cost of power reach zero while purchasing power increases because power reduces the cost of production. That is opposite the scarce economic facts associated with production of things that have no power (no power to reduce costs). Consider the power-less example of interest earning currency whereby the supplier has a monopoly on the supply (such as a legal entity has when competative currencies are outside the law or fined, taxes, and punished out of the market). The increase in currency (power-less currency) production (inflation) lowers the price (interest rate) and INCREASES the cost of production while purchasing power reduces. The monetary cranks blame that on someone named Keynes. It is false. The blame rests on false people who are false on purpose, for profit - at the expense of their hapless victims.
Think now. Why is money scarce? http://howto.wired.com/wiki/Make_Money_Around_Free_Content Last edited on Tue Feb 26th, 2008 01:55 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/red-state-triumph.html I tried to read the above and to offer a measure of why that ispiration evaporated I offer this: http://www.theonion.com/content/video/diebold_accidentally_leaks If the accounting process is false, why credit it to be true? Why support by innuendo that nothing is wrong with the account? Accuracy does mean something specific. Why ignore it? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19453.htm
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Restore+the+republic That is a search for Restore the Republic dot com. My lastest work on the two currency products utilized to restore power to the people was published on the forum on that site. The forum is no longer loading. It may be a temporary problem. It may be a site vanishing act of some kind. Why? Is anyone curious? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6046520409389956642&hl=en Please note: A: Inflation B: Interest rates at 20 percent Those are the two sides of the evil monopoly currency fraud. Please see this as fact or expose my error. Anyone can corner the currency market and gain a powerful share of that market by offering no interest loans for home mortgages and one percent interest loans on new energy production and consumption. Competition in markets forces competitors to provide lower cost and higher quality products or reduce their market share. That is how things work in reality. It is unreal to lie about how the only choices are inflation or high interest rates. That is false. High interest rates are reasonably charged, as a cost, to people who prove to be high risk borrowers. If the people control their own currency the people would charge the government a high interest rate for borrowing currency because the people running the government prove, by their actions, to be a high risk borrower. See this? When true becomes false and when the world is falsely perceived or up-side-down ‘The Government’ owns the money. That is false. People own the money. When the people regain this power over money the people will have the power to charge “The Government” a high interest rate for borrowing the people’s money. That sets things back to right, true, just, and peaceful prosperity – for posterity. See this? If, for example, “The Government” goes about the world torturing and mass murdering, if that happens, “The People” raise the interest rate on “The Government” and punish “The Government” for mal-investment. Do you need to know the facts? Example: The Iraq War was sold as a money making venture where the legal criminals (Bush/Cheney/Neocons) borrowed the cash to conduct to war from “The People” on the promise of paying for The War with oil profits. This is fact. That is how it went down. The War was sold as a money-making venture to gain more Oil POWER by taking oil from the Iraqi people. This is fact people. Don’t lie about it. So…’The People’ are now finding out how “The Neocons” conned the people into this mal investment. The Iraqi Oil isn’t really paying for anything other than more and more Oil profits for the Oil Cartel as Oil is made more and more scarce (raising the price of oil). The profits go right to the legal criminals while ‘The People’ pay the costs. So...who is paying the INTEREST rate? Enter stage left: The Federal Reserve Banking Cartel or MONOPOLY MONEY All interest payments go to that Cabal of legal criminals. See? Now it is easy to see the connection between the Banking Cartel and the Oil Cartel. They are in the same “Currency” game. One deals with Oil currency (a power) and the other deals with monetary currency (another power) and both steal the POWER from The People through SPECIAL INTEREST. This is completely up-side-down. Think in terms of ‘who’ and ‘whom’. Who earns credit? Who creates debt? The people earn credit. The legal criminals create debt. Who has to pay the debt? Who profits? The people pay the debt. The legal criminals profit. If the people stop loaning power (or charge more interest for loans of power) to these criminals the end result will be less mal-investment. How about this angle: What is the difference between an average Joe who borrows more money for a new car than the average Joe can possibly repay and the average dictator who begins a war of aggression that cannot possibly be victorious? See that please. Don’t lie about it. The average Joe receives the new car and drives around for awhile. Eventually the payments on the loan end. Joe never could afford the new car. It was a case of mal-investment. The bank is just as guilty as Joe because it takes two to loan and borrow this money stuff (purchasing power). The average dictator invades another country to steal the oil and before long the war turns into a quagmire. Eventually the piles of tortured bodies are too high and the dictator can’t make any more payments on the loan. Guess who the dictator borrowed the power from? This is a relationship people. The people and the government relate. One earns credit. The other creates debt. Get that straight. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
+++++++++++ This action made private individuals who had been previously exempt from federal income taxes now liable for them since the general public began consuming and making large amounts of private credit. Notice all the case law prior to 1933 which affirms that income is a profit or a gain which arises from a government granted privilege. After 1933, however, the case law no longer emphatically declares that income is exclusively corporate profit or that it arises from a privilege. +++++++++++ +++++++++++ A major purpose behind the 16th Amendment was to give Congress authority to enforce private law collections of revenue. Congress had the plenary power to collect income taxes arising from government granted privileges long before the 16th Amendment was ratified and the amendment was unnecessary, except to give Congress the added power to enforce collections under private law: i.e. income from whatever source. +++++++++++ +++++++++++ Congress has the power to abolish the Federal Reserve System and thus destroy the private credit system. However, the people have it within their power to strip the fed of its powers, rescind private credit and get the bankers to pay off the National Debt would Congress fail to act. +++++++++++ +++++++++++ The key to all this is 12 USC 411, which declares that Federal Reserve notes shall be redeemed in lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank. +++++++++++ +++++++++++ If the Fed is under no obligation to redeem its notes, then no one has an obligation to make a return of income. It is that simple! +++++++++++ ++++++++++ According to Bonvier, public money is the money which Congress can tax for public purposes mandated by the Constitution. Private credit when collected as revenue can fund programs and be spent for purposes not cognizable by the Constitution. ++++++++++ +++++++++ Never forget that private credit is funding the destruction of our country. +++++++++ David Merrill, The text and movie are very simple to understand as presented as far as I am concerned. It is easy to see. I can summarize and comment on that information (information is currency). Private Private commerce is separate from Public commerce by involuntary law. I have to add the involuntary word because I have this thing about being accurate when passing on currency from one person to another person. When I am involved the focus will be toward greater accuracy. You can focus on whatever you choose. Private commerce is separate from Public commerce because people will starve to death without private commerce and because Public commerce requires an unrecoverable cost associated with enforcement of involuntary commerce. In other words: If all commerce were Public commerce the people would work to death in order to enforce their own slavery. The flip side of that relationship (involuntary association) is a situation where all commerce becomes Private. If all commerce were Private the people may, and this is not proven, the people may not invest in their own security against criminals (single criminals and organized criminals). This summary may appear to be inaccurate to the reader who may have watched the link and read the text offered by David Merrill. If the reader is at all confused by the link and the text offered by David Merrill it may be a good idea to discuss that confusion. My intention is to summarize the principles before moving onto the interesting stuff. The interesting stuff is the stuff that secures the people from crime and allows people to work toward prosperity for their own current lives and for posterity. The principle difference between Public activity (commerce) and Private activity (by involuntary law) is the principle of free will. A Private activity is free from involuntary association, by law, and a Public activity is shackled with involuntary enforcement. It is very easy to know when activity moves from Private to Public activity. Someone will offer two choices when activity moves from Private to Public activity. The two choices are these: Choice A: Obey Choice B: Suffer Punishment If anyone, including David Merrill, harbors a false perspective concerning this accurate fact please consider exposing that falsehood now. Again: PRIVATE equals voluntary association. PUBLIC equals involuntary association. The biggest problem I have with the link and the text offered by David Merrill is the lack of focus on the principle difference between Public and Private human activity. The link and the text expose criminal activity concerning money and currency. Criminal activity is neither PUBLIC nor PRIVATE unless someone, anyone really, considers all involuntary associations to be criminal. The apparent assumption in the movie link and the text is such that PUBLIC (involuntary ) associations are LAWFUL and RIGHT and MORAL and NON-CRIMINAL. In other words; the text and the movie apparently project legitimacy for specific involuntary associations such as, for example, The Constitution of the United States. This does not have to, by default, cause conflict between individual people. This can be seen as simple fact. The Constitution of the United States is a written document prescribing an involuntary union of states. It is all there in black and white. Ignoring the facts won’t make the facts go away. Anyway…lets assume that it is OK to enforce an involuntary association for the specific purpose of securing the union or preserving liberty by collecting the power required to defend against criminal individuals and criminals gangs. This isn’t too hard to swallow even for someone like me who does not agree that involuntary associations are necessary. I can suppose, for the moment, that people must pay, or else suffer punishment, when criminals are roaming the neighborhood injuring innocent people as robbery, rape, torture, and murder. In other words; when robbers, rapists, torturers, and mass murderers are injuring innocent people currently, happening right now, it is a good idea to exert some pressure upon your fellow man (and woman) to invest in reducing those specific crimes and to ensure that the investments earn an effective remedy. OK, so, suppose a power is put in place to collect these taxes for our mutual defense as we all agree to secure our liberty. Suppose, in fact, that we enact a power that enforces the collection of a tax upon all who reside within our reach. This is not often the way a person describes ‘our government’. It is an accurate way to describe it. This should alert the reader since falsehood is difficult to find once falsehood has infected the mind. Suppose, then, that ‘we the people’ agree to enforce our-selves to pay a PUBLIC tax. We, in short, require (obey or be punished) tax payments to ‘the government’ – or else. Please know, for a fact, that this is what has been done and this is what causes the division between PUBLIC and PRIVATE. The reason why the division exists is something that can be called “Special Interest”. In other words; certain people are allowed to become PUBLIC people while everyone not allowed to become PUBLIC people are left as PRIVATE people. A PUBLIC person has ‘special’ powers. A PUBLIC person can use the POWER given to the PUBLIC person in many specific ways and these specific POWERS are enumerated specifically and presumably these SPECIAL POWERS are accurately prescribed (much like a doctor prescribes a specific cure for a specific disease rather than, say, prescribing blood letting for a headache) and these POWERS are not, at all, ambiguous. To allow these POWERS to become ambiguous or unspecific is to court disaster and open the door for ‘The Government’ to become CRIME. Quote time: +++++++++++ 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. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him, out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others. ++++++++++ So…the POWER to tax is very specific because the POWER to tax can easily turn into organized crime. It would not take much confusion or ambiguity to hide criminal robbery behind this POWER to tax. It would not take much confusing language and it would not take a whole lot of confusing TEXT to disguise a criminal gang taking over the POWER to tax and make that POWER a criminal power instead of a PUBLIC TRUST. People are busy working. People do not have the time and energy required to make sense of too much confusing jargon. The POWER to tax must be specific and it must be simple and it must be easy to understand and it must be universal, fair, and equitable or this POWER will be criminal, unequal, unfair, inequitable, and destructive to a point whereby the people (Private) are working themselves to death for their own enslavement. Now, suppose that the private people (the people) agree to support this involuntary tax collection business and this thing is then called PUBLIC activity. Now, and this is very easy to understand, the PUBLIC activity has the power to accumulate more POWER. I can help make this very easy to understand by making this personal. Suppose you were given the license to print money (purchasing power) and you were given the license to collect taxes (in the form of purchasing power). Yesterday you had to work for a living. Today you have the license to print legal money (Public money/currency) and you have the license to collect taxes. Which is easier for you to gain more power quickly? Yesterday you had to work for a living and you had to please everyone you meet and you had to provide all your associates with their desires. This is PRIVATE stuff. You go out and ask people if they need something and if these PRIVATE people say: “Yes, I need lunch.” “I need a new house.” “I want a new car.” “My car is broke.” “My house needs a new roof.” if they say that and you supply what they demand, the way they demand it, then you are gainfully employed in an honest job. Good for you. You earn a living. That, my fellow Amercians, is the Amercian dream. It is called: WORK. Yesterday you were PRIVATE and you had to provide a demand. You worked. Today, a new day, you get your license to print POWER and you get your license to TAX. You get to create PUBLIC LEGAL TENDER today. You get to collect TAXES or send people to court and jail for failing to pay TAXES. Which is better? Three choices: A. Work for a living (PRIVATE) B. Manufacture legal tender (MONEY) C. Collect Taxes Which is easier? Which cost more? Which choice requires more work from you? I can help walk the confused, if someone reading this is still confused, through these three choices. A. Working for a living requires a lot of work because people demanding things would rather do these things themselves unless you can do these things cheaper. Working for a living requires a lot of very effective work, the best at this job, and if you are not up to snuff you will starve at that employment. Find a job where you can compete and earn your share of the market. B. All you have to do is add zeros to your bank account. That is it. Now you are very, very, powerful. Add a lot more zeros and you are that much more powerful. The work required to defend your power is done by grunts. These grunts get sent to places like Iraq to die in defense of your personal (PUBLIC) power. You have the license. You got it. You own it. You control it. Add as many zeros as you see fit. You have this power. You may have to work at deceiving the PUBLIC. That is the catch. C. People really don’t like being told what to do and this TAX collection job isn’t going to be easy. The catch here is the same catch as catch B. You have to be able to deceive people into a belief in the legitimacy of robbery. It can’t be easy. I’ve commented at length concerning the linked video and the text. My prescription is specific. Two products: One is an interest free loan for home mortgages for qualified borrowers. The other is a one percent interest loan for new energy production and consumption. I can’t, for the life of me, figure out why people are averse to my prescription. My guess is that the people have been publicized. I can explain as demanded. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.mises.org/story/2918
I'm reading and finding question begging, myth, Straw-Man fabrication, and apology for the status quo - which included torture and mass murder. Seriously; the author appears to create a ‘just price theory’ based upon his selective misinterpretations of other people’s thoughts. I’ve seen this many times. The author is picking out (and by doing so he is excluding other) meaning of a term called Fair Price. Anyone claiming to support a Fair Price, according to the author will be guilty of being stupid. That is basically what is being reported by the author. You can, of course, form your own judgment, or fairness, concerning the meaning of the words published. Consider the meaning of the word EQUITABLE: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/equitable Here is a more detailed definition of equitable commerce: http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf The idea is to avoid passing on costs from one person to another person. The idea is to consider how a free market works and know that reducing costs increase purchasing power. Know that competition tends to inspire pricing at cost or as near to cost as possible as a means of gaining market share and providing a cost-less product while maintaining high quality. The lagal criminal types will convince you that price and cost are two different things. They torture and mass murder for profit. Why do you beleive them? Do you torture and mass murder for profit too? Price is cost and only when someone can manage to pass on cost to someone else does price become higher or lower than cost. If you don't see this then don't accuse me of being economically stupid. You would be the stupid one. If you do see this and you do know that passing on costs from one person to another person is the difference between price and cost, then please know that someone intending to pass on costs will be inspired to hide costs. Hiding costs is done so as to pass on costs. This happens all the time. People claim to be offering a 'discount' and fail to provide the accurate cost. You get a 'discount' from a price that is 10 times above the cost and the 'discount' is 5 times above the cost. This is called fraud. I'll read on to see how much more fraudulent the author manages to 'pass on the costs' of being economically stupid. I'm back. The author speaks about the 'socialism' of Bush. The author also calls Bush "The President". Please know that Bush is a capitalist. That should be clear. Bush is not a socialist. There are two types of socialists and two types of capitalists. There are the voluntary capitalists. Bush is not one. There are the involuntary capitalists. That is Bush. There are the voluntary socialists. Stalin was not one. There are the involuntary socialists. Stalin was one. Please be clear about this big, it is HUGE, lie. Bush is a capitalist. Bush is moving ever closer to Fascist (which is a blend of Capitalism and Politics). Fascism is involuntary capitalism. Communism is involuntary socialism but that is not as clearly known since hippies in the 60s (the free love types) were communists and they had nothing whatsoever to do with Stalin's tortures and mass murders unless you count the effort to end the Vietnam War. I repeat: BUSH IS A CAPITALIST The author lies. If Bush were not a capitalist he would have been impeached already. And "The President" comment. Who is he kidding? A president is elected by the people. Bush was elected by fraud. Bush is no one's president or to be more precise; Bush is the president of the legal criminals who torture and mass murder for profit. It is past time to impeach the killer. Last edited on Wed Apr 2nd, 2008 08:03 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.garynorth.com/public/3328.cfm Please read that link. When the officals are claiming to be increasing the money supply what should a reasonable person think? I have two words for you to consider: Caveat Emptor Gary North is, in my opinion, as close to a voluntary capitalist (can also be called a market anarchist) as one can be - the one going by the name Gary North. The way involuntry capitalism works, on the other hand, is fraud. The officials say things like 'Buy stocks now'. The officials sell stocks on that day. See how this works? When the officials are claiming to be inflating the money supply by 17 percent (Ron Paul made this claim resently) it may be a good idea to check the facts. Read the link - please. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts242.html
That falsehood could explain many questions. The U.S. Constitution ended liberty in America. The U.S. Constitution ensured the power of the few to control the many through currency manipulation as proven when George Washington supressed the last battle of the American Revolution (The false labeled Whiskey Rebellion). The U.S. Constitition was a dirty deal made between southern slave masters and northern slave masters and the 'dirty compromise' required to extort these legal criminials set the stage for the battle between the North and the South (The false labeled Civil War). If someone concludes that "The Founding Fathers" gave "us" liberty that someone might also conclude that America is 'represented' by "representatives" in government. America isn't THE STATE. America is a land of people who are controlled by a few legal criminals. The power of those legal criminals is stolen through falsehood and violence. American's are as much the victims as any other people on the planet. Read that link and know that the person who wrote it is duped, ignorant, or stupid when it comes to the BIG LIE. This one: If Americans have any honor, how can they betray their Founding Fathers, who gave them liberty, by tolerating a government that claims immunity to law and the Constitution and is erecting a police state in their midst? If a person does not recognize the cause the person will treat symptoms. The cause of the violence is violent people and the reason for their immunity is falsehood. We the people trust our form of government that was rotten from day one. We expect the legal criminals to behave better because it is the right thing to do according to the law of the land. HELLO! The law of the land since The Constitution's start has been: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section8 To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; From day one the document (the law of the land) meant to suppress LIBERTY. Here is your confession: http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/whiskey/text.html And whereas, it is in my judgment necessary under the circumstances of the case to take measures for calling forth the militia in order to suppress the combinations aforesaid, and to cause the laws to be duly executed; and I have accordingly determined so to do, feeling the deepest regret for the occasion, but withal the most solemn conviction that the essential interests of the Union demand it, that the very existence of government and the fundamental principles of social order are materially involved in the issue, and that the patriotism and firmness of all good citizens are seriously called upon, as occasions may require, to aid in the effectual suppression of so fatal a spirit; That is King George of America suppressing LIBERTY as people peacefully protested against a tax on whiskey BECAUSE no one had any money to pay the TAX since they were using whiskey AS CURRENCY. The people of the times knew exactly what happened. The BANKERS (Alexander Hamilton) took over the country with a currency fraud. The same 'troops' who volunteered to fight against the British (and their currency fraud) were fighting against the new KING GEORGE or they were conscripted into the suppression of that last battle FOR LIBERTY. Either Paul Craig Roberts is naive, stupid, or ignorant. The U.S. Constitution is only 'better' than the NEW LAW OF THE LAND because the new KING GEORGE has placed humans on the torture table and, of course, Nuclear War is also 'on the table'. Sure, The Constitution could be used to bring a brutal dictator back in line with past dictators who were less brutal. Who is the stupid one? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
+++++++++ In other words, I don't exactly want to read something with an overtly Marxist/Austrian/neoclassical/whateverist thrust, although an overview of the various bodies of thought would be welcome. +++++++++ Equitable Commerce I have a hard copy. This basic economic handbook exposes the dogma that pervades the 'Austrian' (capitalist) and 'Marxist' (socialist) systems based upon involuntary associations (fraud and force). It does so by offering a more accurate, disinterested, and objective human economic perspective that avoids politics altogether. What cannot be ignored (without resorting to dogma) is not ignored in that economic study (117 pages) such as ‘how price is determined by cost’ and who or what determines cost. Rather than assume that economics must be dictated by pricing schemes whereby producers have the power to eliminate the competition (such as involuntary capitalism whereby the State enforces a limited liability corporate accountability shield of fraud and a monetary currency monopoly fraud) and by eliminating the competition the pricing scheme can involve a decrease of the supply in order to increase the price to ‘whatever the market will bear’ as well as dumping products below cost in the effort to create market share in preparation for a decrease in the supply in order to increase the price to ‘whatever the market will bear’. Equitable Commerce (an economic study reinforced with practical experimentation) avoids the dogma associated with supply and demand manipulated pricing schemes that are assumed to be dictated by either The State, The Unseen Hand, The Limited Liability Corporate Entity, or any other dogma, rather, the short and easy to read economic study is based up the principle of cost, the principle if individual sovereignty, and the principle of equity (not equality). I have yet to read any economic study where that dogmatic assumption of a mysterious and ambiguous entity hasn’t been leaped toward; whereupon ‘economics’ is supposedly not (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) dictated by man made pricing schemes based upon scarcity even the Marxist versions. The dogma pretends to create demand and supply induced pricing forces ‘out of thin air’ as if no actual person decided to manipulate the supply in order to manipulate the profit or power flowing from the consumer to the producer (above cost). If the economic student (like I was before reading Equitable Commerce) is ‘educated’ in the “Austrian” or “Marxist” political/economic dogma they may ignore the cost principle, the equitable principle, and the individual’s sovereignty too (since those political dogmas ignore the cost principle, the equitable principle, and the individual’s sovereignty). I think I read about half way through Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson. I can find where I stopped if needed. It is another capitalist manifesto based upon a scarcity pricing scheme where production intends to ‘exploit the market’ by transferring wealth from those who earn it to those who manipulate the supply into a state of scarcity and then jack up the price above cost. The unreported assumption is state controlled credit since a credit monopoly will not exist without fraud or force (The State). I am more than a little curious to have someone read Equitable Commerce (all 117 pages) and find fault with it (other than the dogma parroted by monetary cranks) especially since the data contained in Equitable Commerce is based upon controlled experimentation. Once the reader thoroughly understands the economic principles involved (The Cost Principle, The Equity Principle, and Individual Sovereignty) there is a corresponding ability to expose the dogma that is inherent in the involuntary associations pretending to pass as economic knowledge. Example: A common theme among dogmatists is a mysterious power wielded by ‘capital’ where this entity called ‘capital’ somehow manages to gain power over human beings. It is often reported that ‘capital’ employs ‘labor’. By that dogma a person may be led to believe that ‘capital’ can employ ‘labor’. A person believing that ‘capital’ can employ ‘labor’ may fail to identify the person who is transferring power from his victim to his own bank account by fraud and by force. Capital or ‘things’ do not employ anything – ever. Things, like guns for example, sit. Even, as I’ve seen dogmatists suggest here on this forum, things that are automated cannot employ anyone at any time. An automated car wash, for example, cannot employ anyone anymore than a ‘company’ can employ someone. An automated security system cannot accidentally injure an innocent person either – ever. Some ONE (a sovereign individual) turns the thing on. When ‘capital’ is said to employ ‘labor’ chances are the capitalist is gaining rapidly in the business of taking power from an individual. The ‘capitalist’ is an individual – not a corporation and not The State. Human’s, who labor (or just work for fun), employ things. Human beings act with pre-mediated will power. Things cannot decide or employ will power (computers may be simulating will power or the power to make human decisions) however the dogma of ‘capital’ employing ‘labor’ is an old economic fallacy that pre-dates computers. This is a bit long for a sales job for a little book that is not much more than a pamphlet. Suppose the person asking for a BASIC economic book does read this BASIC economic book? I can dream can’t I? Suppose the person does read it and then suppose the person understands the basic principles involved in economics. Now what? Will the person return to the common herd mentality of parroting monetary crankiest elitism or will the person decide to employ principles in economic thought? Suppose every dogmatic argument supporting the fraud of capitalism was used (turned around) on the dogmatist like, for example, the dogma apologizing for scarcity pricing schemes associated with wages? The dogmatist claims that wages are paid based upon the abundance of labor or over-supply of labor and therefore the price of labor bears a small exchange rate. Why pay someone a high wage when many laborers are demanding employment? Why not pay a low wage since ‘the market will bear’ a low wage? Confusing? I’ve read Equitable Commerce, The Science of Society, Mutual Banking, and A New System of Paper Currency which are very easy to understand economic works written by American Anarchists (or so called Anarchists) so this is not at all confusing to me. I am armed with true principles. The Limited Liability Corporate Nation State Interest/Profit Wage Paying System Dogmatist claims that ‘the market will bear’ a low wage to many laborers. Got that? The reason why the dogmatist claims that to be true, empirically, is factually based upon a currency monopoly fraud. So called ‘capitalists’ have the power to create currency of the ‘legal’ variety and with that power the so called ‘capitalists’ have the power to finance whatever they choose to finance since they, the so called ‘capitalists’ have the power to create ‘legal’ tender or MONEY and this ‘right’ is exclusive. Like this: “every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.” Carl Menger (1840 -1921) Now turn that around, I mean specifically, turn around that dogma. Suppose that the Marxists were serious (rather than being puppets financed by ‘capitalists’) and the ‘laborers’ took over the power to create credit and at the same time the ‘laborers’ removed that power to create credit (out of thin air) from the ‘capitalists’. Got that? Previously the ‘capitalists’ financed a situation where the supply of labor was high and therefore many laborers were fighting over each other for a very low or small supply of ‘jobs’. The scarcity of jobs created a high demand for employment and therefore the market would bear a high price (cost to the laborer) for gaining a job. Is that backwards? Hardly Now the ‘laborers’ seriously take over the power to create credit out of thin air. “Laborers” offer purchasing power at no-interest to qualified “Laborers” for the purchase of land and the construction of homes and work shops. “Laborers” charge ‘what the market will bear’ in interest rates (up to 25 percent interest charges) for anyone wanting to borrow legal money to gain possession of ‘capital’ (the means of production). Workers get an interest discount Non-workers pay as much as the market will bear for the use of credit to buy the means of production. A ‘boss’ who does not actually work, and cannot prove a ‘credit rating’ of having worked will not qualify for a no or low interest loan (not even for a home and not for a ‘shop’). No worky - no money unless the ‘capitalist’ can afford to borrow and pay the high interest charge. Equity, if you do take the time and effort to read the BASIC economic book, is neither Austrian Capitalist nor Marxist Socialist economic KNOWLEDGE. I am curious to see if you learn anything. The Above is copied from here: http://www.anarchism.net/forum/board_entry.php?id=27460 |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19818.htm
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/schembrie7.html
It is time to do more numbers. My wife and I had another one of our arguments and I will tell that story before moving onto the current numbers. I hobble out of the truck and hop over to the gas pump. My card goes through the slot and soon the fluid flows into the Ford’s gas tank. The cost in dollar units is over 80. The truck is used by me and my wife for various chores including the hauling of heavy things. I hop because one foot is being repaired and it cannot support weight yet. I get home and make a comment as I plop down on the couch and prop my black-red leg up. “80 dollars to fill up the truck; an electric car and solar panels pay for themselves and add more money to the bank account.” I say that general theme if not those precise words. Much of the argumentation between my wife and I concerns imprecise language. “Do you know where to get an electric car that won’t turn out to be a lemon?” My wife responds. She is cooling up to the idea and the price of gas is helping move her. She is the only one generating an income at this time in our lives. I generated an income for 25 years until my employers deceived me out of any insurance claim after my body wore out at work. My doctor bills are now paid for by my wife and her insurance policy purchased after my employers lied and forced me out of work. I think I left that dishonorable relationship with my honor intact; other people consider me to be ‘too honest’ or even stupid. The argument with my wife went sour because that is what arguments are and the bottom line is that we are not yet in a position to purchase anything; let alone invest. We are surviving on a resent liquidation of an earlier investment and my wife’s ability to generate an income. Here are two possible examples of cars:  http://www.aptera.com/ask.php How long will it take to charge the Aptera? This depends on the amount of battery discharge but a typical time would be 2 to 4 hours.
http://www.teslamotors.com/  The cost per mile is advertised as 2 cents. A 30 mile per gallon gasoline powered vehicle at 3 dollars per gallon costs 10 cents per mile. That is what happens when comparing the cost per mile against the cost per mile. 2 is less than 10. 2 is cheaper than 10 by more than a little. In easy to understand terms: I drive up to the gas station and pay 80 dollars. I drive in the garage and spend 2 dollars to charge my car up over night. 80 dollars can last me one month if I don't drive around much. The 'savings' is already in the books as reported above where the 30 mile per gallon gas vehicle at 3 dollars per gallon is 10 cents per mile. My truck does not average 30 miles per gallon and gasoline is now almost 4 dollars per gallon. The electric car is 2 (not 10) cents per mile. Back to practical knowlege? Suppose I can go 500 miles in the truck for 80 dollars? Compare that to range on the car that charges up in four hours at a cost of 2 dollar per charge. What is the range on that car? With the All Electric Aptera, it is very easy to figure out the mileage range. The mileage is determined by the distance you can drive, under normal circumstances, until the batteries are effectively drained. In the case of the first Aptera typ-1e, we have calculated the range to be about 120miles. More power is needed to drive up a steep hill that goes on and on and on for 120 miles. Less power is required to go down hill. This is very simple. The Tesla car has brakes that generate electricity so going down a steep hill or using the brakes adds more power to the batteries. Suppose my new car does go 100 miles on 2 dollars worth of electricity and I go 500 miles in two weeks. That will be 5 charges worth or 10 dollars worth of power. My truck costs 80 dollars to drive 500 miles. 10 dollars or 80 dollars for 500 miles should not be a difficult choice. That supposed a requirement to pay for electricity. Enter stage left: Solar Panels. I will check current prices again and I will map out what I call Power-Independence Day again. The idea here is to know the cost of purchasing one Solar Panel and then find out how much time it takes to generate the power needed to pay for the Solar panel. That will find Power-Independence Day. The Solar Panel on Power-Independence Day will pay for itself. Then the idea is to know how much more time is left before the Solar Panel runs out of power. This is simple people. Economists like to throw out words that sound really important like “depreciation”; and that is fine. The Power-Independence concept is easier to see than the concept of “depreciation”. You spend your hard earned income on a Solar Panel. The Solar Panel generates electricity for about 25 years. If you use the electricity during that 25 years time you don’t pay for that electricity for 25 years time. If the total amount of electricity you generate in 25 years time is big, like a BIG electric bill, then you pay for that Solar Panel by generating INCOME from the Sun. If you generate a whole lot of electricity in 25 years your income is more than the cost of the Solar Panel. How much more power is produced from a Solar Panel over (more than) the cost of the Solar Panel. The last time I calculated this cost/benefit ratio the numbers were almost twice the cost of the Solar Panel. In other words one Solar Panel can pay for itself and than that Solar Panel continues to make enough income to buy one more Solar Panel. That is like hiring an illegal alien (from Mars?) to pedal a bicycle to generate income for 15 years and then having that worker work for free for 10 years or so. All that is needed is CREDIT to get the ball rolling or SAVINGS if you have no CREDIT or if CREDIT is too expensive (interest rate is high). Numbers: http://www.solarhome.org/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATS&Category=100 That is a 100 watt Solar Panel (quick search) and the cost is 600 dollars. SW modules are manufactured to comply with U.S. and international standards, and are UL listed and carry a 25-year, 80% power output warranty. The idea here is to figure out how much total power is produced and see by that measure if the thing will actually pay for itself. Suppose the Sun shines for 10 hours a day. This is a ball park number; just for fun. The reality of these facts is unquestionably true while our ability to see the facts and then use those facts to our advantage is not unquestionably true. 10 hours per day for 365 days per year and 25 years is 91,250 hours. The idea behind using hours as a measure of INCOME is due to the measure of price/cost of electricity. Look on your electric bill and see the price of electricity. The price is based upon a kilowatt hour. The Solar Panel is measured in watts at 100 watts in this case for this Solar Panel. A watt is generated every second. That is a lot of seconds a lot of minutes and a lot of hours. Time goes on for 25 years at 100 watts. If the Solar Panel generates electricity for 10 hours then the Solar Panel generates 100 watts for 10 hours. That is 100 kilowatt hours for 10 hours or 1 kilowatt hour. That could be multiplied by 365 and 25 to arrive at total power produced. 9,125,000 Either way the math works out the same. That number is total watt hours. A kilowatt is 1000 watts so take away three zeros to get total kilowatt hours produced in 25 years. This doesn’t have to be so complicated. The advertisers could figure this all out for you if competition was working instead of our current form of “Capitalism” which is really National Socialism. 9,125 total kilowatt hours of income produced for a Solar Panel that costs 600 dollars. How much does electricity cost? Here things become very funny and not in the ‘ha-ha’ sense. Pay attention to actual rate changes during ‘peak hours’ and the advertised rate of price on electricity is irrelevant, however we need a ball park. http://www.energy.ca.gov/electricity/current_electricity_rates.html We can use 12 cents per kilowatt-hour. 9,125 total kilowatt hours of income produced in 25 years at 12 cents per kilowatt hour equals a total income of power. 9,125 times .12 equals 1095 Granted, please, this is very rough figures. The point is to point out how the Solar Panel is like hiring an illegal alien from mars to pedal a generator on the roof of your home. The worker works for a total salary of 600 dollars while the worker produces for you a total income of 1,095 dollars. You save about 400 dollars. The illegal alien works 10 hours a day, every day, for 25 years guaranteed. You end up paying negative 400 dollars for investment and that is the cost of your fuel for your car. The cost is negative. You earn income. Someone pays you 400 dollars for buying a Solar Panel. If you do not see this, then don’t. Pay, like me, 80 dollars to go 500 miles instead of paying 10 dollars to go 500 miles and instead of having someone pay you 400 dollars to use their power. Who pays out the 400 dollars? The sun pays. The sun powers us up. Wake up woman. Wake up man, the sun is shining. Last edited on Wed Apr 30th, 2008 02:00 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north622.html +++++++++++ The hostility of Keynesians to thrift is legendary. They believe that consumption stimulates the economy. +++++++++++ When power is used to produce power producing products, get this please, less power becomes more power. This is a fact that can be seen with any expenditure of power resulting in a profit where the word profit does not mean 'to take power from someone'. When profit is defined as an increase in value resulting from productive investment - no one has to lose. No one has to lose. Iraqi human beings, babies, children, teen aged people, and even old people do not have to lose. Iranian people do not have to lose. People who move their life savings from retirement accounts to government securities do not have to lose. Profit can be the application of power invested toward the production of more power. The Solar Panel is one example of that type of investment. The Wind Generator is another example of that type of investment. The hydro-electric dam is another example of that type of investment. The power to produce it is X and the power that comes out of it is Y. Y is greater than X. Power produced into a state of over-supply causes the price of power to reach toward zero. When power, productive power like electricity, reaches that low cost over abundance condition the power to purchase with monetary power increases and this happens because productive power, like electricity, lowers the costs of production. What happens to ‘our’ economy when the price of electricity and the price of a barrel of oil halves? Please figure that out and see if it computes. I don’t want no stinking Nobel Prize. How about some sanity? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2008/05/nightmare-made-real-torture-murder-and.htmlYou may now remove the "probably" from the last sentence of that excerpt. There is no question in my mind that the Democrats and their whore apologists -- including their supporters and apologists among the progressive bloggers -- are worse, and much more sickening. To repeatedly and loudly insist that you view certain policies and behaviors as evil, while you simultaneously do nothing of any significance to oppose them or slow them down or, still worse, act to further them, requires a lethal, murderous dishonesty that should be deeply sickening to any semi-decent human being. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski204.html
My objection to that work concerns partisan ignorance. How can I explain? The legal criminals stole the word “capitalism” from honest people who do not plan on and then follow up on the injury of innocence, on purpose, for profit (plunder). Capitalism is now a term that describes legal crime whereby people who call themselves capitalists plan on and follow through with the injury of innocent people, on purpose, for profit. That part of my objection is intimately known by many people including Hugo Chavez. The usurpation of the word “capitalism” from honest people who do not intend to harm anyone, by false advertising, or any other pre-planned, pre-judged, and pre-arranged method of injuring unsuspecting and vulnerable people (consumers at large) is much like the usurpation of the word “socialism” from honest people who do not intend to harm anyone, by false advertising, or any other pre-planned, pre-judged, and pre-arranged method of injuring unsuspecting and vulnerable people. Example: http://www.anarchism.net/scienceofsociety.htm
Another example exists to clearly illustrate how honest people who intend to harm no one on purpose for profit have their terms stolen from them. Between the time where the law of the land in America was The Articles of Confederation and then The U.S. Constitution a group of people called themselves REBELS. The Rebels were also Federalists or Con-Federalists. These Rebels had their “Federalist” label stolen from them by “Nationalists” who hid behind the stolen name “Federalist” and then these “Nationalists” glommed on the name “Anti-Federalists” to anyone who rebelled against the change from The Articles of Confederation to the U.S. Constitution. Example: http://www.wakeforest.edu/~zulick/340/henry.html
That brings me to the crime of stealing the true meaning of democracy from the honest people who do not plan for and then execute plundering the innocent victims by deceit, trickery, torture, and mass murder. Democracy was once a peaceful means of abolishing criminal governments before people were left with no power other than ‘tax avoidance’ by deceit or open rebellion. Why has ‘capitalism’ maintained it shiny coat through all this while ‘socialism’ continues to be demonized? What happened to accurate currency? Why snuff out true meanings of words used by honest people who successfully rebel and avoid suffering tyranny where the tyrants plan on and execute false advertized capitalistic profiteering? Example: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3883148810958929341 THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED And my final objection concerns which Austrian school will earn the support of honesty peaceful people who do not intend to harm people on purpose for profit. Example: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north512.html 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. If the revolution includes a currency monopoly, then that is socialism. If there is no law that punishes competition in the currency markets, then that is socialism. The ability to employ terms is not the same thing as the power to enforce the meaning of terms. Last edited on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 12:53 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/alston/alston44.html
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=3bc0e959-3b4e-440d-9b99-69078429b82c
Scarceonomics? I see the "what the market will bear" pricing scheme in that type of monetary crankism which has been employed to rationalize the interest/profit/wage paying/limited liability/corporate/nation/state/systematic extortion by legal currency fraud monopoly crime. You may not see it. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://mises.org/story/2874
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20208.htm
I can cut in here and offer: "Government" by the people own their own monetary currency so who, then, recives the profits from that supply? The answer is simple. The people profit from their currency equitably when the currency is supplied as a non-profit enterprise or, in other words, the profits (interest) goes to 'government' to finance government i.e. Interest on money is a TAX. That is an example of 'discussion' albiet one part of 'discussion'. The next quote is now saved for my wife to read: MW: How should Obama approach the issue of "debt relief" for the victims of the housing boondoggle who are now losing their homes in record numbers? African Americans were particularly hurt by the subprime fiasco. Is there a way to minimize the losses of people who were trapped in a banker's scam? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
More from here: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20208.htm
If 'the government' were to offer two products to the people for consumption the form of those products could be as such: Product A: A home and business property mortgage loan at no interest to qualified buyers Product B; A one percent interest loan for power production and consumption such as: The purchase of Solar Panels The purchase of a Solar Panel installation business ‘start up’ The purchase of an electric car The purchase of an electric car taxi service If ‘the government’ merely awarded the license to produce and maintain that new supply of money (not dollars) to compete with the current Federal Reserve issue of fraudulent currency (dollars), then the people could regain control of the economy because the people would have sound money backed by their own honest industry and property. The moral is that economic strength consists of the ability to create credit that fuels economic growth. But the privatized banking sector is crippling this strength in the United States these days. Instead of creating credit to fund industrial capital formation, the banking system is lending to bail out bad financial pyramiding. Credit is a product that's almost free to create. Its main cost of production is the lobbying expense to buy Congressional support. The moral is that you can't really have a grab for empire and the wars that go with it and at the same time have a booming economy. In 1985 there were just 13 US billionaires. Now there are more than HOLD ON Please consider this: http://www.the-portal.org/mutual_banking.htm Just look for and read the description of something called: The Parasite City. The dichotomy is not merely between an elite and the masses, or between the vested interests and the downtrodden, the cultured and the great unwashed. It is something much more specific. These two nations, two cities, actually are two economies – Economy #1 (production and consumption) vs. financial and property-based Economy #2 which controls the economic surplus in the form of savings and investment. And the different characteristics of these two economies go far beyond the merely economic dimension. There are contradictions in that work. The BANKERS monopolize CREDIT costs. They are being challenged by a competitor. The competition is Islamic Finance. Here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Islamic+Finance 1 - 10 of about 1,200,000 for Islamic Finance Watch how that grows. Example: http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/21/islamic-finance-sharia-islamic-finance-islamicfinance08-cx_ee_mn_0421islam_land.html Islamic finance is booming Why? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19818.htm Partnership is the heartbeat of Islamic economics. “Underlying the system is the philosophy of risk sharing: the lender must share the borrower’s risk, making the two in effect partners, injecting a strong social component into the financial system. This concept separates Islamic Finance from Western Finance, which seeks to maximize profits and minimize loss through diversification and risk transfer.” Also, money must be put to work. Because Islamic finance prohibits interest, it seeks revenues from rents, royalties, business profits, or commodity trading; a mortgage, for example, represents a “rent to buy” arrangement. Thus, conceptually, Islamic economics is the opposite of Western finance, which revolves around the individual’s self-interest. That is an example of employing the cost principle. Costs are not passed onto victims. Costs are accounted upon those who cause costs. Last edited on Tue Jul 1st, 2008 07:58 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20206.htm
Who is "we"? We is the people who have the license to enforce legal tender. That "we" will actaully have to work to earn their pay (interest). If "we" The People regain license to enforce our own legal tender, then we can begin to prosper on that Liberty Day. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20235.htm
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north636.html
If, say, someone is excluded from posting on the Austiran Economics Forum for failing to obey strict gag orders, well, long live the web. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
++++++++++++ http://www.restoretherepublic.com/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,27/func,view/catid,34/id,6958/#6958 |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
We find ourselves, nevertheless, at a certain transformational moment where things that had long gone unsaid are now being spoken aloud. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/08/usa.warcrimes |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo144.html
Who has been tricked? The Constitution legalized slavery; how can anyone promote it with a straight face? Answer: Ignorance or fraud Hamilton also invented the notion of special "war powers" that are not specifically delegated to the federal government by the states. He subsequently argued for a standing army, funding of the army "without limitation," and the nationalization of all industries that supplied goods to the army. The suppression of the rebellion against "legal tender" money monopoly i.e. The Whiskey Rebellion required a force of arms. G.W. conscripted that force of arms, the Watermelon Army, to invade the frontier and reclaim the power to extract wealth from free people all of which was made lawful by The Constitution. Section 8 http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8 To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; Back to the gulible and/or fraudulent propaganda: and its potential to cause government to grow vastly larger than what the Constitution called for The Constitution called for the suppression of insurrections. How can the suppression of insurrections be interpreted in any other way besides absolute despotism? When the slaves revolt: the law licenses their torture and mass murder, on purpose, and for profit. Wake up people. Last edited on Wed Jul 9th, 2008 03:36 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north641.html
Gary North has an interest in positive interest where someone manages to extract power from someone at a rate determined by "market forces" and the flow of power goes from the borrower to the person who loans the power. The borrower pays. The loaner profits. That is Gary Northism. Gary North can't see past Gary Northism. Here are a few examples of free market interest that does not go as Gary North dictates interest flow. http://www.the-portal.org/mutual_banking.htm That is an expose on 'interest' where an interesting thing occurs when interest flows from those who loan purchasing power to those who produce purchasing power and the flow of power goes from those who produce to those who loan. The interesting phenomenon is called a Parasite City. Next is a link that documents how interest can flow in the opposite direction as “negative interest”, and this type of power flow goes from the loaner to the borrower. http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=904 The loaning agent freely exchanged with the borrowing agents until the Gary Northism type banks (positive interest) took over. You may have to read the words in the link to see how that worked out in history. Here are two links that describe a thing called equity, which is a non-interest transfer phenomenon where borrowers and loaners keep the power they earn and neither borrower or loaner are encouraged to pass on costs to the other. http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf That one is called Equitable Commerce. The writer actually tested his invention and it worked. The writer also invented his own printing press and employed that invention in the production of News Media to compete with the news media monopolies of his day. http://www.anarchism.net/scienceofsociety.htm That one is called The Science of Society and it describes equitable commerce in a more detailed expansive manner than the original, sort of like an Equitable Commerce for Dummies. http://www.perfecteconomy.com/pg-parable-of-perfect-economy.html That source is a modern source that bridges the gap in history from the start of the American experiment with its colonial script to the modern application of that interesting monetary employment. Whenever someone claims to have the exclusive ability to communicate monetary wisdom, check your wallet. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w33.html
Please note how these supposed free market proponents are so quick to apply the political means of fraud when they point fingers at the bad guys and support the good guys. There isn’t any room for doubt. “Socialism” is bad. “Capitalism” is good. By that demonization the entire populations of people who support social structures are condemned as bad, while conveniently the entire populations of people who support capital structures are good. Here is where the dogmatists confess their duplicity. If the free market did factor into this free competition between social and capital structures the winner would earn its place. Where is this free market? Here: Orwellian hate-fest directed at "super-rich" people who had earned their money through legitimate enterprise. Where is an example of one of these "super-rich" people who had earned their money through legitmate enterprise? I'm going to link 25 examples of something. The 25 Most Vicious Iraq War Profiteers When speaking about criminals and their crimes, it seems to me, it is a good idea to follow the paper trail to the people who benefit most from those crimes if the idea is to account for the actual people who plan on and then execute crimes. Why call "them" socialists? What is the point if not to collectively punish innocent people for the planned actions of a few very powerful people? How do these people actual gain so much power in the first place? Why not ask legitimate questions and seek accurate answers? Why blame “socialism” for the actions of people who plan on and execute robbery, torture, and mass murder for profit? Why label the criminals with any label other than criminals? If “capitalism” is so much more superior to “socialism”, then why plan on and execute fraud and violence in the effort to exclude social structures? The real competition being demonized, tortured, and murdered may be Islamic Finance. Islamic Finance threatens The Dollar Hegemony with products that offer higher quality for lower cost. Islamic Finance offers accountability as a quality. Islamic Finance offers no-interest costs to consumers. Is that the real enemy or not? Why ignore the real competition? Why point fingers at phantoms? Russian, China, Venezuela, and Iran are places were people live. Why blame them for failures in market experiments by labeling them with the bogus term “socialist” as if “capitalists” have a patent or copyright on the “Free Market” of social structures. The answer is a confession; that is why the answer will never materialize from the mouths of capitalists. The following is worth reading: http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/dorsch/2007/0501.html The “Axis of Oil” led by Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, is slowly chipping away at the US dollar’s status as the world’s “reserve currency.” Are the "socialists" becoming "capitalists" or are these terms meaningless beyond dogmatic politicization? Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 03:02 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Demonizing Iran is an old trick. It does what demonizing the Soviet Union did decades ago: it pumps up the jingo mindset. It pumps up military budgets. Military spending draws down domestic spending – a key right-wing agenda. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20342.htm The fight is certainly a power struggle. The PUMP is an interesting analogy. I am going to link one of my efforts to inspire accurate data flow from the Austrian Economists who can be seen as right-wing people with a right-wing agenda with a mantra that involves the flow of power by way of interest payments from those who create purchasing power to those who loan out The Dollar from their Dollar Hegemony Power Plant (it produces falsehood and violence by the way). Here is the link: http://www.austrianforum.com/index.php?showtopic=364 My personal history within that power structure remains a documented history on this date of July, 23 2008. Here is an example of my illustration of the PUMP:  The idea is to view the social structure from as many angles as possible so as to find one angle that makes sense compared to another angle that is nonsense. Here, again, is one angle among many: http://www.islamic-finance.com/aboutus_lectures_past_f.htm
The competition is between interest-based Banking and any alternative. The simplicity of this competition can be viewed with an illustration. If anyone who has a history of good credit is presented with a choice between high quality money A and high quality money B where both products are as good as each other and one does not cost as much as the other the competition is over. Let the best money win. High quality at a lower cost The Austrian, right-wing, capitalist professors (I've met them personally) will not discuss the competition. If they do somehow recognize the competition the discussion is over, the dogma flows forth like a flood in New Orleans. Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 03:22 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://theinternationalforecaster.com/International_Forecaster_Weekly/Super_Losses_Super_Layoffs_Super_Bailouts
There are many alternatives, as many as there are people. Connecting people together in a productive fashion requires an honest, transparent, and high quality medium of exchange - at the lowest possible cost. If that medium of exchange could be The Dollar one might think that it would be The Dollar by now. It is not. The Dollar and The Dollar Hegemony created what we have now; how is it working for you? The name or label is false when the result is destructive. The Dollar is just a label, less than a god damn piece of paper. The Dollar is merely letters arranged in a specific order. The thing labeled is the thing that makes things happen, not the label. The thing that has the power to purchase is the thing that has the power to purchase and when someone actually has an interest in following the paper trail to the origin then someone will find some one, a person, who has the power to purchase. The medium of exchange can be one thing or it can be many things. The medium of exchange can be honest or it can be dishonest in function, only people are dishonest in character – by their actions. You won’t get one to confess, dishonest people are dishonest. The medium of exchange can be accurate or it can be inaccurate. Which is better? Who decides which is better? The medium of exchange can be specific for specific things or it can be ambiguous and unspecific to anything. Who wants which type? Which type can be laundered? Which type is always clean? The medium of exchange can be supplied at the rate that is equal to the demand or it can be scarce and then it can be overly abundant by design. Knowing when it will be scarce or not is something worth knowing, something to bank on. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://washingtonyourefired.com/RestoreTheRepublic.html I submit the following question:
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20373.htm
That is not true. That is seriously inaccurate. Bank runs expose the weakness of a fraudulent currency monopoly of “legal tender”. The fabric of the big lie is unraveling and exposing the frauds and dupes. The Mike guy is seriously wrong. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/index.php?p=episode&name=2008-07-29_008_the_scam_called_the_state.mp3 Free Banking? Highest quality currency at the lowest cost? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20407.htm"Ladran, luego cabalgamos" (the dogs bark, therefore the caravan is moving), he said, quoting from el Quijote. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/buppert/buppert11.html |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20608.htm |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.restoretherepublic.net/user_iforum_posts.php?f=1028&p=10151&pg=1&justadded=1 |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north649.html
I think Gary North is one of the most accurate Gold Bugs around. He is one of the capitalist bunch who employ the capitalist pricing scheme which is fine so long as no one employs fraud (lies) and force (violence) to eliminate any competitor who may employ something other than the capitalist pricing scheme. Some words written by Gary North indicate that he does favor an honest free market. Why does he confuse ‘saving’ with ‘investing’? The textbooks describe the anti-recession policy of the government as injecting new purchasing power into the economy, but without ever mentioning the process of either pulling purchasing power away from taxpayers and buyers of government debt or the counterfeiting operation of the central bank. There is the answer. He who invests in the "government" wants to profit from what the government does; therefore 'smoke and mirrors' is employed by calling 'investing' (in profits from the government) 'saving' (something that is a false front for profiting by employing the government as the means by which profit is extracted from the victims of that false front pyramid scheme). How could a self-respecting Austrian Economist sleep at night if he or she knew that he or she profited by torture and mass murder (what the government does)? Obviously he or she either does not have a conscience in the first place or he or she needs to create a smoke screen by claiming that investing in what the government does is ‘saving’ (which everyone knows is a thrifty thing to do). I went to a Las Vegas Financial Markets Convention put up by The Mises Institute and the Austrian Economists. That was in 1996. I paid my fee to attend. The people who put on the show solicited questions for the panel. I asked many questions concerning the power of the internet as an anarchistic free market, the power of China to become an economic contender, and other things. Not one of my questions was answered directly. I was shunned to say the least. Someone there did answer my question indirectly. That honest person said: “If you can’t beat them…join them.” Lie and cheat. Go ahead and torture and mass murder too; profit at the expense of the victims. That is the FREE MARKET. It is free from conscience. It is free from truth. The FDIC's job is to conceal what is happening. It refuses to reveal the names of suspect banks. The other banks go along with this, because they do not want to be hit by waves of doubt. Customers may buy T-bills rather than bank CD's. Bankers are never sure which bank will be hit by runs and which will benefit. For the sake of continuity, they support the FDIC. They don't want to rock the boat. There it is again. "They" (those innocent guys) "save" by transferring their purchasing power (how did "they" earn it in the first place?) from the Banks who have a license to monopolize and therefore extract power by usury (enforced monopoly on the supply of money) to the power that administers the license to monopolize currency. Choice A: “Save” money by employing a bank for a piece of the action (a lesser rate or interest) whereby the bank charges people to use legal currency. Choice B: “Save” money by employing the government to collect an interest profit directly from the people. Those two choices are called “saving”. Get it? Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
And Gary North is himself deceived. The capitalist pricing scheme is the cause of this so called “problem” which isn’t a problem to those who “join em”. The idea, of capitalism, is to gain at the expense of a victim. The idea, of capitalism, is to pass on costs. The idea, of capitalism, is to remove the limits of price by any means. The Austrian hero explains: “every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.” Carl Menger (1840 -1921) Last edited on Sat Aug 30th, 2008 12:22 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/batfe-poll.htm |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20709.htm
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20802.htm
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
The average brainwashed person is bound to believe in the inevitability of a cycle of economic booms and economic busts where society is wandering aimlessly through each high and each low of the cycle. What can possibly be done to limit the excesses during the up cycle? Nothing is the answer. Nothing can be done. The up cycle is inevitable, so get in and grab all you can while the cycle is booming. The sky is the limit. What can possibly be done to limit the extreme depressive lack of business during the down cycle? Nothing is the answer. Nothing can be done. The down cycle is inevitable, so suffer and bear it. The smart guys are in tune with the inevitable business cycle, like a conductor is in tune with an orchestra. The conductor points over to the string section and waves the command to buy now, buy now, buy now, the cycle has hit bottom. As the cycle regains power from the bottom the conductor moves his magic wand over to the wind section, buy now, buy now, and buy now, as the music of boom builds higher and higher in volume and speed. The conductor knows when to hold the percussion section with a command and a wave of his wand. Hold on, don’t buy, it is time to get ready for the crash. Then the peak at the top is reached on pure momentum as the conductor waves frantically to the percussion section, sell, sell, sell, sell, while the mindless economy crashes inexplicably, inevitably, and without any warning – even contradicting the brass sections dissonant cries of further boom during the fall. The conductor is the legal money monopoly, or The Dollar Hegemony. The idea is to cause the boom and then cause the bust on time like clockwork. The plan works. The feeble minded, the ignorant, and the dupes play along voluntarily like an orchestra filled with professional musicians who pay the conductor for a seat in the orchestra and each musician drops a hat or a instrument case on the floor for donations. The music is horrible, but people still play on. The result of the boom cycle is a flow of power from those who create power to those who conduct and play the music. The mad race to produce anything at all causes many products to be produced that would otherwise never sell. The mad race going up into the boom also produces destructive products, because the influx of liquid power spills into the hands of mad men. The conductor makes sure of this fact. The boom must be busted somehow; it would never serve the conductor’s or the demonic musician’s purpose to allow the boom to continue ever higher upward. Too much power would spill out; too much power would reach the hands of the intended victims. Too many people would become strong, independent, and autonomous. Too much power would empower people to play their own music. That would be very bad for the conductor and the demonic musicians who plan on and cause the business cycle. There would no longer be anyone listening to the demonic dissonance of the brass section calling for more spending near the top, spending on war, spending on torture, spending on terror. No signal by the conductor to anyone who would listen or cause a wild mad rush to sell everything and buy nothing as the percussion section hammers the end of the boom and beats down the peak of the gluttonous power climax. People would merely behave rationally because people would have all the power they needed to accomplish whatever they wanted anytime they felt like employing the abundant supply of power, and they could do so rationally. For those of you who have been reading my posts I am going to link a reminder to you as the conductor and the musicians are creating the down cycle and pushing that cycle to new lows, and a new bottom. http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=904 That link is a historical record of one example of music played outside the demonic orchestra’s assembly. Please consider rejecting, even for just a moment, all the lies that spew forth from the demonic orchestra’s music, such as: The interest rate must be increased to punish the excesses of poor investment. That type of sound is generated by the demonic orchestra. The interest rate must be higher. Look at the link. The interest rate can be negative. When the producer of legal money wants to create a boom the producer of legal money can write a check from the magic check book. The producer of legal money can then give that money to anyone the producer of legal money wants to have that money. The cost of getting that money is the interest rate. If the producer of legal money does not have access to the tax fund where tax-payers earn and then send power to the tax fund, the producer of legal money does not produce legal money. The producer of money that is not legal does not have a magic check book, because the tax-payers do not pick up the tab, during the down cycle toward recession and depression. The producer of legal money in America is a group of people who run a company called The Federal Reserve Corporation and those people have the magic checkbook because those people have access to the tax fund where the working people send their power. The working people send their power as tax payments, tax obligations, and a promise to keep on paying for as long as they work and live within reach of the tax collectors. Without that link between The Federal Reserve Corporation and the tax fund, The Federal Reserve Corporate People would not have a magic check book where the tax payers bail out all debts caused by The Federal Reserve Corporate People’s investments. The link between The Federal Reserve Corporation and the tax fund is the link to The U.S. Treasury. If you pay taxes to the U.S.A. your past pay, your current pay, and your future pay goes to The U.S. Treasury fund. The Internal Revenue Service makes sure that everyone keeps their promises to keep on paying so that The Federal Reserve People can keep their magic checkpoint and continue creating the boom and bust cycle. The promise to pay future payments to The Internal Revenue Service is now a promise to bail out the musicians who collect interest, then make bad investments (bad music), create debt, and loose their shirts when the debt becomes due, so the taxpayer can assume that bad debt, and the musicians can keep their million dollar homes, their expensive cars, and their lavish lifestyles. The taxpayer must then work more hours for less in return because more of the value of his production goes to more of the musicians who are now part of the ever larger and growing orchestra. Remember the sound of the demonic music? Here it is again: The interest rate must be higher. Here is the link again: http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=904 That is negative interest. That is interest that is less than zero interest. The producer of the legal money, in that historical case above, pays people to spend money. That is a factual possibility once the producer of money has access to the tax fund, the producer of money can pay people to spend money. The producer of money who has access to the tax fund can charge negative interest and by that method the producer of money can create a boom while every other producer of legal money is creating a bust. That link proves, by historical fact, that the producer of legal money can begin an economic boom at will. The producer of legal money can sustain a boom for as long as the producer of legal money can invest that money wisely. As soon as the producer of legal money can no longer invest that money wisely the producer of legal money will no longer be able to sustain an economic boom. Why did The Federal Reserve lower their interest rate to a level that was negative? Who received the magic money from the magic check book? Where did The Federal Reserve spend that magic money? What did the people at The Federal Reserve invest that magic money into? What was produced by that magic money investment? Was that investment sustainable? Look at the link. Here it is again: http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=904 The people who seize control of the business of printing legal money must also seize control of the tax fund and the means by which taxes are collected. Once that power to produce legal money is seized by people, then those people can create an economic boom. Those people who seize the power to create an unlimited supply of legal money have the power to invest that money into some other form of production. Look at the history. What happens when the people who seize the power to create legal money invest in war? Now listen, please, to another phrase that is sung by the demonic orchestra. You, the reader, may not recognize the dissonant melody right away. Play this phrase in your mind a few times, not too many times, to see if this phrase becomes familiar. War is good for the economy. War is good for the economy. The reason why that phrase is dissonant to everyone except the musicians who play that demonic music is that the sound of that music is torturous and murderous to the victims of war. The victims of war, the ones who pay the bill, are tortured by that music. The ones who pay the tab are murdered by that music. The ones who receive the power from the victims of war are the ones who play that tune, and they love it. War is good for the economy. Look at the link and read that link. After reading that link, listen. Listen to those phrases. The interest rate must be higher. War is good for the economy. Those are signals played by the conductor who has control of the magic check book, which is backed with a promise by the tax payer to pay any bill, any bad investment, any cost incurred by the conductor who spends the tax fund on any investment including war – including a war that can not and will not be won. War is good for someone’s economy. The interest rate is (now) too high for someone. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north655.html That above is the song of increasing interest rates. It is the song that is half true. It is the scarcity song, the capitalist pricing scheme song. Here is a version of the song:
The song tells a story about two, and only two, choices by which people can solve the problem of scarcity. A. The capitalist pricing scheme B. The capitalist pricing scheme (worded differently) The problem with this song being sung for the Oil Companies is self-evidently duplicitous or "two faced". What, for example, is the capitalist version of the cause of scarcity? Do they not blame the scarcity on “The Government” with government “price control” legislation? See how that works. Capitalists blame the scarcity problem on government price controls, and then the capitalists prescribe the solution as price control, by capitalists. Do you think that I am kidding? Read the link. The big bad government dictates punishment when people gouge other people with high prices, so the big bad government causes the problem of scarcity by controlling the price to levels that are too low (according to the capitalists). What is the solution to the big bad government price control problem? Price control by capitalists is the solution offered by capitalists to the price control problem by government. What is the real cause of scarcity? Does Gary North endeavor to find the real truth and then pass on that accurate knowledge to his readership? Here is a link that offers evidence as to the real truth behind the gasoline shortage, the other half of the truth that Gary North ignores or is unwilling or unable to know and to pass on. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147 There is another principle by which the scarcity problem can be solved. This solution requires an honest and accurate desire to solve the scarcity problem. I’ll list the first two solutions and then add a third (there are many possible solutions) solution to the problem of scarcity.
In order to understand the cost principle I’ve discovered a political and economic law that offers the power to understand the cost principle solution to the scarcity problem. Power produced into a state of oversupply (ending scarcity) reduces the price (controlled by government, capitalists, sellers, buyers, people, human beings, criminals, legal criminals, liars, thieves, torturing mass murderers, etc.) reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases because power reduces the cost of production. If, for example, the suppliers of oil power controlled their price for oil sales based upon the cost principle, then the price of oil would be no more than the cost of oil and that cost is determined by how much it cost to deliver oil to the point of sale. The customer pays all the costs associated with delivering oil to the point of sale. That is the cost principle solution. The incentive is to sustain a sustainable business and do so better than any other competitor in a free market. That is the incentive for employing the cost principle. The incentive for employing the cost principle is to sustain a sustainable business better than any other competitor in a free market. When I employ the term Free Market the meaning behind that term is a market that is free from falsehood and a market that is free from violence. When capitalist employ the term Free Market, they may mean the same thing or they may mean one of the following meanings.
Gary North is a smart guy. Why does he ignore the true cause of the scarcity problem? The true cause of the scarcity problem is the lies that apologize for legal criminals who purposefully cause scarcity for the reasons that they determine at the time they cause scarcity. How can you find out the reason for the decision to cause scarcity when the people who cause scarcity can be trusted to lie? How can you trust a liar? You can trust that they will lie. How can anyone know why the people who have the power to make something scarce, why they decide to make something scarce? The answer is found with common sense. People who have the power to make something scarce do so because they profit by that scarcity. In other words; from their perspective it isn’t a problem. Making things scarce is a solution to a problem. There isn’t any reason to make this up, or imagine it, to read between the lines – so to speak. The data that proves the facts concerning why people who have the power to make things scarce, why they choose to make things scarce, that data abounds. People confess. Whistle blowers blow the whistle. Read the first link by Gary North. Listen to the words of Lindsey Williams. Know the truth. The people who have the power to make power scarce cannot sustain their power if everyone has power. People who have power can make more power themselves. The first step is to know the power of the truth. It is true, for example, that power can be produced into abundance or “oversupply” so as to reduce the price of power right down to the cost of supplying power and then that abundance of power can be employed to create even more power and the price for power can be pushed even lower because the costs of making power are even lower. A sustainable supply of electric power, abundant supply, and on into oversupply, is limited only by the scarce supply of sunlight, wind, water, and the tide. The scarce supply of motor fuel power is limited only by sunlight and our desire to make algae into motor fuel. There is no physical reason for the scarcity of power. The reasons offered by people who have the power to make power scarce are half true and therefore half false reasons. Those false reasons are shared by victims and ignorant members of the insiders. The insiders are the people who have the power to make power scarce. Everyone has the power to make power scarce. It is past time to set outside of that scarcity box. Power can be produced into an abundant supply, reinvested to reduce the costs of producing power, producing even more power, reducing the cost of power even more, producing power into a state of oversupply, reducing the price of power, while purchasing power increases and increases higher and higher, everyone becomes more and more wealthy, because power reduces the cost of production. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/banking_and_taxation_irs_and_insurance/social_security/news.php?q=1229218603
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff252.html
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://praxeology.net/TV-IA.htm Work in Iceland |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://mises.org/story/3293quote: quote: Anyone, I read through most of the article above and at a point in time and space the contradictions grew to an intolerable size and velocity. In other words: the bull-crap became too deep and I had to step back to fundamental principles as a more efficient and accurate method of viewing the subject. The subject is money as money fuels economy. The author of the piece linked (the bull-crap shoveling artist) claims to know this or that about China, The U.S., money, finance, economy, savings, and investment. How about some fundamental facts first? 1. When money is equal to the things that money buys, one dollar for one thing to buy, then there is economic stability. That must be understood, in my not so humble opinion (hard earned), before moving onto any thoughts about political economy. 2. When money is made legal, or not-legal (outside of law), then the economy is politicized into a political economy where politicians control the economy. Einstein has been quoted as saying number three: 3. Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. If the reader can now view political economy from these three beginning principles, along with me, we can better understand what is happing now in our world (and cut though the bull-crap). When money grows faster than the production of things that money can buy there will be a reaction to that change from a stable economy and that reaction will be an increase in the price of the things that money buys. This is very complicated when this principle is viewed on a very large scale where many different moneys are being manufactured and supplied to many people who manufacture and supply the things that money can buy. This principle is simple, the effect is complicated. Remember this first principle well before moving on. Work your brain some with this principle and make up simple examples that help illustrate the truth of this principle. Example: If China makes 1 billion shoes this year and 1 billion shoes next year and 1 billion shoes for 10 years in a stable economy the price of a shoe is 1 Yuan per shoe for 10 years. Don’t get caught up in entertaining all the things that can cause the shoe to rise or fall in price. The idea here is to know the effect on the price of the shoe caused by the production of money that is produced by the politicians in the political economy. For 10 years the price of the shoe does not change because the number of units of money does not change, and that is how the supply of money does not cause a change in the price of the shoe. Now, after 10 years of a stable economy, where the price of the shoe remained the same for 10 years, and the price of the shoe did not change from 1 Yuan for 1 shoe for 10 years, the politicians decide to change the supply of money. The politicians decide to change the supply of money in one of two ways, according to their plan, the plan they decide to execute, they decide to either double the supply of money or decrease the supply of money by half. The politicians run some computer models to see what happens to the price of shoes in both cases as the politicians decide to change the supply of money. A. Doubling the supply of money will double the price of the shoe. The shoe will go from 1 Yuan per shoe to 2 Yuan per shoe. B. Decreasing the supply of money will reduce the price of the shoe by half. The shoe will go from 1 Yuan to half of a Yuan per shoe. If you, the reader, run that math problem through your head until you know it and see it for what it is, in reality, you can then begin to understand what the political economists call “inflation” and “deflation” and you really don’t need to know much more than that single and simple principle. Which choice do you think the politicians will pick? When the politicians pick choice A the politicians have a lot of new money to spend, and that is one reason why the politicians take over the money making business. Now I see the very serious need to make this simple principle one step more complicated. The reader may never understand why the politicians would ever voluntarily choose the second option where the choice is to remove money out of the economy and by that choice the politicians begin the process of “deflation” – where the price of the shoe goes down instead of the price of the shoe going up. The next step here, and now, is to look at something called “The Business Cycle”. The reasoning behind the willful choice to remove money from a stable (or booming = “inflating”) economy is to cause a recession, a depression, a crash, and a down cycle on purpose. What on earth, you may wonder; would someone, or some group of people, be thinking when someone decides to cause an economic down turn by that decision to reduce the supply of money? Here is where simplicity wins again against the complex answer. The idea is to cause price fluctuations on a predictable schedule where the politicians (and their business partners) know when prices are at the highest, the lowest, going up from low to high, and going down from high to low. The idea is to sell at the top and buy at the bottom. This is not news, and this is not the simplistic fancy of an overly imaginative forum member, as many are likely to assume as they are apt to do when faced with simple logic as simple logic explains the unnecessary profusion of diversionary complexity. Once the power of supplying legal monetary currency is in place, in the hands of those who control this power, that power can then be used to increase prices, decrease prices, and increase prices again – on schedule. One of the best books that the reader can read to confirm this basic and simple principle is a book written by someone who saw this practice in operation. This book was once infamous. Now this book is well hidden under piles of bull-crap. Here is a link: http://www.mininova.org/tor/2152570 If the reader has learned something simple from my explanation and the reader wishes to further test out his or her new found knowledge, to apply that knowledge as wisdom, then I can proceed to illustrate that type of chore with thought experiments as the reader and I begin to think and act like political economists. We can pretend to be The Boss and see how our plan manages to stabilize our economy – if you wish. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://mises.org/story/3299
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmADAA97RTI&feature=related There's no way you own it. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article21957.htm
A debate on the subject of Network (World Wide Web) voting has yet to be conducted (or heard by me) where user freindly (cost free), open source, and crime free (encoded) results are public access, public policed, and public enforced realities. Here is an example of how powerful that subject, that issue, and that reality is: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=assassination+politics&aq=0s&oq=assasination+politic The way that works, as a power, is illustrated by current realities known as selling short, selling long, and something called "put options". People move their individual powers toward a collective power, a fund or store of value, and then that collective power is spent on something. The point of attraction, the reasoning for individuals to move their power to that one location, is adjustable, call it a tax, call it an investment, call it a stock, bond, purchase, ticket, call the impetus whatever you want, each individual wants something, and when each individual wants some future event to happen, something bad for other people, that collective power finances that future event, that future event may not happen, yet, but that future event, powered by millions, is more likely to happen, when millions power the actions that may make that future event happen. Who would bet against a future event that is desired by millions who put their money where their mouths are? About a century ago, US labor leader Eugene Victor Debs was thrown into jail during a strike. Sitting in his cell he could not escape the conclusion that in disputes between two private interests, capital and labor, the state was not a neutral arbiter. The force of the state--with its police, militia, courts, and laws—was unequivocally on the side of the company bosses. From this, Debs concluded that capitalism was not just an economic system but an entire social order, one that rigged the rules of democracy to favor the moneybags. A prosperous, politically literate populace with high expectations about its standard of living and a keen sense of entitlement, pushing for continually better social conditions, is not the plutocracy’s notion of an ideal workforce and a properly pliant polity. Corporate investors prefer poor populations. The poorer you are, the harder you will work—for less. The poorer you are, the less equipped you are to defend yourself against the abuses of wealth. There is a third function of the capitalist state seldom mentioned. It consists of preventing the capitalist system from devouring itself. Consider the core contradiction Karl Marx pointed to: the tendency toward overproduction and market crisis. An economy dedicated to speedups and wage cuts, to making workers produce more and more for less and less, is always in danger of a crash. To maximize profits, wages must be kept down. But someone has to buy the goods and services being produced. For that, wages must be kept up. There is a chronic tendency—as we are seeing today—toward overproduction of private sector goods and services and underconsumption of necessities by the working populace. Here is where Joe's Law must be contrasted against the above "knowledge". Power (unlike any other consumable) produced into a state of oversupply reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases (wages effectively go up for everyone) because power reduces the cost of production. I think, and you may question this please, that the Capitalist Class (whomever they are) know the facts concerning power production (Joe's Law), and that is why competition in the production of power must be defeated by that class of people who call (falsely) themselves capitalists - they are monopolists (see Howe - Confessions of a Monopolist). Capitalism doesn't devour itself; lies (falsehood) and violence are monopoly powers, powers that devour all other powers including lies and violence. Might does not make right, might devours might, leaving one power left - one last mighty person who defeats everyone else - it is the definition of insanity. Capitalism is the practice of pricing sales based upon a scarcity index, or "that which the market demands", or whatever price the buyer is willing to pay. That practice, that capitalistic practice, is harmless without lies and violence because any buyer can find a seller who offers a higher value sale at a lower cost, even the buyer can make the thing sold him or herself, if possible. When capitalist set about destroying the competition, with lies and violence, then capitalism becomes un-capitalism or super-capitalism, or whatever word is employed to accurately identify a pricing scheme (or practice) that encourages people to destroy competition, by deceit and violence. My words are new words, you won't read these words anywhere else, that does not make these observations, these reports, any less accurate, these observations and reports, by me, are merely un-popular - for some reason, or for no reason at all. The criminal class, or the legal crimnial class, profits from conflict between peaceful capitalists fighitng peaceful socialists, that criminal legal class sells the ammo, and collects the taxes used to make the ammo. How good is that deal? That criminal legal class makes their victims work harder to buy the stuff used to enslave them, to torture them, and to kill them. This is not old news. Listen here: http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/commonsense/text.html 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 calamities is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer! |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22123.htm
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=3599 Electric cars http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=3582 Detroit is the Windy-City? http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9945005-54.html  http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1476/86/ "Jet Engine" Wind Turbines Could Quadruple Power Generation Look around and see the new age dawning, in my town a huge wind mill is now turning, it turns free wind power into cheap electricity and that is an increase in benefit and a lowering of cost. Does it take an economist to see how a Quadruple of output is another increase in benefit and a lowering of cost? Who is in charge? Why are they so damn stupid? I think the answer is that the people in charge are not stupid, they profit at our expense, and to find proof of this "follow the money" and that money leads to The Federal Reserve PEOPLE. Money is purchasing power, money backed by actual power (Oil or Electricity) is more powerful than money backed by stupidity. Last edited on Sat Apr 25th, 2009 01:00 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.wsws.org/ |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://endthefedforums.com/index.php Competition |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22546.htm
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/riggenbach/riggenbach3-5.html
And for anyone who may conclude that the above is some aberation, or some new discovery of history, even a wild speculation, here is a quote from someone who figured this stuff out before the Civil War:
This definition of Socialism may surprise some into the discovery of the fact that they have been Socialists all along, unawares. Some, on the other hand, who have called themselves Socialists may not at once be inclined to accept the definition. They may not perceive clearly that it is the emancipation of the Individual for which they are laboring, and affirm that it is, on the other hand, the freedom and happiness of the race. They will not, however, deny that it is both; and a very little reflection will show that the freedom and happiness of each individual will be the freedom and happiness of the race, and that the freedom and happiness of the race cannot exist so long as there is any individual of the race who is not happy and free. So the Protestant and the Democrat may not always have a clear intellectual perception of the distinctive principle of their creeds. He may be attached to it from an instinctive sentiment, which he has never thoroughly analyzed, or even from the mere accidents of education and birth. Read the rest here: http://anarchism.net/scienceofsociety.htm Or here: http://classicalliberalism.blogspot.com/2006/04/science-of-society-no_10.html Last edited on Fri May 8th, 2009 08:34 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north715.html +++++++ Ellen Brown is a lawyer. She is anti-Federal Reserve. So, she gets a hearing in conservative circles. This is unfortunate. There is nothing conservative about her. She is an apologist for statism and the United States Treasury (a wholly owned subsidiary of Goldman Sachs). Her article is about the hyperinflation of Germany, 1921–23. She has no understanding of what happened or why, but she talks as if she does. If you want the real story on the German hyperinflation, you can get it on the Mises.org site. All of these are available for free. +++++++ Good morning people, The above link and quote sparks and interest in me to convey questions and possible answers concerning current human events where the forces of evil continue to overpower innocent humans and happy life on Earth. Gary North wrote the article and again half of the truth is better than none, unless the mind perceiving half the truth assumes a false second half. The article is a warning to anyone who may fall into a trap of deception whereby the listener is misinformed about money. I find this to be incredibly ironic. Many so called “experts” on political economy are very authoritative and simply wrong, a false perspective is more destructive than an ignorant one because an ignorant perspective is at least open to the possibility of learning that which is not accurately understood currently, while the false perspective goes happily down the path of destruction. The warning in the piece by Gary North above is warranted in simple terms, easy to understand language, and beneficial to anyone who may be steered down the false path of accepting false authority concerning money matters. Specifically speaking there is a danger in blaming the wrong people for pre-meditated actions perpetrated by un-exposed criminals as those criminals plan on and then execute their plan to injure innocent people for profit. Gary North points directly at a specific Central Banker who caused specific things to happen in Germany during the time of Hitler’s criminal (legal crime) reign. Gary North does not appear to be interested in exposing the men behind those men. Who benefits most from these pre-meditated and willful acts perpetrated by these legal criminals? Gary North will leave his readers thinking in terms of Capitalism and capitalists, the good guys, against the bad guys, those socialists who run Central Banks. Before anyone badmouths me, if someone has a mind to turn the tables, or point this reflection back at me. I offer, as a challenge, for the reader to read and comment on Gary North’s work, in the link above, and then for the reader to read the following: http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=904 ++++++++ 'The small town of Worgl in the Austrian Tyrol, suffering like every other town in Europe and America from the Great Depression, took the unlikely step of issuing its own currency' ++++++++ The point here is to point out how the blame does not go to “socialists” running “Central Banks” where these error prone economic “monetary cranks” (idiots), make the mistake of failing to obey “Austrian Economic” wisdom, where “capitalism” is the only way that leads mankind toward prosperity. If the reader has exerted actual careful effort into reading both links and the reader considers my take on this to be unsupported conjecture, I offer the following quote from Gary North’s article: +++++++ What the witch was to medieval man, what the capitalist is to socialists and communists, the speculator is to most politicians and statesmen: the embodiment of evil. +++++++ When people get caught into the clap trap of blaming innocent people for the actions of the guilty, what is the expected result of that error? The guilty are empowered to continue committing their crimes, while the innocent continue to be injured? Blame is being projected, explicitly and inexplicitly (subliminally), at innocent people who happen not to be believers in the goodness of capitalism, as a means to economic prosperity or any other supposed end by that means. Capitalism is merely a pricing scheme whereby the seller sets the price of the seller’s property at the price determined by the buyers want, or need, of the property for sale. That is the essence of capitalism, when a capitalist will hazard to confess the principle behind their dogma, and few will. Capitalists see no other possible method of pricing, such as the price of a thing that is based upon the cost of the thing being sold. Perhaps a capitalist does exist, a self-confessed capitalist, who can see a cost based pricing scheme, but by that capitalist filter, their dogma based ideology, the perception of a cost based pricing scheme is viewed as “monetary crankism” or “economic ignorance” or some other emotional reaction. If a capitalist is capable of exposing the error of a cost based pricing method (not the capitalist method to be sure), then that capitalist has yet to speak, or write, and reach me. Speak up if you can, please. When a few people command the power to produce and maintain a legal money supply those people can abuse that power. When that power is willfully abused, after having acquired it, the idea is to transfer even more power to the abusers from the people who create power. If a capitalist calls the people who create power by the label: entrepreneur and a socialist call the people who create power by the label: laborer: is there any cause for conflict in that discrimination? Why do capitalists blame socialists for the deeds of legal criminals? Who do socialists blame capitalists for the deeds of legal criminals? Why do legal criminals hire propagandists? Please enlighten me. I read through the whole article written by Gary North and a few things could be answered with more precision.
|
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22702.htm From the "left" above I find:
Notice, again, the connection between Oil and Dollars (or Physical Power and Psychological (Political) Power), where an obvious POWER of defense is first imagined into thoughtful being and then executed by physical action – where an Oil Monopoly Power combined with a Money Monopoly POWER is forced out of that land where people reside. The remaing question is then; who governs who (after the old bosses are removed from power)? Here is Marx on that question:
Who takes control of legal purchasing power and how does that arrangement work out in specific transfers of power? In other words: "How much interest (cost) is paid by who to who for the use of legal money, and be accurate in the answer (no fraudulent data)?" |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://mises.org/story/3425
All of them? Does that author realize the irony of that statement? That development seems to have risen from this little-understood and dangerously deceptive arrangement: two groups of persons with entirely different motives may sometimes find themselves allied in what appears to be a common cause. Same author quoting a sentence that applies well to the supposed "Federalists" fighting the supposed "Anti-Federalists" during the usurpation of Liberty by The Constitution supporters (The Nationalists who provided the false and misleading labels). |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/schmidt/schmidt17-2.html
I had asked the question on the power of the network (path of least resistance) to the Austrians (so called economists) back in 1996. I agree with that answer. http://www.austrianforum.com/index.php?showtopic=163 That link records thoughts on "the path of least resistance" effect, where routers find ways around blockades. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo172.html
Anyone, Why are these messages written in code? Why must there be such a huge gap between the words and the meaning behind the words? If the idea is to accurately identify specific people who plan on and follow through with the plan to injure innocent people; then why not call that what it is – in fact? What is the idea where the idea is to accurately identify specific criminals? A. Defensive government B. Accurate perception employed in defence against victimization C. A recruitment tool Once the idea bears fruit, where the accurate perception tool is employed toward identifying legal criminals, where the people who are guilty of pre-meditated destruction of innocent life are known, then does the idea become a form of “The British are Coming” where Paul Revere spreads the word? If the idea is to accurately know who intends to injure innocent people, for profit, or just for fun, and that same idea is then moved into an advertisement phase, where the idea becomes a warning of some sort, let all the innocent people beware, then why does the warning have to be couched in these mysterious terms? Here is the quote again: Together, they wrecked much of the world economy because of their shared "fatal conceit" (F.A. Hayek’s term) that government central planners were superior to private property and free markets. “Government Central Planners”, “Property” and “Free Markets”. The bad guys appear to be those evil government central planners. Now, please, what is the idea where the idea is to accurately identify specific criminals? Who are the bad guys? Who has the idea where the idea is to accurately identify specific criminals? Here is a guy, this Tom guy, and he has this idea where the idea is to accurately identify “Government Central Planners” – is this true? What is Tom doing? He, if I may answer my own question, is planning on doing something. He must have planned on writing those words – no? Is Tom centrally located? Is Tom a Central Planner? Why has Tom governed his word choices so as to misidentify the legal criminals as being “Government Central Planners”? Why blame “government” for actions of human beings? What is the plan behind this governing of words so as to mislead, misidentify, disguise, deceive, miss-communicate, and falsely propagate falsehood? I have to say, to any reader, that I have a whole lot in common with this Tom guy, more than I have in common with most everyone else, however, please, see the diversions. Why is “property” being communicated in such a way as to suggest that “private property” represents “the good guys”? Why do people plan on and then execute their plans to suggest that “property” is good, bad, or even indifferent? What is the reasoning for introducing this idea of “property” as if “property” were capable of thought and or action? Example: Suppose a robot was constructed where the robot has a program built into the robot and the robot will torture and mass murder millions of people if some person turns the robot on. Please think about that above example as an illustration of why I think Tom is spreading a whole lot of false propaganda, as Tom becomes a “Government Central Planner” in that effort to spread that specific false propaganda concerning this supposed “private property” stuff. P.S. I wrote an e-mail to Tom (a plan of mine to warn Tom about the things I publish in reference to what Tom publishes) Last edited on Fri Jun 12th, 2009 12:02 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/06/disruptive-by-design-wired-editor-in-chief-chris-anderson-discusses-the-future-of-free/ Free as a marketing strategy. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23923.htm Lies, War, and Empire By Dr. Michael Parenti |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24255.htm By Noam Chomsky America is not a democracy, nor was it intended to be. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard159.html Rothbard ignores the work of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews, and Rothbard misrepresents the work of Benjamin Tucker. Spooner's "A New System of Paper Currency" is also misrepresented, indirectly by Rothbard. The things ignored by Rothbard just happen to be the things that compete with his Interest/Profit/Wage Paying System. Why does Rothbard ignore the competition? Why does Rothbard misrepresent the competition, does Rothbard intend to destroy competition? Is competition in Rothbard's way, impeding the power accumulation intended with his Interest/Profit/Wage Paying System of wealth accumulation? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/ostrowski/ostrowski95.1.html
Ahhh...the failed noble experiment hypothesis - false. The architects of U.S.A. inc (Limited) included people like Robert Morris and Alexander Hamilton, two “Nationalists” (Legal criminals) hiding behind a false front called: “Federalists”, and their goal has been achieved – in spades – where the idea was, and is, to transfer POWER from those who earn it to those who produce and maintain the “monopoly” and their tool is legal tender; a money monopoly. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
No other time in human history comes close to the present. Certainly, if these risks are not understood by those who make decisions in the heights of the immense power that science and technology have placed in their hands, the next world war will be the last one, and it would take, perhaps, tens of millions of years before new intelligent beings would attempt to write their history. The Global Warming scenario on steroids, and a rapidly accelerating rate of acceleration for the winner in the race to DOOM DAY. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Economic Hit Man meets Lew Rockwell |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
ChindiaDr Buiter’s team adds the usual caveats: “beware of compound growth rate delusions;” or “the bigger the booms, the more spectacular the bubbles, and the devastating the busts;” or indeed that “convergence is neither automatic, nor inevitable. In history, it has been more the exception than the rule.” Anyone, What is meant by "convergence" as in: "convergence is neither automatic, nor inevitable."? Please, don't be shy. |
|||||||||||
