| ||||
| ||||
| Moderated by: Joe Kelley | Page:   1 2 |
|
|||||||||||||
| Prison Planet Forum | Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29th, 2011 04:19 pm |
|
21st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul-slams-bernanke%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cstaged%E2%80%9D-media-show.html Anyone, A television reporter asked Ron Paul a question: What tools exist to reign it in. The subject matter is The Fed. Look here: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27988.htm Are you smarter than a 5th Grader? I want to speak to the Honest Productive People of America, the people who are intelligent as a result of necessity, and as a result of a willful demand for the truth, over time. Above are 3 viewpoints, and I will ad a fourth: 1. The Fed (the official legal viewpoint from "private" interests) 2. Journalism (the official no-nonsense "uncover and report the truth and let the chips fall as they may" viewpoint) 3. Government (the official legal viewpoint from the "public" interests) 4. My viewpoint (a viewpoint based upon over 3 decades of diligent, and relentless, independent study, complete with links to sources) My viewpoint: A sound bite will not work. Here is my source for the claim that a sound bite will not work: http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshire/EinsteinQuotes.html "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." I. Human survival is a power struggle (as simple as it gets) I.A Human survival depends upon the power each individual produces in excess of consumption; failure to produce more than consumed is unsustainable for each individual member of the human species, and unsustainable as a total measure of all power produced by all humans as consumption subtracts from that total. I.B Human survival depends upon reproduction, failure of one person to reproduce is an example of one individual consuming the power of one individual life and failing to produce more life during the consumption of that one life, and failure, therefore, to reproduce that one individual (genetic) example of life, while failure to reproduce, as a total amalgamation of all individual human lives, is failure to perpetuate the species; human life ends. The power of reproduction is insufficient, human life lasts one more generation. I.C 1. Human beings can take power from other human beings, as a method of surviving, which is a method by which total power decreases. This method can be seen as the parasitic method, and it is a method that cannot be sustained, it is a method that does not ensure the survival of the species, it is a method that ensures that the species will destroy itself, and it is a method that will destroy itself if the power of the numbers of individuals using this method reach a critical mass of numbers, and the result is a steady rate of consumption, of power, that is greater than the rate of power produced. The parasites consume the host by this unsustainable method when the numbers of people operating this method exceed the number of people who produce power, not as a strict, simple, relative number of people: as an accurately measurable power struggle. I.C 2. Human beings can refuse to take power from other human beings, as a method of surviving (producing by way of producing, more than consumed - not the parasitic method), a method by which total power increases. This method can be seen as the host method, and it is a method that sustains human life. Power available is used to make more power, and the level of power increases exponentially, since the scarce power supply increases to an abundant power supply, which increases the power available, the power from which more power is produced increases, and therefore the rate of increase increases. The result of an increase in the power supply is an increase in the standard of living, for each individual human being, while the cost of living decreases, for each human being, as power moves from scarcity to abundance - while power is used to produce more power, and then more power is used to produce even more power, on and on, even reaching a total power supply that can build Pyramids, or produce inter-planetary travel, even to a potential point of total power that is sufficient to empower the human species with the power to colonize other planets. II. Numerous methods exist by which people either take power from other people or people produce power (use power to make more power), resulting in either scarce power, and destruction, or abundant power and production. II. A. The methods by which people take power from other people, all of the methods, can be called crime, in English, or some other word in another language, it is the same process in any language. The criminal methods include (but not limited to): 1. Deceit (the power of knowledge is skillfully employed in the process of transferring power from the ignorant victim to the knowledgeable criminal) 2. Threats of violence (the power of will is skillfully employed in the process of transferring power from the apathetic victim to the willful criminal) 3. Examples of violence (the power of force is skillfully employed in the process of transferring power from the weak victims to the strong criminal) 4. Organized crime (criminals agree to access division of labor, specialization, and economies of scale, in the work of taking power from other criminals, not in their group, and taking power from power producers, and recruiting more members into the one dominant, criminal, group) Note: Power producers are the source of power, therefore crime cannot exist without that group, a function of numbers applies, and becomes obvious, as the number of criminals increase, the number of power producers decrease, and the total supply of power produced decreases as that power supply is divided by the number of people consuming it, and not adding to it, that power supply is produced by a steady decline in numbers of producers, and that power is consumed by a steady increase in the number of criminals, and the rate of consumption increases in proportion to the increase in criminals gaining numbers over the number of power producers. The rate of power consumption increases while the rate of power production decreases as the criminal power gains power over the productive power. Where: C = the number of criminals, parasites, or those who take power from other people P = the number of power producers, or those who produce more power than they consume T = the total supply of power above consumption + = a rate of increase in the total supply of power - = a rate of decrease in the total supply of power C > P = T- C < P = T+ The greater or less than symbol can be "power in numbers" or just power not necessarily a function of numbers of individual criminals or individual power producers. Criminals produce crime, destruction, or negative surplus wealth. Producers produce surplus wealth, they consume less than they produce, they produce positive surplus wealth, and if no one does so, human life ends. As the total number of criminals (parasites) increase, the rate of increase in the total power supply decreases, and when the total number of criminals exceed the total number of power producers, the result is a negative rate of total power supply increase, or, the people, as a total amalgamated whole, consume their power supply, which is unsustainable, as power lessens, power becomes scarce, then more scarce, and fewer and fewer people have enough power to survive, fewer and fewer people add to the total power supply. As the total number of criminals (parasites) decrease, the rate of increase in the total power supply increases, and when the total number of power producers exceed the total number of criminals, the result is a positive rate of total power supply increase, or, the people, as a total amalgamated whole, produce more power than the power consumed, and as more power becomes available, more power is used to make more power, and the quality of life increase, and the cost of life decreases, and the power producers work less and get more for each measure of power spent. For each measure of power spent, more power is produced, when the power of the producers exceed the power of the criminal parasites. Visual reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo&feature=player_embedded The above visual reference measures an increase in the total power supply and therefore the total power spent by the parasitic criminal group must be less than the total power supply produced (minus the total power spent by the productive group) because the total power supply has increased, as the power producers improve the rate of power production for each amount of power spent, working less and gaining more over time, when seen as an amalgamated whole, and the rate of increase increases despite the parasitic crime power consuming power, and not adding to power, at a high rate. That is the good news. The power producers are gaining power over the parasitic criminals in measurable ways overall. The bad news is such that some individuals are being consumed so as to benefit other individuals in some places, at some times, in the past, and in some places right now, and in some places some time in the future. The worse news is that some of the individuals who are being consumed, to the unwelcome benefit of criminal individuals, are the most productive people, the people who could have, but will not, increase the total power supply, and the worse news grows exponentially worse, as the power stolen from the productive people, who are now less able to produce, empowers the parasitic people making their criminal group more powerful, and therefore more able to consume, and lessen, the total power supply. Historical reference: http://www.constitution.org/civ/comsense.htm Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamities is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer! Honest productive people who send their hard earned power to people so as to protect the hard working people from harm, is one thing. Honest productive people who send their hard earned power to people so as to protect the hard working people from harm, but instead the power sent is used to injure honest productive people is another thing. One thing increases the power supply, and the other thing decreases the power supply, on purpose, for someone's, or some groups, exclusive profit. All that above is meant to offer a competitive viewpoint intended to describe the nature and constitution of the problem. The problem is such that those who produce power are being victimized as the power they produce is stolen and then the stolen power is used to perpetuate the power to steal, under the false front of "protection" against harm. Having the fourth competitive viewpoint in view I am going to comment on the other 3 viewpoints originally posted above. 1. The Fed (the official legal viewpoint from "private" interests) 2. Journalism (the official no-nonsense find the truth and let the chips fall as they may viewpoint) 3. Government (the official legal viewpoint from the "public" interests) 4. My viewpoint (a viewpoint based upon over 3 decades of diligent, and relentless, independent study, complete with links to sources) 1. The FED I can offer a real time account of how The Fed works, and then make some comments in the effort to communicate why the real time account does account for how The Fed works. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ That web site measures the flow of dollars. The Fed controls the flow of dollars. If the honest productive people actually want to keep the power they earn, so that they can use that power to create even more power, and so that they can avoid providing the means by which they suffer, then all the honest productive people have to do is to replace the dollar with something better, and that won't be difficult to do, since the dollar is almost as bad as the worst that can be, in that sphere of conflicting interests that goes by many names, including: 1. The Fed 2. The Dollar Hegemony 3. Wall Street 4. The World Reserve Currency 5. The Business Cycle 6. The Globalists 7. The Elite 8. The New World Order 9. Business a usual 10. The Establishment 11. The Powers that be 12. The Oligarchy 13, U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) The name is a place holder, the thing, is what the thing is, in reality. Deception is the greatest power employed by those who profit from that thing, and those who profit from that thing can make their victims believe that everyone profits from that thing, as we all join together in our power struggle to profit at the expense of other people, or non-people, or weak people, or unfortunate people, or stupid people, or terrorists, or savages, or socialists, or capitalists, or the bogey men. In a word, the Fed, is criminal, or false, or destructive. One word descriptions, although accurate, only begin to explain the complexity. Simplicity works, but not if the idea is to produce an effective remedy. Simplicity works to accurately identify the problem. If the honest productive people are able to slow down, stop, and end the flow of their hard earned power going to the people who use that stolen power to keep the flow going in that direction, the dollar has to either go, or the dollar has to become something that it is not, because the dollar is the unit of currency that does what it does, in real time. This: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ The dollar in its present form, as it is designed, and used, is a destructive tool, a deceptive tool, a weapon, and it perpetuates a crime in progress. That web site, that debt clock, measures what The Fed does. You can believe whatever you want, while you stay connected to everyone who is connected by the dollar, and those who are not connected by the dollar aren't, no matter what anyone wants to believe. If you are connected you pay along that path, if you are not connected you don't pay along that path. Disconnect from the dollar, see what happens. If disconnection from the dollar disconnects you from every other power producers, you will suffer a net loss of power, a bad idea lone. So you stay connected to the criminals, so as to stay connected to the other power producers. Only disconnecting from the dollar connection, without replacing the connection to other power producers, by way of a better connection, results in, cutting off your nose to spite your face, or shooting yourself in the foot, so, logically, the right thing to do is to connection to other power producers with a different form of currency. Failing to fill the void, when the connection between power producers and criminals is no longer a connection, is economic exile, solitary confinement, or some other word that is a place holder for the real time result of having no connection to anyone else. The Fed disconnects power producers from other power producers when they create an economic bust, when they bleed the economic body into an anemic, bloodless, condition. The solution isn't to help the criminals by volunteering to produce less, and consume more, to give more blood, attach more parasites, invite over a few more vampires, or completely disconnect yourself from every other power producer, the solution is to throw the bath water out, and keep the baby. The honest, and accurate, accounting mediums, that connect power producers to power producers, is vital, in the process of using scarce power to make more power, and make power abundant, without which, human life ends. It is a suicidal act to willfully sever the connections between power producers, as the saying goes, if products don't cross boarders, troops will, and that is true for a reason, a reason that should be clear, but may not be clear, when the power of reason is compromised by the power of falsehood. A proposed solution that suggests disconnection from all, is a solution that proposes disconnection of power producers to power producers, when, if you think about it, all that is needed is disconnection of power producers from criminals. One supposed solution removes any hope of charity, for many reasons, and the other workable solution preserves that willful connection between power producers and people in desperate need of help, such as children, and old people, and people who are too weak minded, or too weak physically to produce, alone, enough power to survive. Cut the connections between everyone, as a supposed solution to cut out the connection to criminals, isn't a solution, it is another problem, and a very serious one. The dollar connects all who use it to all who use it. Those who are not connected by the dollar are either completely disconnected from everyone else, or some other connection connects people to people. Connecting criminals to their victims is what the dollar does, that is what it is designed to do, and the flow of power goes one way in that connection, it goes from those who produce power to those who steal it, and the stolen power is then used to perpetuate that form of that connection so as to keep the power flowing only in that direction. The dollar, in that form, has to go, but not without something better filling the void, something competitive, something that allows the consumer to regain the power to choose something better, and no longer something that is the only thing that must be used, when it is made available, or not used, when it is made scarce, according to one person, or one group of a very few individuals. That is what The Fed does and the score board (debt clock) is as accurate as it needs to be, and there are many forms of the score board including the following reference. In addition to the dollar denominated Nation State (nationalism) Debt Clock there are these scores along the dollar denominated legal monopoly extortion racket money trail: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-gCKDmnRGY Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports report, precisely, who produces power, where the power comes from, and who steals power, names, dates, amounts, and all of it is denominated in dollars, and all of it stops the second that anyone connected to that crime in progress stops using dollars, and starts using something better. Failing to use something better than dollars, or failing to make dollars something that no longer is used to steal power, is not a solution, just like laborers going on strike is not a solution. Laborers uniting to create a better business competitor, and then out-competing their former employer is a solution; because one method stops the process of producing power, going the wrong way, and the other method forces competition which forces more production of higher quality, at lower costs, gaining more power, as a solution, rather than consuming power as a supposed solution, rather than refusing to be productive, as a supposed solution. A. Measurable progress that accurately proves that the problem is being solved. B. Lies that cover-up the truth; whereby the supposed solution is the problem. All those words intend to quantify and qualify what The Fed is. How do you measure what The Fed is, in reality, and without resorting to deceit as a means of communicating what is The Fed? 2. Journalism (the official no-nonsense find the truth and let the chips fall as they may viewpoint) If the supposed journalist fails to accurately communicate how criminals are now perpetrating very serious crimes, what then constitutes that message? That message, if it fails to accurately communicate how criminals are now perpetrating serious, very serious, crimes, is by that measure criminal. The crime may be nothing more than a failure to know the truth, criminal negligence, and a little bit of criminal negligence is not worth a moments concern, not a fraction of a second of concern does any good, whatsoever, concerning a minute, minuscule, harm-less, crime of criminal negligence, on the far end of that scale, and on the far other end of that scale, criminal negligence can include such things as a doctor prescribing Tylenol to a patient who will die from something obvious, something any other doctor would not miss-diagnose, just to illustrate the point of criminal negligence, which is a scale of examples from least to most criminally negligent. If you were a reporter and you were watching a group of people driving tanks with flame throwers through a church full of people, including pregnant mothers, babies, women, children, old people, toddlers, and even grown men, and you reported that the burning, crushed, and tortured dying people were "killing themselves", and if that is what you actual believe, as you report that criminal massacre, then you are defining what is criminal negligence, as you fail to be a journalist. It matters not if there are laws that intend to discourage such crimes, they are crimes by the measure of their ability to cover-up, and perpetuate, crime. If the supposed Journalist intentionally produces and publishes false information, concerning very serious crimes, committed by known criminals, then the supposed Journalist is an accessory to those very serious crimes, a hired criminal associate, or even a charitable volunteer criminal associate, covering up the crimes, "pro-bono". Alex Jones is a Journalist, by the measure of communicating the facts, facts that can be proven, or challenged. If a journalists facts are successfully challenged, a journalist further proves his measure of journalism by retracting the false information. These are known methods of accomplishing knowable goals. 3. Government (the official legal viewpoint from the "public" interests) Ron Paul is a representative of liberty, as far his power allows him to be, which, by that definition, as he defines that definition, represents everyone, and excludes no one, except by way of self-exclusion when criminals exclude themselves from that group. Got that? Why, you may ask, does this guy, Joe Kelley, speak in language that is so foreign to my ears? If you think that, then you are measuring the language of duplicity, you are measuring the language of falsehood relative to the words I convey to you. By contrast the language of falsehood is compared to the words you read from me. I don't speak double speak, get it? Ron Paul, as far as I have known his messages, and that goes back decades, consistently represents everyone, except the criminals who exempt themselves from liberty, because Ron Paul represents liberty. Liberty is the condition of life that effectively disconnects criminals from victims, liberates the victims from their oppressors. When criminals can't get to their targeted victims, there are no victims, all the potential victims are liberated, and no longer accessible to the criminals. If that appears to you to be a message written in a foreign language, then you may be speaking double speak. I don't. You may have grown accustomed to speaking with a forked tongue. You may have been exposed too long to the radiation of falsehoods emitted by the supposed journalists who are in fact members of the legal crime cabal, just get yourself a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, and follow the dollars as those dollars connect the victims with the criminals, if you want to know who those criminals are, there they are, in black and white. Numbers don't lie. Math is provable. Math repeats each time you try it, the same result occurs every time you use math to solve a problem. How much do you get when you take 1 from 2 this time? How much do you get when you take 1 from 2 tomorrow? When you come up with a different answer, using math, let me know, so far, math works the same it once did 2000 years ago. The English language isn't that way, not like math. What was once a liberal 200 years ago, is not a liberal today. Why? Try math, it works better. Try reading what I write, not what you assume to be what I write, and you may see the math based message, or not, and then try asking questions, if you are the least bit curious. 4. My viewpoint (a viewpoint based upon over 3 decades of diligent, and relentless, independent study, complete with links to sources) There are too many divergent viewpoints working to solve one problem, when one solution works to solve one problem. What is the problem? Power is being consumed by those who steal it from those who create it, and that stolen power is used to perpetuate that one way flow of power. That is English. The math based account of the problem is documented in dollars. That is math. If that one problem, dollars, is known, what is the solution? Again from Alex Jones's own power to report the facts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDswHOfib9A That is a source of information that reports a clearly workable solution to the problem. The problem: Power is being consumed by those who steal it from those who create it and that stolen power is used to perpetuate that one way flow of power. The solution must be a method by which power is no longer flowing to those who steal power, as the thieves then use power to keep stealing power, and the solution must also allow the productive people to connect with fellow power producers maintaining the power to use power in the work of increasing power, which increases quality, and lowers cost, or increases the standard of living for all the power producers, and as a bonus, charity is possible. What is the best solution? What is the second best solution? What is the third best solution? Who decides which solution is the best one? Will the best solution be the best solution for everyone, at the expense of no one, except those people who willfully volunteer to exclude themselves from the benefits of the best solution? At this point I see a need to return to Gary North and his report on the division within the Austrian Economist group: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north512.html WHAT IS THE SOLUTION? Four solutions: 1. The Fed system of extortion using the dollar unit of currency to connect the power producers to the legal criminals: transferring power one way (an enforced legal monopoly) 2. A solution by which government produces and maintains a not-for-profit monetary accounting system such as the examples shown in the Money Masters videos, or the proposed examples reported by Walter Burien, or examples offered by one side of the Austrian Economist group (all of which are enforced legal money monopolies) 3. No law power expended toward the enforcement of any money supply of any kind, no power taken by government and then spent to subsidize any competitive money supplier whatsoever, which is the other side of the Austrian Economist group (the complete absence of the willful employment of the force of government in the work that causes a money monopoly power) 4. My competitive offering of 2 financial products issued by the government power as licenses awarded to a number of competitive money producing businesses in the effort to solve both the problem of having a need for competition in money markets, so as to allow the force of competition to enforce higher quality, and lower cost, and the problem of financing government by some means other than abject crime (involuntary taxation). Clearly, for anyone having managed to get this far, the fact that competition is the solution, and competition is the force that will work to solve the problem, can be seen as a glaringly obvious fact. Having no choice other than The Fed system of extortion, measurable by following the flow of dollars, using math, using the actual record of dollars flowing from the source of dollars, through each user, and back to the source of dollars, having no choice but that measurable crime spree, that perpetual victimization of the people who produce power, by the people who steal it, is the only single enforced answer for the few who profit by that one choice, which is not a choice at all, since it is a crime, and it is a devious crime, and it is enforced by threats of violence, and it is enforced by actual examples of violence. It is not a choice, it is a dictate, it is an enforced condition of servitude whereby anyone using dollars will be sending the power they create to the criminals who produce and maintain the dollar legal unit of money. Anyone choosing something better solves that problem - as obvious as the sun on a clear summer day in the open desert. Something better that that extortion racket is, in a word, competition. A. Monopoly B. Competition One is not a choice, and the other is a choice. That, at least, is obvious. Among the competitors, which ones are no better, and potentially worse than the dollar monopoly non-choice, and how can anyone move from the dollar non-choice to a better choice, when taxes must be paid, and the only legal money accepted by the involuntary tax enforcers are dollars? Of the four choices I have enumerated above, there is only one choice that completely avoids monopoly, and that choice, as it happens, completely removes the force of involuntary taxation. You can't have one with out the other. A laws that says, hey dude, if you want, you can pay me with your choice of money, when you pay your taxes, is a law that removes the tax collectors from the power they have over money, and once that power is gone, the government power is subject to the money power. Once that law is the law the money power subjects the government power to whatever the money power demands, or else, the government power does not collect taxes, or money, or power, and that is why the word power is a better word than money. Money is power. Power is money. If money has no power (to purchase) it isn't money. Get that, or remain ignorant about money. I like that choice. You may not. Many people, even most people, think (or are made to believe) that taxes must be involuntary, since failing to enforce tax payments, from the people who create wealth, which is the only place taxes can come from, will result in anarchy, and anarchy, according to this type of thinking, is a situation whereby everyone is running around raping, robbing, torturing, and mass murdering everyone else, as the story goes, all men are bad, and therefore some of "us", have to lord over the rest of us, and "us" good people have to force all the bad people, and "us" good people must make the bad people good, by our superior goodness, since "they" are all bad, and only "we", or "i", am good, in other words, might makes right, or in other words "do unto others before they have a chance to do unto you", or, kill or be killed. That is the script that is written by all the dictators, and unfortunately, that is the script that is also read by all the dupes who are sending their hard earned power to the dictators. Here, take this power I worked hard to produce, and kill them over there, before "we" have to kill them over here, or bla, bla, bla, bla, the same story, in other words. You are either with us, or you are a terrorist. In one word: Obey There is no choice, and that is the secret. Knowing that that is what is happening, measurably happening, is one thing, doing something about it is another thing. Of the options enumerated above, to solve the problem described above, are the monopoly money enforcement methods. The Fed solution solves the "How can I get something for nothing?" problem, which is the problem from the victims perspective, and which is the solution from the criminals perspective. The Bill Still, Money Masters, or the Walter Burien, from his work with Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, solutions, employ government in the work of supplying a not-for-private-profit legal money monopoly method, which has worked, does work, and will work, so long as the criminals don't take it over, as they are likely to do, have done, and are doing. The same problems, of usurpation, are addressed in the solution I offer, if anyone wants to know. The main point here, from my viewpoint, is to point out that the solution is to allow the force of competition to work, as competition is a measurable transfer of power from a monopoly power, whereby the consumers have no choice, to a condition whereby the consumers have the power of choice, and once the consumers have the power of choice, the suppliers must increase quality, and lower cost, or the other suppliers will increase quality, and lower cost, and therefore the only way to keep the power that is needed to stay in business, is to pony up, and be better than the competition. If the solution is to change the laws so that government is subject to the monopoly power and the monopoly power has no competition, then that is a description of what is, not a description of the solution. That is a description of the problem, not a description of the solution. Therefore there are two obvious methods to solve the problem (as it was described above): 1. Enforce a single supplier by way of deceit, threats of violence, and acts of violence, by the single supplier (criminals) upon the targeted consumers (victims). 2. Allow liberty to work, whereby victims have effectively disconnected their connections to the criminals, and suppliers must produce higher quality supplies to the consumers or be forced to look for work where they can supply higher quality supplies to the consumers, or be dependent upon true charity for failing to produce more than they consume, or die trying. My viewpoint may appear to be harsh to some. Think first. Use your own brain. If the power supply becomes scarce then there isn't enough power to be charitable, and on that path each person will be forced to spend more and more of the scarce supply of power working to defend against a growing number of increasingly desperate criminals. If liberty exists, as a greater and greater power, as more and more producers of wealth disconnect themselves from the criminals, more and more power is produced, and less and less power is consumed in the work of defending against criminals, because, by that definition, more and more people are allowed to produce more power, and less and less people can afford to earn their living at crime as the remaining criminals have to fight each other to gain access to the remaining, shrinking, supply of ready victims. Added to one problem is one more problem and before I add the second problem I will restate the first one: The problem: Power is being consumed by those who steal it from those who create it and that stolen power is used to perpetuate that one way flow of power. Second problem: Too many people continue to believe that they can solve a measurable problem by using a solution that is measurably the same exact thing as the problem. In one word the problem is: Stupification That is a numbers problem. How can less people be in one group and how can more people be in the other group? Group A: Those who stupify Group B: Those who are stupified If Darwin's theory is correct, then that problem will solve itself, one way or the other. The internet, for example, may have been constructed as a means by which those who stupify can increase their power to stupify, and now, it seems, the power is like a genie let out of the bottle, or like the opening of Pandora's box, and try as they might, the genie won't go back in the bottle, and the box remains open. Stop reading from the script, before it is too late, please.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue May 17th, 2011 12:50 am |
|
22nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
#1...LEO=Law Enforcement Officer. Persona Non Grata, I can get back to that later, now that I know what you mean, I have to go back and read the context of the acronym. For now I see our discussion taking a bad turn in the following: #2...Whether I do or do not see any significance in a link you posted does not bear on my or anyone else's decision-making process, so try not to make weakly formulated presumptions, if you would please... Having no reference as to what you mean with the above, and polite, request, I can't honor the request, since it makes no sense to me. If you have no comment on the references I offer, then you don't have any comment on the references I offer, and to me that is exactly what is its, you have no comment concerning the references I offer. #3...The PEOPLE have the power to "target" tyrants, if they would just band together with singular purpose, be it either in armed rebellion or unarmed revolt. If an intelligent person cannot perceive which are tyrants when their actions boldly proclaim their tyranny, then such person deserves their oppression, in my opinion... My point on that has to do with getting from point A to point B, whereupon there isn't enough power, therefore point A become powerlessness, and point B, obviously, becomes a willful effort to gain power. That was my point. If you say that The People have the power, that is a statement that can be proven, or that is a statement that can be dis-proven, in a measurable way, and if I can offer another link that may or may not help with the measure of the power of The People, I can only hope that you will consider the measure of this power that The People have, so as to help measure the claim for accuracy. Offer me a measure of the power of The People as you know it to be - please. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ If the link doesn't measure what you claim, then I have no idea what it is that you are claiming to be this power that The People have, so our viewpoints are, apparently, measurably, not on the same page. #4...I have read Mr. Bell, and am one who believes that his system, while a bit extreme, is preferable to the con-artistry which is so prevalent among our governors today...The likelyhood that Mr. Bell was persecuted for thought - of any kind - is only further testament to the absolute tyranny of the powers-that-be. The powers-that-be know who to snuff out and who not to waste time on, such is a measure of their power. Other people are less inclined to resort to the stuffing out solution to problems. The ratio of those who resort to snuffing out, and those who avoid resorting to snuffing out, if I can offer a wild guess, is somewhere along the lines of 1 to 99, on average, but a wild guess, there must be fewer of the killers, and there must be more of the cannon fodder, otherwise there wouldn't be anyone left, and I think that the average is being pushed to an unacceptable high average for the snuffing out group, and those on the top of that group are set to do some spring cleaning, if that makes any sense. I have no references for that perspective, since it is just my own - all alone. I think they know that their own numbers are bloated. #5...I'm sure you're a very well read person, as am I. And you seem to have an abundance of faith in the knowledge of books and the act of evangelizing others with the knowledge gleaned from them. I also value the advice and wisdom of those more learned than myself...but I am not the guy who, when faced with a severe personal threat, will quickly assess the situation and try to determine which previously read tome possesses the knowledge to talk my self out of harm's way... Is that a clue for me to shut up, or just a clue for me to stop wasting my time linking sources? I can't tell. Are you just speaking your mind, or am I specifically well suited to be receiving this news from you? I don't know what faith has to do with me, I'm not one to be consumed by faith, to my knowledge, I don't understand faith, much. Harm is on the horizon, and being powerless to avoid it, to me, indicates a need to gain more power.
I have no idea as to why you would even ask me such a question. I'm the guy who knows that the only way to avoid harm is to gain more power than those who will harm. Why would you ask me such a question? What brings you to the point of asking me that question, as if I wrote something that could indicate something about me that would inspire you to ask me that question? When the legal criminals slaughtered the people in Waco, I can still remember the phone call, Linda Thomson started an armed march on Washington. I have an M1 Garand, I got it cheap from "the government" through the DCM program, I was set to take it. I was set to go show a force of deterrence, not start a war, I have no idea why protestors protest unarmed, it makes no sense to me. When that armed march of deterrence didn't materialize, I ran for congress in my distract, on the "It isn't good to torture and mass murder for profit" ticket, and the NRA backed the Assault Weapons Banning Republican candidate instead. I have been running an on-line presidential campaign, last election cycle, and again for this cycle. When The People, with all their power, have enough power, they will end the current reign of terror, or they will perish. I'm not sitting on the sidelines, but I too have to eat, my time, my power, is limited. I believe only a MASSIVE movement (action, not words) will dispel this particular parasite. Please understand, I don't want blood, but I fear it will be inevitable if people don't stop yapping and start DOING. Words are not powerful, but actions are either driven by reasoned thought, or actions are driving by something other than reasoned thought, which do you prefer? A person may be influenced by words to a point at which a person acts without independent, individual, reason. That is the essence of the info-war. Some people use words to cause people to act in certain ways that just happen to be destructive to may people while the actions done just so happen to be beneficial to the few who use words to cause people to act in certain ways. The words are not powerful, they are just harmless words, while the actions inspired by the words are powerful to a measurable tune - such as: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ I link things, even if you don't appreciate the links, because that is what I do, those are my actions. You act the way you act, competitively, and I act the way I act, competitively, because our actions are not driven by external forces, commanding us to obey, and follow the one monopoly act permissible. If suddenly, everyone woke up tomorrow, knowing the right thing to do, and then the right thing was done, by everyone, the event could be remarkable, and my question is to ask how did they come to know the right thing that night? A little bird told them to stop listening to the liars, and so they did? I don't know. What would you suggest that all The People do, next morning, as all The People, undergo this fit of conscience tonight, what is on the laundry list of things to do tomorrow, according to you, a man of action? I can answer that question in great detail, in fact I already have, so I can just cut and paste, or I can rewrite if you don't like links - much. Imagine how far the patriarchs would have gotten with a bunch of debate and no call for action... I don't know who are the patriarchs, so I can imagine just about anything. ...and again, imagine a different outcome if a majority of the colonies' population had said to Britain, "We're done with you." It is quite possible that such a number of resounding "Nos" would have been sufficient to encourage King George to pay serious heed and perhaps even avoid such a potentially exhausting conflict (remember that a minority of the population supported the American Revolution, and still we won)... If you are speaking about the American Revolution than I have a few contentions as to the official version of events, in particular, the cause of the war was a power struggle between those who wanted to run their own money monopoly and those who wanted to run the British based money monopoly power, and then there were those who just wanted to make an honest living. Therefore there were at least two major categories of people involved in the power struggle that became known as The Revolution, which wasn't over after the British troops were kicked out, The Revolution was finally defeated with the singing of The Constitution; paving the way for the new money monopoly power to gain the power they now have - The Dollar Hegemony. I'm not in the "we" group who won; as in "we still won", since I know that the legal criminals won, when they perpetrated the fraud known as The Constitution. Category A: Legal criminals Category B: Honest productive people Category A won You have your viewpoint. I have mine. I've done my homework. Perhaps my homework is in need of greater accuracy; but how will I ever know, when no one challenges what I report? In conclusion - please take no offense - perhaps you are "barking up the wrong tree"...it seems that you and I are on two separate sides of the room. While you might be satisfied to continue in philosophy and evangelism, without a resolution for action...I prefer to combine all three facets, proceed with as much useful knowledge and common sense as possible, and resolve for action in whatever way seems most likely to achieve freedom for my family, myself and my fellows... What ever caused you to think that I am satisfied to continue in philosophy and evangelism, at all? I am not the person your words appear to be constructing, and if something I wrote will cause someone to think such things, then I need to stop writing those words, which words I don't know, since your version of me is unrecognizable to me. What did I write, how did you come up with that view of me, and is there any way to avoid such a huge error in the future? What is the plan? I have a simple one. Use power available to make more power, and then use some of the excess power earned in defense against having power stolen, whereby the stolen power is then used by the thieves to make me weaker - to put is simply. Implementing the plan isn't simple. Inaction has never once in history resulted in victory for liberty...rather, it has only served to perpetuate enslavement... Who is inactive? Who is being painted up as someone who is inactive? I've been struggling with health problems for going on 10 years now, having worked in labor jobs for 25 years before that, I just managed to get a Real Estate license, here in California, to help pay off the bills - while more of my families power continues to be stolen from us through the money monopoly with it's involuntary tax sister of fraud. While I can still write, I write, and while I can still walk I walk. Why do people resort to collective punishment? You think someone might be guilty of something, inaction, therefore everyone is guilty - except you? Really? Prove me wrong...in fact, not in philosophy. When things get worse each person will face a decision, if such a decision has not already been made, whereby actions will either save the actor, at the expense of someone else, or actions will risk the life of the actor, in defense of someone else, or in defense of the actor alone - the act will slow down the aggressor. Being prepared for that moment requires willful thoughts, so as to make the right choice, and then do the right thing. What was the point of posting this topic?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jun 12th, 2011 09:40 am |
|
23rd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north990.html Anyone, Please consider reading the above link, from an Austrian Economic professor, Gary North, concerning the future of honest productive people world wide; and consider doing so knowing the following: A few powerful people have borrowed money from honest productive Americans, you, and then those few people then use that stolen power to cause honest productive people to believe that you owe them money, with interest. Can you shed your false beliefs and know that fact; before you take another willful step into your future? Here is a quote from the link: That was surely forthright for a sitting Treasury Secretary. He was not specific, but to say that another crisis will come was unique. He added this: "It's not going to be possible for people to capture risk with perfect foresight and knowledge." Gary North quotes a person who has willfully borrowed from you. That person then acts, and speaks, as if you owe him money, with interest. Is that true? If that is true, then who is fooling who? Who is the fool? Who is making other people into fools? You can point your finger at me, if that makes you feel better. I just happen to know that the legal criminal lie, they are hired to lie, and those who hire them either know the truth or those that hire them desire ignorance: they prefer to believe in lies. Honest productive people create surplus wealth, and as such they are the source from which credit has been earned. Who constitutes the good faith and credit of the American people? You? Do you consume less than than you produce? Can you measure your productive capacity accurately enough to then subtract an accurate measure of your capacity to consume? If you cannot; then you are ignorant by that exact measure. Who borrows from who? How can anyone borrow from someone who has nothing but lies? What is the cost of lies? Are lies productive? If you borrow a lie, and you then consume that lie, and then you spend that lie, and that lie then becomes current, flowing from one consumer to the next, then how much is produced by that process, and who benefits from that production, what is produced by that lie, and who cashes in on that lie? Liars do not produce. Liars steal from those who do produce. Honest people, who earn the capacity to be trusted, produce valuable things, because that is the only way to make use of division of labor, and specialization, and economies of scale, by way of reducing the cost of distrust, so as to use time and energy (power) more efficiently, to trade, to exchange, to make one part that adds to many other parts as the many diverse and specialized parts are then capable of producing a much more complicated whole. So where do these guys get their power, these hired liars, where do they borrow their power, or do they steal it? If you are not ready to jump to the conclusion that the hired liars steal, or if you are not even ready to jump to the conclusion that the hired liars lie, then I can walk you through, hold your hand, and help you measure reality more accurately - with the help of one of the Austrian Economics professors. Look at the quote: That was surely forthright for a sitting Treasury Secretary. He was not specific, but to say that another crisis will come was unique. He added this: "It's not going to be possible for people to capture risk with perfect foresight and knowledge." Someone has the legal power to add trillions of dollars to the total number of legal U.S. dollars. That same person, or group of people working together, trusting each other (working together), can subtract trillions of dollars to the total number of dollars. Can you call the bank up and tell them to add 12 zeros to your account? $1,000,000,000,000 Someone can, and they do, and the same group hires liars, and one of the liars, or one of the employers of the liars, has part of the power to legally add 12 zeros to their bank account, and then you hear about it from someone else, like me, or like Gary North, or Alex Jones, or anyone who has this wild idea that you may want to know this fact. How about a name, a real person, someone with a name, and someone who is inside that group of people who either hire liars, or who are liars, who are the people, or who is the person, who has the power to add 12 zeros to their bank account, when they want, and they do, and one of them has a name, and one of those names is the person speaking, the person quoted by Gary North, in the article linked at the top of this page. That was surely forthright for a sitting Treasury Secretary. He was not specific, but to say that another crisis will come was unique. He added this: "It's not going to be possible for people to capture risk with perfect foresight and knowledge." Where does the power to purchase with that legal money come from: who produces the value that backs up the dollar, and makes the dollar powerful enough to purchase something? Who produces the good faith and credit of the American people? Who borrows from honest productive American people? What do the people who borrow from the honest productive people say when they are borrowing from the honest productive people in America? A. The truth B. Lies "It's not going to be possible for people to capture risk with perfect foresight and knowledge." Do you know what that means? Do you think that the meaning of those words are only meaningful for a select few people at the top, and that the meaning of those words has nothing to do with most of the honest productive people in America? I can help you know the truth, if you are as yet ignorant about the truth concerning those words. The legal license holders have added many zeros to their accounts and they then consume that power. They then call the result of their use of that power a risk to you, if you are one of the honest productive Americans from which that power is produced. If you are one of the sources of the good faith and credit of the American people, then you are one of the people who produce more than you consume, and you are one of the people who have increased surplus wealth, and you are now at risk because your power has been borrowed from you, and spent, and the expense of your power has caused a risk, and you will now have to produce more, and you will have less to consume, even while you produce more, which is the accurate measure of what is being called risk, by that person quoted by Gary North. That was surely forthright for a sitting Treasury Secretary. He was not specific, but to say that another crisis will come was unique. He added this: "It's not going to be possible for people to capture risk with perfect foresight and knowledge." Adding 12 zeros to the dollar account is definable as a loan that has been legally borrowed from a creditor. Who is the creditor? Who borrowed the money? Who owes who? What is owed to who? How can someone, who borrows from you, manage to convince you that you owe them money: because they borrowed money from you, and on top of that magic feat, they convince you that you owe them interest on the money they borrow from you? How deep are the lies buried into your conscious? They borrow from you while they say you owe them for the money they borrow from you - with interest? Who is the fool? Me? They lie. They first have to convince you, and make you believe, that their product, their money, is the only money that you must have, or without their money you will suffer, without their money you will have to work harder, and without their money, you will have less, and less, and less to consume, and without their money, you will earn less, and earn less, and earn less, as you work harder, and harder, and harder, for less, and less, and less, without their money. Do you actually, really, believe that lie, as gospel? That is what the lie intends to accomplish. That is why they subtract from the total supply of money. They have to convince you that you will suffer without their money. You can see the truth of this if you can regain control of your own mind. Without their money you are broke. To bad for you. A monopoly money license is a legally enforced single legal money product, having no legal competitor, and as such there is no legal force that forces that money product to a higher quality, at a lower cost. The single monopoly money license holders can add 12 zeros at will, or subtract 12 zeros at will, from the total supply of the single legal money product - in this case The Dollar. If you regained control of your mind you could then conceive of at least one competitor to that one legal money license holder who produces that one money product, that Dollar, and then, as with insurance, the quality of the product increases, and the cost of the product decreases, as competitors try their best to get you to choose their competitive product instead of the other competitor. If one competitor keeps adding 12 zeros to their money product, paying themselves bonuses, rewarding their fellow license holders, and the other competitor pays you back for borrowing your money, with interest, then which will you choose? A. One competitor borrows from you and then demands that you pay them back for the money they borrowed from you, and they demand that you pay them back interest on the money they borrow from you. B. The other competitor borrows money from you, risks your money, and if they spend your money almost as good as you, or as good as you, or they spend your borrowed money better than you, then they pay back every cent borrowed, and they pay you back more than they borrowed, they pay you interest on the money they borrow from you. If they don't pay you back, do you look for another competitor, or do you continue to loan money to those who waste your money on failed aggressive wars for profit, or other less wasteful expenses? I'm going to read the rest of the article by Gary North, to see if I can find any value in it. You can do with the liberty you still have; as you see fit. I have yet to edit this offering.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 15th, 2011 02:56 pm |
|
24th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
06-15-2011 Listening to Alex Jones "Race to the Bottom" "National Suicide" "They are insane, out of control" etc. Honest Productive Americans, Please see the big picture logically by contrast with illustrated examples of competitive future possibilities; know where to go, so as to actively move closer to that goal. A. Business as usual, New World Order, World War III, World Economic Collapse, Global Domination, by way of willful orchestrated specific purpose, or by insane random coincidence, or some way, some how, the human species accelerates the accelerated rate going in that direction. B. The human species stops accelerating the accelerated rate going in that direction, some way, some how, randomly, or intelligently. C. The human species slows the rate of acceleration going in that direction. D. The human species stops accelerating in that direction, holding the rapid rate we are traveling in that direction to a constant rate, neither accelerating or decelerating. E. The human species begins to decelerate the rate that the human species is traveling toward extinction, doom, destruction, enslavement, torture, and mass murder. F. The human species accelerates in the opposite direction of depression, doom, destruction, torture, mass murder, war, etc. G. Prosperity becomes an obvious, measurable, obtainable, reasonable, well understood, intelligent, active, willful, common, goal - again. Can I repeat the obvious measure of such things? http://www.usdebtclock.org/ How does that web page compare to a diametric opposite to it; supposing that honest productive Americans can produce and maintain a diametric opposite of that web page? What would such an opposing process look like; assuming that honest productive Americans had an interest in such a thing? A time is approaching whereby the actual power brokers will be transferring the monopoly power from The Dollar Hegemony to the new regime. Regime change is afoot. Out with the dollar, and in with the new regime. You won't be told the measure of the new regime. Think men, think women. The insiders can't allow everyone to gain the power of that specific knowledge; doing so will remove the power of it. The idea is to dupe every one except the few, so as to have the many waste their hard earned power on the wrong investments while the few capitalize on the inside information. How does that work? While the victims are working to secure their surplus wealth, their savings, one way, the legal criminals are securing their surplus wealth, their power, in the other direction. You may need an example. Suppose that many people have earned, by some means not limited to honest means, a large amount of power, surplus wealth, in one form or another, and it is clear and present that the measure of that power is in danger. What does the owner of that power do to avoid having that power taken? If you choose the right choice, your power is saved. If you choose the wrong choice, your power is lost. If you invest in Germany taking over the world, and Germany is bombed to ashes instead, do you win, or do you lose? If you know that Germany will be destroyed, will you choose to secure your power in Germany? Two web pages may help: http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/ http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/ Before WWII, as documented on those web pages, the few designed a specific outcome, and power moved from the past monopoly power, which was then England, to the new monopoly power, which was The Dollar Hegemony. WWIII is now the new plan, and it is on a regular cycle. The next dominant power will be in Asia. Many resources accurately record that move in progress; but the future is a gamble. A moment will exist soon, and at that moment the monopoly power will be in transition, and honest productive Americans will be losing the money monopoly power lever, and that power will be transitioning to the new monopoly power. When honest productive Americans no longer have the monopoly power of legal money they will then have an opportunity to resume legal control of their own legal money, before honest productive Americans are forced to accept a false substitute. In order to better understand this I can offer more words. No matter how poor the Dollar is as a form of economic currency the competition has been worse. No matter how destructive The Dollar was, as The Dollar was used by the legal criminals to steal the wealth produced by the honest productive American people, the measure of The Euro, and the Yen, and all the other legal currencies has been even worse. That dominance by The Dollar is over, and that does not mean that the new dominant legal currency will be "better". What is "better"? If you, as an honest productive American, could produce, and maintain better legal currency, how would that improvement measure up? Look again: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Your power is now flowing to many sides of a new World War. Where do you think those trillions of "dollars" are flowing when "they" say that "they" are "inflating" The Dollar. They say that they are printing dollars. Where is that money going? Where is that power going? What is that power buying? Are you receiving bonuses? Are you receiving investments from investors who are booming your economy? Do you think that the reports of massive expansions of the dollar money supply are lies? The goal has been to bust America because one country cannot be allowed to prosper as an example of prosperity; allowing such a thing to perpetuate will clue the honest productive people in on what can be the goal to work toward. This is not news. A regular cycle of bust and boom has been the goal of the legal criminals for some time. Power flows from the honest productive group during the boom cycle. Power flows from the honest productive group during the bust cycle. Power flows to the legal criminals during boom and bust. This is not news. You may not know the facts, that does not make the facts go away. When The Dollar Monopoly power (World Reserve Currency) is moved to Asia the honest productive American people will have a golden opportunity to regain control of their own legal money power. Know this fact. See it. It will be the legal criminals worst nightmare. Honest productive Americans will then have the power to opt out of World War III; instead of being the force that finances it. Don't just vote for liberty, make it real. Seize that moment when the legal criminals have to make their power over America weak, when they transfer their power to Asia, it will be a fleeting window of opportunity to create and maintain a legal money power that works for honest productive Americans instead of a legal money monopoly power that works exclusively for the legal criminals in America, as it has been, or in Asia as it will be if we let it happen.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jun 17th, 2011 03:30 pm |
|
25th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Listening to The Alex Jones show 06-17-2011 I hear bad news ahead and what I don't hear is a specific report on what must happen so as to avoid bad news ahead. I've written before, and I will write again, that a date can be set in the future, 2012, July 4th, for example, and a number of people joining an honorable agreement is added to the date, and on that date, if enough people agree to the honorable agreement, then that day will be a new day of liberty. What must happen on that day? The number of people agreeing to liberate themselves from the bad news ahead must regain control of their power to employ their honest productivity, their ability to produce an abundance of surplus wealth must be regained, and the connection by which that power is stolen must be severed on that day. Why would anyone reading my words find any argument against it; unless their living depends upon the legal crime organization? Those who choose to remain connected to the legal crime organization will get what they deserve. Is that understandable as a rational viewpoint of physical reality? Suppose 1 million people joining the new liberty day movement join by July 4th 2011? What signal would that send to everyone else, and compare this question, and answer, to the number of people who have no agreement to join in a new liberty day by July 4th 2011? A. No one joins a movement to cause a new liberty day to be a fact on July 4th 2011. B. 1 million people join a new liberty day movement by July 4th 2011. What signal does A send to the legal criminals, or anyone else, including all the people who have no direction, no plan, no way, and no how, to avoid the bad news on the near horizon? What would happen if an Alex Jones, or Ron Paul, or Dennis Kucinich, or Bill Smith, or Pete Jones, or Jane Smith, or anyone, a 5 year old child, started a web page, and the web page took off, went viral, gained currency, and the number of people signing the new declaration of independence, to be made effective on July 4th 2011, only if enough numbers joined, and what happens if only 1 million people join by July 4th 2011, and the new date is moved to July 4th 2012? What would happen if by July 4th 2012 the number reaches 100 million honest productive Americans signed onto the new liberty day movement? What happens on that day, what happens because things happen during the next 13 months up to that day, and what happens if those people agree to stop using fraudulent money and start using honest money on that day? Which money is chosen by whom, and will people allow other people to choose more than one money, will there be a working competition for a higher quality money at a lower cost in America? If you cannot see how that will work, then you will continue to be dependent, not independent, and your dependence will be an intimate connection to the worst inhuman examples of evil on earth as the price of your failure to regain the power of independence.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jun 18th, 2011 10:33 am |
|
26th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north994.html serenesam, There is an example of someone who is an activist and someone who has more practice working on some of the problems with money. In that link he reports an event whereby tons of money was sent to Iraq. I reported on that same event. That event is a very good example of what bad people do, and they use money to do bad things, and they create and maintain bad money systems, so as to facilitate their plans to injure innocent people for profit. If bad people send disease contaminated blankets to innocent people, as bad people have done, on purpose, in the past, and now bad people send radioactive bullets to injure innocent people in the present, the bad people do bad things with tools, if that is what they do, that is what they do, and it should be no surprise that they prefer their victims to blame the tools, not the criminals. Accurately identifying the criminals, for what they do, instead of focusing attention on the tools they use, may actually help the victims in avoiding victimization. Tools: A. Blankets contaminated with polio sent to Native Americans in early U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) history. B. Projectiles contaminated with depleted uranium sent to Native Arabs in current U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) wars of aggression for profit. C. "UNMARKED" 100 dollar bills by the TON sent into Native Arab countries that are being targeted for exploitation. Do you understand the concept of money? Where does the power to purchase with money originate? I have news for everyone, apparently, as the source of purchasing power is surplus wealth, and the only place where surplus wealth can originate is by honest productive work, without which there is no surplus wealth, and therefore no purchasing power. If money is designed by bad people, with bad plans to do bad things to innocent victims, for profit, then what will the money look like when money is designed by bad people, produced by bad people, and maintained by bad people? It will look like blankets, but hidden on the blanket will be a disease. It will look like a defensive weapon, but hidden on it will be depleted uranium which will cause the shooter and the targets to suffer a torturous death as the uranium causes genetic mutation, cancer, and don't forget that the projectile is falsely aimed at false targets in a false war which is in reality merely a crime committed by criminals, and their victims on all sides, including the soldiers who are trained to believe in the lies perpetrated by the criminals, suffer as their power flows to the criminals. A money that is higher in quality could, obviously, be a money that is "marked" in such a way as to render criminal abuse of money powerless, and if you can't understand what I just wrote, then you may want to blame me for that fact, which is par for the course. I understand. If you have something for sale and the person buying it is offering to you a money that is soaked with the blood of innocent victims, who have be tortured, and murdered in the millions of numbers of now dead people, knowing that, and having a choice, would you choose not to allow that person to purchase anything from you, with that blood soaked money on that paper trail that that money has been on? Gary North repeats a story about TONS of 100 dollar bills, sent on pallets, and then much of it was lost, in Iraq. Blame the money? What do you think would happen if one person decided to use a better money, and decided to no longer use the money used by the criminals, and that one person decided to do that on July 4th 2011? That person would have a tough life ahead, all alone. What would you think would happen if 100 million honest productive people in America decided to stop using the legal crime money (dollars) and decided to use something better instead, something competitive instead, on July 4th 2011? How would the legal criminals collect their taxes that they use to purchase their aggressive wars for profit at home and abroad if the entire honest productive population of America began using a competitive money on July 4th 2011? No more marches, just a day when power shifts, and it would be a day of liberty. What would that competitive money be - exactly? Ignore the question, since it is against the law. Be a good slave.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jun 19th, 2011 02:28 am |
|
27th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
The problem with this is that even if competitive money was inside the law, the "winner" may buy up the "loser." For example, there was an announcement that ATT just brought up T-Mobile serenesam, Perhaps you fail to see the point. Competition is what it is; and if it isn't, then it isn't. If competition exists, by law or not, the competitors will have to increase the quality of their product, and lower the cost of their product, or the competitor will, that is a fact, and you can ignore that fact if that is what you decide to do, in your own best interest, or any reason under the sun. If a competitor creates a cartel, or mutual agreement, or monopoly, by hostile take over, or by deceit, or by threats of violence, or by acts of violence, or by any method at all, then competition no longer exists. A. Competition exist B. Not A Do you see the point, or do you prefer to continue to not see the point? You are offered a solution, and you ignore it, and you claim that the solution you are offered isn't what it is, when it is what it is, and your claim is akin to replying to my solution as I report to you that some people do good things, and you reply with "the problem is that some people are bad". There is a legal money monopoly. It exists. It is run by bad people. That is a problem. The solution is competition. You can say: "But the problem is that bad people destroy competition." Yea, that's right, so why are you ignoring the obvious solution offered to you? I'm curious.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jun 20th, 2011 02:24 pm |
|
28th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I disagree with this. The current reign of terror can still be in existence with or without competition. Whoever has the what is defined as being "a lot of money" (as George Humphrey once stated, "we're not talking about the millionaire down the street, you can't even be a member of their club unless you are a billionaire) can still bring about terror for money = power and a lot of money = a lot of power. sereneesam, Do you disagree with what I wrote, or do you disagree with your misunderstanding of what I wrote? Here is what you quoted (and then respond with "I disagree with this"): That is competition, and that is how competition becomes competition in reality, and if you continue to look away from legal monetary competition every time I point at it, as if you were a baby being fed a spoon full of spinach that you abhor, then the point about how legal non-criminal monetary competition ends the current reign of terror will be very difficult to see, as you continue to refuse to look at it. You go on to explain how you disagree with "this" by saying: The current reign of terror can still be in existence with or without competition. How can you measure your disagreement with "this"? Here is a measure of "this" as it is reported by the people running "this": http://www.usdebtclock.org/ That, in fact, ends when "this" can no longer be "The Dollar Hegemony" and many people are now claiming that the end of "this" is going to be something along the lines of "World Wide Economic Collapse" or some other such "Headlines". In fact: "this" ends because of legal, criminal, competition. The more deceptive, more threatening, and more violent criminal cabal steals the legal monopoly, and a new set of power criminals take over the world wide legal crime money monopoly power from "The Dollar Hegemony", and the actual people involved may be the same people on the top 10 or so, while many of the members of the "insiders club" may be left holding an empty bag, once the "better" criminals competitively take over the "World Reserve Currency" power. What is the measure of your disagreement with "this"? What do you disagree with - exactly? Crime is competitive as criminals compete with each other over their limited supply of ready victims; and that is one form, or one level, of competition. Do you disagree with that? Crime also has a competitor knowable as defenders of liberty, or not-so-ready victims, and that is the point that you appear to be unable to grasp; so how can you disagree with something that you are unable to grasp, comprehend, understand, know, acknowledge, see, perceive, and measure? If honest productive Americans unite and begin using their own form of currency, and they produce, and they maintain, a currency that excludes the criminals, divorces the criminal connection, severs the link between the honest productive Americans and the legal criminals, then how do you think those legal criminals are going to fill their bank accounts? This: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ If honest productive Americans unite and begin using their own form of currency; who has any concern, or interest, in that abomination measured above? This: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Do you disagree with that, above? Do you have an argument against the existence of what that official measure measures? You go on to respond, as if you disagree with something, and your words are quoted:
What is the source of the power in question? I think you are speaking about something called "Surplus Wealth", and that power is the source of the "power to purchase", or the "value of money", or the stuff of value that fills bank accounts, the real stuff, not the fraudulent stuff, and if that is what you are speaking about, which I can't know unless you clue me in, then where does that stuff come from: What is the source of surplus wealth? Do you understand the question? What is the source of surplus wealth? It is good, I think, that we have progressed from hamburgers, to information currency, and are now focusing interest on legal money. That may pay off. I don't know. I can't speak for you. And as far as my insistence on "taking you literally"; what would you prefer: I should read between the lines? The Dollar is going down, The Dollar Hegemony is going out, and what is going to replace it, will be either: A. Better legal crime for the criminals, a "better" world reserve currency, legal crime, monopoly power, enforced by deceit, threats of violence, and many, many, many, terrible acts of violence, so as to maintain monopoly power. B. Competitive money; and therefore higher, and higher, and higher, quality money, at lower, and lower, and lower costs, until such time as all the competitors are forced to produce, and maintain, the highest possible money, at the lowest cost. That is a power struggle, that is not a static object, and knowing the difference between "that which is current", or currency, and that which is not current, is a significant step toward understanding the power struggle, as it exists. I think that the time is ripe for a regime change away from legal crime, enforced with a legal money monopoly, in American, and a return to a competitive money, such as the time in America before the legal criminals retook that power from the honest productive Americans. You can go on thinking whatever you choose. So far, from my view, your choices are not competitive Note: The series of responses above have been removed from the original forum they were published onto.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jun 21st, 2011 08:22 am |
|
29th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/06/15/the-practical-implementation-of-constitutional-tender/ Anyone, The above link includes the combination of the Tenth amendment (Bill of Rights), or States Rights (competitive Federated Democratic Republican form of government), subject, combined with the Honest Money subject. I began reading it and before finishing I decided to link that article in this Forum Topic, and add my comments. I am no fan of The Constitution, since I've read the history of it, I know which type of people created it, how it was created in secret, how it included The Dirty Compromise to get the deal struck between the legal criminals who created it, and how it was sold to the ignorant massed by way of a false advertisement campaign run by its proponent legal criminal, banking extortion racket frauds, however, having said that, I do see the wisdom of both The Declaration of Independence, and The Bill of Rights, which work like Liberty bread on a despotism sandwich, where The Constitution is the meat of despotism. I am also not a fan of state run banking monopolies, whereby a few exclusive members of society are subsidized by the transfer of wealth from those who create it, the honest productive people, through the few government employees who spend the collected taxes, and then that power flows to those select few exclusive people who run the legal money monopolies, however, having said that one State can be compared, competitively, to another State, by the tax payers, to see which State offers the higher quality tax/money monopoly/government/business, at the lower cost to the tax payer, and vote with their feet, within a working Federated Democratic Republic, if one exists, by some measure. Well, there you have it, in that link at the top of the page, and here is a quote from it:
That is a large chuck of text especially for all those who are unaccustomed to anything other than a sound bite, and I don't usually quote such large numbers of symbols, all at once, since I prefer to take things apart and get down to the honest parts, the trees, in the forest, however, having said that, the article works as a whole, it is more than the sum of all its parts, at least up to the point where I stopped reading, and then I started linking, and commenting. This is major news on the liberty front. Here is another example of something similar: http://utopianist.com/2011/01/stimulus-writ-small-tiny-california-town-prints-its-own-currency/ Josh Freeman of North Fork, CA sure took President Obama’s talk about providing help to “Main Street, not Wall Street” seriously. The tiny town of 2,400 people, located near Yosemite National Park, sits in a county with a staggering 15.7 percent unemployment rate. Seeing his town struggle, Freeman did what any red-blooded American would do: create his own currency. North Fork Shares, emblazoned with pictures of a butterflies and hummingbirds, are worth $12 per share, and are available in half and quarter shares. Now before you are the things by which people force themselves, voluntarily, and without resort to deceit, and without resort to threats of violence, and without resort to acts of violence, to improve the quality of life, while at the same time, reducing the costs of life, to be better able to pursue happiness, by gaining exclusive control of property, or by helping other people, or any happy thing under the sun, so long as no innocent people are willfully thrown under the bus to get there. A. Utah, a competitive State, within a supposed Federated Democratic Republic, is working toward producing, and maintaining, a competitive legal currency. B. North Fork, a competitive city within a competitive State, within a supposed Federated Democratic Republic, is working toward producing, and maintaining, a competitive legal currency. Now, before I get back to the article, and finish it, looking for specific things, such as the necessary law, in Utah, that acknowledges their new competitive legal tender as a form of legal money that can be used to pay taxes, which is the link that links the honest productive people to those who receive the honest productive power known as surplus wealth, before they set about spending it, distributing it, as various forms of subsidy, got that?, I'll return to that later, but before all that I will show you what has happened in the past when competitive money begins to gain currency, or "gained traction", in three historical examples: A. The time between Colonial Stamp Script in America before the legal crime creators of The Constitution effectively forced a monopoly upon the honest productive American people. Here is a source for information on that time period (not the only source): http://www.perfecteconomy.com/pg-relevant-historic-quotes.html Here is a quote: Having usurped British Parliament, "the Bank of England" required the American colonists to adopt a currency subject to as much as 30 percent annual interest. As interest is the rate at which debt is multiplied, the greater the rate of interest, the faster the dispossession by artificially multiplied indebtedness. Franklin thus later explained the substantial effects and principal cause of the American Revolution to a friend in France: Attributed to Benjamin Franklin B. The time before the abomination now called The Civil War included an experimental currency in a few experimental cities including what is now called Brentwood New York. Modern Times was an experimental city built up by people using Equitable Commerce, and similar forms of that competitive currency continue today in Ithaca New York. Here is a link that documents the original experiment: http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf C. A competitive currency used by Austrians before the take-over by the Nazi Regime. Here is a link reporting that experimental competitive legal currency: http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=904 In each case an experimental competitive currency was invented, produced, and maintained, and in 2 cases the experimental currency was crushed by legal criminals. A fourth example involves the invention, production, and maintenance of Whiskey as a replacement currency, and George Washington crushed that competitor once the law of the land prescribed that solution to that problem. Returning to today, the Equitable Commerce experiment continues to work in various forms, Utah is beginning to challenge the National State, which is run by legal criminals, and a city in California is also inventing an experimental competitive currency, producing it, and maintaining it, according to my latest news sources. Which brings me back to reading the rest of the article at the top of this post, and I will be looking for that link between Utah precious metal money and tax debt. Let me go out on a limb and say those famous last words… “This time it is different.” I like the use of lists, and I agree with the validity, the accuracy, and the truth of the listed events, that are occurring in our present reality, with one exception, the debate over sound/honest money has been going on for more than a few decades. First of all, Utah has made gold and silver money once again. It is this anomaly – this “disturbance in the force” if you will – that has captured the attention of two of the largest newspapers in the nation. Why would a state actually pass a law to make constitutional money legal again? They are confused about the issue, as is evidenced by comments made by the reporters. I am going to offer some comments that may help anyone who may yet be confused. If one State within a working Federated Democratic Republic shines as the one State that has the only sound/honest money, then, ask yourself, what may happen? Think in terms of "keeping up with the Joneses", and consider what you would do, if you hear about someone you know in Utah, as that person brags to you about how they avoid having their hard earned wealth taken from them by way of inflation during BOOM, and taken from them by way of inflation during BUST, and you may not understand, until the person in Utah explains how sound/honest legal money works for them, but not for you, since you are not in the State that offers a competitive legal currency. You are stuck with the dollar, invented by the people who invented The Federal Reserve System (of extortion), and maintained by their successors, and the person you know in Utah isn't stuck with that criminal dollar. Do you move to Utah, or do you wait until the people in your State copy the example set by the people in Utah? Do you wish, and hope, and prey, that the people running The FED send troops into Utah, so as to crush "so fatal a spirit" as did George Washington back in the day? What do you really think The Civil War, which was not at all civil, was all about? It was about slavery, yes, and the masters meant to keep their slaves, not set them free. The slaves always have to set themselves free, waiting for charity doesn't work. Perhaps you can wait long enough to prove me wrong, and I won't hold my breath. Back to the article: With gold and silver as legal tender, the people own the metal. That is what I was looking for, and found, the link between tax debt and "legal tender". If you owe a tax payment to the government you can pay that tax payment with "legal tender", and you don't have to work for Federal Reserve Notes in Utah, if their experiment works, in Utah, you can work for gold and silver, or dollars, your choice? Will Utah still accept Federal Reserve Notes as payment for Utah State Tax Debt? I will read on, to find out, and then, of course, there will be a need to set a legal exchange rate in Utah, so as to measure the value of the dollar relative to the value of gold, and relative to the value of silver, and that, my friends of liberty, is legalized monetary competition, if it is invented in Utah, is produced in Utah, and is maintained in Utah, and is not crushed by enforcers of monopoly legal money powers. “He who owns the gold makes the rules.” Well… with the system put in place in Utah, the people are in a position to make the rules – not the central bankers. One might think that such a thing is reasonable, and any intelligent human being above the age of 5 could understand the fundamental principles, and interests involved, but, then again, this is the land of the something for nothing fad, so, who knows? I do. How about you?
Do you see? There will be competition, in the plan, the planners are planning on inventing, producing, and maintaining a legal monetary competition, legal choice, who would ever have thought such a thing? The sky is falling. Some one pinch me, I must be dreaming. So what does the Federal Reserve think of all of this? You can bet your bottom “dollar” that they are watching for any vulnerability with which to attack this system. However, unlike what happened with the Liberty Dollar and its founder Bernard Von NotHaus, what if there is no legal recourse for the Fed? What if state law is on solid constitutional grounds? What if free market implementation solutions have the backing of the state(s)? What if those solutions operate legally within the confines of the existing finanical system? That writer is so exited he may have misspelled financial. I'm on the edge of my seat. While it has been a very long time, there is precedent for “we the people” winning in a battle with the central bankers. Andrew Jackson led the last charge to “root out the den of vipers.” It nearly cost him his life. In the end, it was he who “killed the bank” – an epitaph written on his tombstone. Keep in mind, please, that Andrew Jackson was not a friend of liberty for "we the people", he was one of those "just us" people, just us get free, screw the Indians, women, slaves, and consider what happens when you travel down the road of "enemies of our enemies are our friends": a tangle web woven, but none the less, vipers are vipers, and not just anyone can root them out. Here’s to the Sound Money Summit. Mark your calenders. September 26th and 27th promise to be the next quantum leap forward as the states move to return to honest money. Here is the link: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/constitutional-tender/ No time, or interest, to edit, now, but I can delete and repost if something is really messed up, after the forum removes my edit button.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 23rd, 2011 02:59 pm |
|
30th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Josef, I really do admire your intellect. Take a look at this: serenesam, As I admire yours. I think there is a spark in each of us, something that drives us to "do the right thing", if only we knew what the right thing is, if we were all graced with a continuous steady flow of perfect information, what could possibly go wrong - ever? Absent that steady flow of perfect information, or absent that spark that drives some of us to "do the right thing", the thing called life is imperfect, and often things go awry; but from whose viewpoint? Who does the measure of perfection, right, wrong, good, bad, better, worse, true, false? Who decides to move our meeting of the minds, where we are afforded the opportunity to compared notes, to the punishment bin? I thought our exchange was exceptionally beneficial to anyone having similar contentious viewpoints as ours, as we aired our dirty laundry in public, and as we allowed the chips to fall as they may, and what is our reward for being honest, open, diligent, resourceful, meticulous, and persistent? We are moved from the good topic to the bad one? I do not agree with most everyone else's measure of good, with few exceptions, and the exceptions remain consistently the same exceptions. Do no harm. If you do harm, accidentally, don't repeat the error, or it isn't an error, is it? If you are attacked, and in defense the attacker is harmed, who claims that it is the defender that has done harm, on purpose, for profit? Beware of things that sound to good to be true, and if possible go back to the source of the claim, and find out the motive behind the claim, and as likely as not the claim will be false on purpose, for profit. There are basic things that can be known, and from those basic things many other things can be measured, compared to the basic things, for reference, for accurate measure, and when confusion arises, when things don't add up, it may be a good idea to go back, and rethink, re-evaluate, the basic things. I have been working on this since at least high school in 1975, what I call by a few basic names: 1. The Problem 2. Legal Crime 3. The Power Struggle My intellect is a combination of many things, persistence is probably the most valuable thing, as I keep chipping away at the remaining confusing items, improving the basic things, and retesting all contending perspectives, and that is where the value of your persistence can be measured. Without contending perspectives there would be only one perspective. How can life exist if only one perspective existed? There is great value in competitive perspectives, or absent that, the one perspective had better be the best one. Does that make sense? I will read the rest of your reply now. I work forum conversations in this way, as if simulating a conversation, by reading from the beginning of a post, and stopping when I see an opportunity to comment on the words I read, and then I go on to read, until I see an opportunity to comment, instead of reading the whole response first - and that works for me. That is how I work forums, as I try to measure other perspectives, as I try to test my own perspective, so as to improve my own perspective, so as to get rid of the false viewpoints, and so as to know, better, life.
I am going to comment on your method of responding before I comment on the words you quote. When someone offers a viewpoint to someone the person offering the viewpoint will have to choose words to accomplish the goal. Why choose the word "socialism"? Socialism is a word that has two opposite meanings in English. Why choose the word "capitalism", for the same ambiguous reason? When Albert Einstein offers his measure of Relativity, do you understand the full measure of that unique perspective? When Albert Einstein offered the world his viewpoint on atomic science, did someone turn that viewpoint around, from something good, to something bad? What is socialism, according to Albert Einstein, or Stephen Pearl Andrews, Eric Fromm, or Noam Chomsky? What is socialism, according to Joseph Stalin, Karl Marx, George Washington, or Ludwig Von Misses? I can measure each divergent definition of socialism by reading the words written by each of those viewpoints on that list above, but I can't ask them, and get an answer from them questions I have about their version of socialism. I can ask you. Will you answer my questions? If you don't, then, what is the point of quoting those versions of socialism to me? Is socialism, according to your version of socialism, a voluntary, welcome, agreeable, and mutually beneficial association among liberated people? Please consider answering that one question. As to the specific quote: * Modern anthropology has taught us, through comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing cultural patterns and the types of organisation which predominate in society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a cruel, self-inflicted fate. Please consider reading Eric Fromm's work: http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Anatomy_of_Human_Destructiveness.html?id=YjR5Ve-zTcYC Eric Fromm offers references to specific studies of anthropology relating to the various forms of human associations, including references to modern day (his day) examples of societies that are, or were, much less "civilized" due to their remote locations, disconnected from "civilized" societies. I can quote specific words from Eric Fromm, on that point. Our connections to each other can be improved in specific ways. We can work toward improving our equitable connections, and we can work toward avoiding criminal, or inequitable, or unwelcome, or dictatorial, or false, connections, and who on Earth wants to improve inequitable, unwelcome, dictatorial, false, inaccurate, fraudulent, injurious (to the innocent), criminal, master/slave, connections? Let them raise their hands, confess, and offer reasons as to why they want, work toward, and make those criminal connections "better". Who would make roads and then place signs at each intersection saying: "you have the right of way" on all four corners? No one; because no one is stupid enough to fall for that fraud twice. The lies have to be covered up with half truths, or the victims have to be stupefied to a much greater level, before someone could get away with such an obvious crime as to build roads and then place signs at each intersection saying: "you have the right of way" on all four corners? Who ordered the signs placed on all four corners of each intersection? Why are the signs still there; as the bodies pile up? Who is still claiming that the signs are there to help spread democracy? Why are people still using dollars, are they really that stupid; or is there some other power involved, other than abject stupidity? I will read the next quote you offer: * The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. In so far as the labor contract is free what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists' requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product. That is dogma, from the first sentence, and I do not have to read the whole thing. I will respond only to the first sentence, and then you can respond accordingly. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By what measure, by what accurate method, is one person known to be a worker, and another person not a worker, or one person an employer, and another person an employee, or one person a seller, and another person a buyer, and when we can nail down the best answer to this question, we can move on to the rest of that quote, if you are up to the challenge? If not, then not. I will move to the next quote: * I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. I've been alive for over 50 years now and that sentence above is, to me, patently false. By my measure, again as a result of more than 50 years of life on Earth, there are many honest productive people who are gaining capacity for improved life, not deteriorating, despite the enormous power wielded by legal criminals who use stolen power to cause deterioration. A. All human beings are deteriorating. B. A majority of human beings are honest productive people who continue to improve despite the enormous measure of power designed to injure those innocent people - cause deterioration. You, and whoever wrote those words, may choose to place more weight in the first perspective (A); while my perspective is the later, and I can offer many specific examples that support my viewpoint, if you care to know. Next: * The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor — not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. You may to very well by reading Equitable Commerce by Josiah Warren, so as to identify a specific method of pricing that is chosen by many people, and that choice, as far as I know, is the essence of capitalism, it is capitalism. Capitalism is, as far as I have determined so far, a method of pricing - a choice. A person can choose to price something equitably. A person can choose to price something at a price that maximizes the flow of power in a favorable direction, or inequitably, and that is a choice, and so long as there is no other power involved, so long as the inequitable transfer is strictly voluntary, in every sense of the word voluntary, then, by that measure, both people involved, and all people involved, measure the transfer as an equitable transfer, despite the fact that the price was set by the seller so as to maximize the flow of power in a favorable direction - inequitably. That may be a difficult paragraph to understand; and I can get past the specifics and get right to the general facts - the principles. Associations will either be voluntary or involuntary, and any other character is relatively superfluous when compared to that specific, principled, character of human associations. In other words, the root, can be expanded into subdivisions from the root as such: A. Voluntary associations B. Involuntary associations A. 1. Voluntary capitalism 2. Voluntary socialism B. 1. Involuntary capitalism 2. Involuntary socialism Capitalism can be compared to socialism, and the differences, and the similarities of each association can be known, as this, and that, but those difference and similarities will be minor differences, and minor similarities compared to the differences between Involuntary capitalism and Voluntary capitalism, or the differences between Involuntary socialism, and Voluntary socialism. Involuntary capitalism and Involuntary Socialism will be almost identical, as if both were the same thing, compared to the differences between Involuntary capitalism and Voluntary capitalism, which is like the difference between night and day, or right and wrong, or good and evil, and the same wide span of difference exists between Involuntary socialism, and Voluntary socialism. Master and Slave associations are, in my view, criminal associations; whereby criminals plan on and then execute their plans to injure innocent victims, as criminals invent, produce, and maintain those connections that make up those associations, while the innocent victims suffer, having no power to avoid such injurious associations. It matters not what label is used by the criminals to get away with their crimes, since criminals lie, they false advertize, they commit fraud, they target their victims, and they misinform their victims, and they mislead their victims, and they hide behind false fronts, and they use false flags, and they deceive, and they threaten violence, and they use violence, and all that is all part of Involuntary associations. Where there are voluntary associations the capitalists and socialists appear almost the same, with only minor, practically irrelevant differences. The measure of the divide, the measure of the conflict, the measure of the hatred, lies in the lies, the lies that are part and parcel to the Involuntary, criminal, associations - with or without badges, licenses, franchises, titles, and pieces of authorized papers. Calling "capitalism" evil, when there are plenty of honest productive voluntary capitalists supplied in abundance, is, a measure of falsehood, misdirection, fraud, prejudice, and collective punishment, so as to cover up the true measure of evil, owned by those who produce evil, even if they say otherwise. What do they do? If they plan on injuring innocent people, and then they execute those plans, and innocent people are injured, does it help the victims in avoiding further injury by using the name capitalist to call attention and accountability to the criminals? What happens to all the honest productive voluntary capitalists when you collectively plan on punishing all the capitalists for the crimes committed by only the criminals who hide behind the false label of capitalist? What does that make you, as you intend to target capitalism, for crimes committed by criminals, and all those innocent bystanders pay the price of your punishment - how do you explain away all that collateral damage? What word do you use to hide the fact that your plan includes the injury of innocent victims, and you go ahead and execute that plan knowing that innocent victims will pile up in mass graves as they scream bloody murder on their long march to a torturous death? What is done? Not what is said. How many screams occur, listen to the victims as they scream, heed that warning. How many bodies pile up? What is your solution to the "capitalism" problem? Is it the same old final solution with a new font? I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. Words lead to deeds. You will have a very hard time selling voluntary socialism. Planning on and implementing socialism onto a targeted number of victims will be as difficult. How do you manage the voluntary sales job? How do you managed the involuntary method? I can offer two definitions of socialism that are in the historical record, and these definitions are original versions of the idea, and then I'll offer a glimpse of the historical record whereby the word socialism began to mean the opposite of the original meaning. I do this not in the hope of selling socialism, or capitalism, rather the idea is to do the right thing, to avoid being a victim, and to avoid being a criminal, more that once, and to avoid perpetuating victimization of the innocent by the criminals. Socialism as defined by one of Socialism's original activists, proponents, and historians (He wrote a book titled The History of Socialism, or so I've heard, but I have not found that copy yet, and I originally found my copy of the book where the quote was found in a Library in Australia, and I paid for photo copies of the text mailed to me from that source, and since than I have helped publish this book on-line, by converting the photocopy text into digital files): http://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. If you get to the root of voluntary capitalism what will you find, and will it be any different from that definition above, and if different, will the differences be a matter of principle or interest? Next is a quote of Karl Marx by Eric Fromm in the before mentioned book titled "The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness": For Marx, capital and labor were not merely two economic categories. Capital for him was the manifestation of the past, of labor transformed and amassed into things; labor was the manifestation of life, of human energy applied to nature in the process of transforming it. The choice between capitalism and socialism (as he understood it) amounted to this: Who (what) was to rule over what (whom)? What is dead over what is alive, or what is alive over what is dead? (Cf. E. Fromm, 1961, 1968) Whose version of capitalism is joined voluntarily? Whose version of capitalism is enforced by deceit, threats of violence, and acts of violence? Now onto the Communist Manifesto so as to help know how the criminals redefined the original meaning of socialism. http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html Thus, in 1847, socialism was a middle-class movement, communism a working-class movement. Socialism was, on the Continent at least, "respectable"; communism was the very opposite. And as our notion, from the very beginning, was that "the emancipation of the workers must be the act of the working class itself," there could be no doubt as to which of the two names we must take. Moreover, we have, ever since, been far from repudiating it. Presuming that the historical record is accurate, the text clearly records a division between the voluntary socialists (such as "The Owenites in England, and the Fourierists in France" who were referred to by Stephen Pearl Andrews) and the involuntary "communists". Karl Marx, apparently, became corrupted, from a scientifically based, self-improving, perspective, to a criminally based, dictatorial, perspective, and we in America have similar turn-coats; George Washington in particular. A similar division occurs within the capitalist set of people - in their numbers. 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. There is much more to the obvious divisions among the capitalists, in particular the writings of Karl Menger - offering a measure of the division that I won't elaborate on right now. I have to move on, it is getting late, and I have yet to produce something of value, or work, as I define it. Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralisation of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured? That is extremely dogmatic; making references to things as if things, or even ideas, or even legal fictions, or groups, are capable of responsibility, and therefore capable of accountability, which is a variation on the criminal tactic of yelling "thief" while committing a crime, so as to inspire the victims to be misdirected, and render them powerless. There may be more meaning in the context of the words quoted, but why tangle things up is such a confusing web of falsehood, what is the point? Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition. Since, under present circumstances, free and unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo, I consider the foundation of this magazine to be an important public service. Excellent final quote, I agree with those words, that perspective is well supported by many examples. Thanks I can deal with the move from the main page to this punishment bin, this execution of punishment, without trial, as those who executed this punishment rationalize their acts, by some measure, because this is what is, even if I don't agree with the transfer; I can deal with it. At least this thread was not deleted, at least this thread is still competitive by its actual measure, despite the move to discredit it. No time to edit Please understand that I welcome your perspective, even if I do not agree with it, and if you can expose my error, as I try to expose yours, I will be better for your effort, you will help me, which amounts to a measure of generosity on your part - as far as I can see - at this point.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jun 26th, 2011 12:53 pm |
|
31st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Do the Bankers/Federal Reserve do Usury ? Valerius, I think that your question is a very important question that can help everyone once it is answered accurately. I am going to offer an general answer, or an answer that moves toward a more accurate answer, assuming that my answer is valid. If a person has a choice between borrowing from someone who charges a lot for a loan and borrowing from someone else who charges less for a loan, then that is a case whereby two competitors are competing against each other for the opportunity to sell a loan. If a third competitor competes for the same opportunity to sell a loan and the price charged to the borrower is even less, then which does the borrower choose? A. Higher priced loan B. Medium priced loan C. Lower priced loan If a fourth competitor moves into the competition and undercuts all three previous competitors for the opportunity to sell the loan to the borrower and the fourth competitor lowers the price even lower, which does the borrower choose? A. Higher priced loan B. Medium priced loan C. Lower priced loan D. Lowest priced loan to date If a fifth competitor moves into the competition and undercuts all four previous competitors for the opportunity to sell the loan to the borrower and the fifth competitor actually pays people to borrow the loan, so as to corner the market, which does the borrower choose? A. Highest priced loan B. Next to highest priced loan C. Medium priced loan D. Next to lowest priced loan, almost "free" of charge E. Negative priced loan, lender pays borrowers to borrow money At which point you may claim that no such thing can exist, where banks pay people to borrow money, and at which point you may want to check out the following link: http://www.umungu.com/scrip.htm When banking competition is not against the law, what do you think happens? When banking monopolies are not enforced by the same people who enforce moral laws, what do you think happens? What happens to the quality of things produced, and the cost of things produced, when there is no competitor allowed to offer higher quality and lower cost? I can illustrate the answer with one link: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ If all the honest productive American people picked a day in the future, at which time, in unison, all of those honest productive people in America began using a competitive legal money, instead of the enforced legal monopoly, or Dollar Hegemony, who would have a care in the world about all those who still rung their hands over that National Debt Clock, whereby many people are led to believe that they owe an impossible sum to a very few mysterious nobodies? In short: Yes, Bankers/Federal Reserve do Usury, that is what they do, and they have names, and they leave paper trails, and those paper trails are denominated in their legal monopoly paper fraud currency money stuff (not so short an answer). OK, the short answer: Yes
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jun 26th, 2011 06:13 pm |
|
32nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north997.html Anyone, That is a link to the latest report about The Dollar Hegemony (A.K.A. U.S.A. Inc. LLC), or The Federal Reserve System operators, including Ben Bernanke, and the members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), by Gary North, the Austrian Economist Authority - if there ever was one. Note: They don't know why. Gary may be playing with the facts, nudging, or chiding, or kidding, or having his tongue somewhere near his cheek, or white lying, or whatever can communicate Gary North knowing better than he reports to his readers. If those legal criminals running The Dollar Hegemony don't know why the things they do cause the things that happen, over, and over, and over, and over gain, with unfaltering consistency, then I'll eat my hat. I don't have a hat. The point is made, and it matters not what I believe, or what Gary North believes, as to what those legal criminals know, or don't know, while they continue to somehow manage to retain control over nearly incalculable power, and as they continue to cause unspeakable suffering upon immeasurable numbers of victims perpetually, and with impunity. If they are so dumb, Gary, why are they so powerful, for so long? If they are so dumb, by what measure of lack of intelligence does their victims compare - competitively - on the dumb scale? Gary was speaking about this: The Keynesian textbook account, including Bernanke's textbook, says that monetary expansion and low interest rates are supposed to increase economic growth. It's not happening. Keynesian textbooks can be compared to Austrian Economics textbooks, just as Socialist textbooks can be compared to Capitalist textbooks, and if they have been authorized by the authorities who are connected to The Dollar Hegemony, the bend will be toward blind obedience, or a general scarcity of competitive information, such as can be found by people who are neither Keynesian, nor Austrian, and neither Socialist, nor Capitalist, just honest working people, who are not out to get something for nothing, as a plan, followed by the execution of the plan, to get something, for nothing, or to get something at the expense of someone else, or to trade inequitably. Here is a quote from one of the Austrian Economics Professors who wrote the fundamental principles behind Austrian Economics, according to some of those authorities living today: ...every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others. http://mises.org/etexts/menger/two.asp I've read enough of that professors work to realize that the motive is no different than every other motive dreamed up by someone planning on, and then executing the plan, to gain at the expense of targeted, innocent, victims. What is the measure of what they do, compared to what they say? Is the truth in the fine print? Do they confess, eventually? When the pot calls the kettle black, as in the Austrian Economists calling the Keynesian Economists monetary cranks, and that "they" don't know how to do this, or that, I'm curious about the viewpoint from which the finger is pointing, as much as where the finger is pointing. The exclusive control over the legal money power is an example of some individuals, certainly not every individual, attempting, and then gaining ground, to secure his, or their, own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others, right out of the Austrian Economics text book. Karl Menger goes on to describe, in his words, not mine: how value isn't value without scarcity. Things that are abundant are not valuable, speaking in Austrian Economics speak. What about Sunlight, or power of any kind? Power remains powerful even when it is abundant, perhaps even more so because it is cost-less, as a result of being abundant. The fingers being pointed at the legal monopoly power, and calling them anything but legal criminals, misdirects the focus of attention away from the fact that they are criminal and focuses attention on whatever other characters are associated with the false front. Call the legal criminals Humpty Dumpty and sooner or later the victims are going to dislike Humpty Dumpty, and then it will be time to replace the old name with a shinny new one, preferably one that the victims identify as being a nice, harmless, or even beneficial name. Absent anything good, the lesser of two evils prevails, at least Humpty Dumpty isn't as bad as Donald Duck, currently. That last sentence leads into another quote from Gary North: Furthermore the data above proves beyond a reasonable doubt why there has been no excess lending by US banks to US borrowers: none of the cash ever even made it to US banks! This also resolves the mystery of the broken money multiplier and why the velocity of money has imploded. The use of the word velocity is instructive when measuring current realities. It is not merely speed, or velocity, that measures currency, in any form, the current of a river, the current flow of blood through a human body, the electric current flowing in an electric circuit, and hydraulic fluid flowing in a hydraulic circuit, all have stuff flowing at a specific rate and the rate is determined by all the forces that determine that rate, and if the rate increases, certain measurable things happen, and if the rate decreases, certain measurable things happen. A human body can be killed if the velocity of blood slows down or speeds up too fast, there is a range where life is possible. Electric circuits are even more sensitive to changes in velocity, whereby too much velocity will render the circuit powerless to do the designed task, and injure parts of the circuit. A social network can be seen in similar light. Take an operating social network and then remove half of the legal currency that was circulating at a measurable velocity and what do you think will happen? Does it matter if that removal of that currency is done by a few people, or one person? The result is the same until such time as the currency returns into circulation. What happens if the power available in the social circuit is doubled, such as the case when the legal criminals doubled the legal number of dollars in 2008? Does it matter where the money is sent, what the money buys, or even if the money is burned, or even if the money is used to employ an army of people to dig holes, and then another army of people to fill the holes back in? What happens if the legal money supply is cut in half inside the social network and that half of the supply of money is then added to a doubling of the money, and then both the half and the double money supply sum is sent outside the social network? How about a look at rough numbers to get an idea of what happens. A = Total dollars in circulation (with a known velocity) inside U.S.A. Inc. (LLC). That is the situation before the total money supply is cut in half, and we can say that that time is roughly the beginning of 2008. Then there is the following: B = half of A is removed from inside U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) Then there is added to that cutting in half the legal life blood of the U.S. economy an additional plan, with an additional execution of the plan, which amounts to the following: C = doubling the total supply of legal dollars before it was cut in half. Then the plan is to take the half that was taken out of circulation inside U.S.A. Inc. and add to it the doubling of the supply of money (before cutting it in half) to spend that total amount of legal money outside U.S.A. Inc. A = 1x (where x is a number of zeros) B = .5x C = 1x Before the plan is executed the Honest Productive American People have 1x to work with as the life blood of the economy. Then the Honest Productive American People have their life blood supply cut in half and taken and what is taken is added to the doubled amount, which adds up to 1.5x, and that sum of dollars is sent, or spent, or held in reserve to be spent later, or sent to the competition as the Honest Productive American People struggle to compete. Before the plan is executed the Honest Productive American People work with 1x as an amount of legal purchasing power flowing through the entire American Economic Body, and no one anywhere has any more Dollars to work with as far as the 2008 plan is concerned, and then 1.5 is suddenly transferred somewhere by some people. BP (Before Plan) 1x for the Honest American People and 0x for the competition. AP (After Plan) .5x for the Honest American People and 1.5x for the competition. What can be expected to happen, by any reasonable person, even an Austrian Economics Professor? Before the plan is executed the Honest Productive American People have 1x power, perhaps trillions of dollars, perhaps more, who has the most accurate number? Then the power of the Productive American People, as world economic competitors, is cut in half, while their half cut out is added to the measure of their power before the cut (Bust), and that power is then employed by a few people, and the same few people who have the legal power to cut the power of the Productive American People in half, bust it, and the same few people who have the legal power to double the power used by the Productive American People, boom something, and the same few people who then have the power to spend the half taken from the Productive American People, and the same few people who have the power to spend the extra sum of purchasing power that they doubled, and added to the half they took out of circulation, and they can spend it outside the network used by the Productive American People, those few can actually spend that purchasing power taken, and doubled, on the competition that competes with the Productive American People; if that is what they plan on doing, then they can execute that plan. Who has the power to stop them? If the Honest Productive American People do not have the power to stop them before half of what power they had was taken, will they then have enough power to stop them after that power, and much more, is used to finance the competition? This is not news. This has happened before, and here is the writer who wrote about it then: http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm Here is how this story was told back then: 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. Double the power available, keep half of that doubling, then cut half of the power out of the circuit, keep that half and add that half to the total power taken, then that sum of power is transferred to the competition. A. 1x Then B. .5x After taking half C. 1x Taken by doubling D. .5x added to 1x = 1.5x sent to the competition E. .5x is what the home team has to work with after having worked with 1x, and now the home team, suffering from that loss, is competing against the competition that was just given 1.5x. And Gary North says: They don't know why. They are stupid? They are hedging their bets by creating the situation to their advantage, and the few who know exactly what is being done, and why, are not likely going to be advertising those facts, because everyone can't win when the goal is to earn something at the expense of other people. When the goal is "to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others" the "others" can't be clued in on the goal, they need to be clueless, or even better, they need to be paying for the whole thing and then sent a bill for all the cost of the whole thing, including expenses, and including bonuses flowing to the worst of the worst, or best of the best, whichever eye by which the measure is made. Which explains the following link well enough: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ I have yet to finish reading Gary North's report on the bad guys, as the bad guys are busy, lately. I'm curious about such things, but not in such a way as to find myself seeking to secure my own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of all others, rather, I think that responsibility is individual, or there is no responsibility, and without responsibility there certainly can't be accountability, by my measure?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 29th, 2011 07:33 pm |
|
33rd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north998.html Anyone, Gary North again, the go to guy, holding the fire under the legal criminals, as those lying, cheating, torturing, and mass murdering, serial killers extraordinaire, transfer the power from the source, which is the honest productive people of America, and use that power to keep the power flowing, by any means necessary, including the aforementioned crimes against humanity. And the skeptics may claim, this, or that, but all that has to be done to hold the actual people accountable is to follow the money to the source, then follow where it goes, what it buys, and who cashes in on the current crimes of the century. Look into Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports. You may have heard that the Federal Reserve System is the lender of last resort. This is a misleading concept. The Federal Reserve loans the U.S. government newly created fiat money. The government issues the FED an IOU. It is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. But who stands behind the United States government, wallets in hand? You do. And so do I. So, humanity, are you embarrassed by your gullibility, at all, as the power still flows from the victims to the criminals, and it is accelerating, and the rate of acceleration is accelerating, as the honest productive people grow ever weaker, and as the legal criminal grow strong enough to increase the rate of acceleration of power flowing to them, by way of deceit, and by way of threats of violence, and by way of unaccounted examples of horrific mass violence? Just a tad embarrassed? What is the pay off for willful ignorance, and what is the profit for parroting the lies, how does one rationalize such embarrassing moral irresponsibility? I didn't know? I was following orders? Really?
There goes more of the gullibility. Who claims that "we are broke"? Look at the debt clock: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ That is a measure of the power flowing. The power exists. The power is a power to purchase. If it is not power, it cannot purchase. When they say that "we are broke"; they mean "we want more of the power we are stealing from you". If there is more to take, and they know there is more to take, then they take it, anyway they can, including by way of the lie that "we are broke". Why parrot that lie? We are not broke. There is plenty of power, abundant power, so much power that the legal criminals can steal much, or most, of it, and then consume that power to destroy our ability to produce power, and use our power to destroy other people in other countries, and there is so much stolen power that there is enough power to rebuild the other countries that they destroy, and so much stolen power that they can BOOM the Chinese economy. How much power is there, not who owns it, how much power exists? Call the total supply of surplus wealth X. Is that supply increasing or decreasing? If the legal criminals use that power to BOOM the Chinese economy, then the total supply of power is increasing, as the power is used to make more power. If at the same time that power is used to destroy Libya, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other countries, then the total supply is being used up, it will be decreasing, as the power is used to destroy power. How much power is it? It is enough power to BOOM the Chinese economy, destroy Libya, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, feed most of the people in the Unites States, and construct two cars in every garage, all the garages, all the houses attached to all the garages, the roads, the Space Program, the welfare programs, the corporate subsidies, the secret military, the underground bunkers, the nuclear industry, bio warfare research, and the list goes on, and on, and on, and all that purchasing is the measure of the power to purchase, which is the measure of the entire sum of humanities power to use power to make more power, power enough to construct Pyramids before the discovery of oil, before the advantages of industry, before electricity, before air-flight, and before global networked communication whereby anyone can instantly contact anyone else and transfer information immediately. How much power is the power that they are claiming is the true measure of us being broke, as those people are driven in limousines, to one of their summer homes, on one of their summer vacations? Who says "we are broke" - Gary North? If they have the power to steal all the measurable surplus wealth, then they are not broke, and once they have that power they can take anything away from anyone, or everything from everyone, all the power to purchase, by using the same tool they use to steal the power - they manipulate the legal monopoly money supply. What happens if all the honest productive American people stop using The Dollar on July 4th 2011, and begin using a competitive, accurately, honest, high quality, and low cost money instead? The National Debt clock then measures something other than the connection between the honest productive people and the legal criminals. Who ever is left using The Dollar is left holding an empty bag, because the source of the power has been disconnected from that legal extortion racket? What then is the measure of the power produced by the honest productive people once the honest productive people stop using the dollar measure? No more "we are broke". Then it is just "they are broke"; meaning those left holding onto that fraud account. What then, when all the honest productive people of American begin using their own honest legal money, or many diverse competitive currencies, once the flow of the power to the legal criminals stops, what is then the measure of the power of the honest productive people of America, who can say then, that "we are broke", and what is used to measure how broke we are then? How does anyone measure the "full faith and credit of the" honest productive American people? The scam is such that the lenders (the honest productive American people) are told that they are the borrowers, and if the honest productive American people are broke, it is a lack of knowledge, a lack of will to resist victimization, and in that measure we are broke, not by the measure of power to purchase, not by the measure of the power to produce surplus wealth, and once the honest productive American people figure out the scam, and figure out the tool that is used to facilitate the scam, The Dollar Hegemony, they will be powerful enough to end their victimization. They will no longer be broke. We are the victims of last resort. The honest productive American people are the lenders. Who is paying the lenders the interest payments, and the principle payments, that they earn for lending the power to purchase to the borrowers? A. Honest productive Americans are the lenders. B. The legal criminals borrow from A How can the lenders be so stupid as to actually believe that they owe someone something for having loaned something to someone? The scam is so incredibly bold, and audacious, that there is very good reason why the legal criminals think that their victims are stupid, inferior, and deserving of victimization. Look at how stupid it is, for the lenders, the honest productive American people, to believe that they are broke, and that they owe the people who borrow from them, instead of the other way around. Imagine going to the Bank. You sit down and take out a new home loan, for 100 thousand dollars. You then send the bank a monthly bill, not a payment, a bill. You send the Bank a monthly bill and you charge the Bank a monthly bill that begins to transfer the interest you charge the Bank for you having borrowed money from the bank, and then you charge a principle payment transferred to you from the Bank, as the Bank pays you for the money you borrowed from the Bank. You borrow 100 thousand from the Bank. You then charge the Bank an amortized payment schedule whereby the Bank pays you an additional 100 thousand dollars of principle, and you also charge the Bank 100 thousand dollars of interest payments, because, as you say to the Bank, you borrowed money from the Bank. Because you borrowed from the lender you expect, and you receive, monthly payments of principle and interest from the Bank, because you borrowed from the Bank; the borrower is owed principle and interest payments for having borrowed from the lender. Got it? You borrow 100 thousand dollars from the Bank. You tell the Bank that the Bank now owes you 200 thousand dollars, for having loaned you 100 thousand dollars. How do you convince the Bank that that arrangement is acceptable to the Bank, how do you get the Bank to believe such a ridiculous fraud? You think I'm stupid? Read Gary North (who appears to be as yet still duped into the belief that "we are broke"): You may have heard that the Federal Reserve System is the lender of last resort. This is a misleading concept. The Federal Reserve loans the U.S. government newly created fiat money. The government issues the FED an IOU. It is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. But who stands behind the United States government, wallets in hand? You do. And so do I. Who is borrowing power from who? Who owes who? Who is paying who for what? Where does the power to purchase originate, where does that power come from, and how is the transfer from those who create that power to those who then spend it managed? Power does not exist at a point in time. Then someone makes more power. Now power does exist. The producer of the power has it, of course, the producer made the excess power, the producer produced the surplus wealth, the producer consumed less and produced more, and the producers produces surplus wealth, from a time, and from a place, where there was no power. Someone has the power that that same person produces. How is that power then transferred to someone else? What is that transfer called? The power producer has power. Power flows to someone else? Who is the lender? Who is borrowing? Who owes who? If the producer believes that the power flowing to the other person constitutes an obligation to pay more, and more, and more, and more, because that power started flowing in that direction, if that happens, then that is called what? Stupidity. Fraud? Willful ignorance? The lesser of two evils? What else can explain that transfer? The powerful people empower the legal criminals, and the legal criminals then use that power to keep that flow of power accelerating, making the powerful people less powerful, and making the legal criminals more powerful, until such time as the power producers can no longer produce power. Does that make the power producer broke, or just incredibly stupid? Of course the legal criminals smirk. Of course the legal criminals laugh as they give themselves bonuses, and raises, and extended vacations, and piles and piles of tortured and murdered victims stink to high heaven, on your dime. You are next. They can afford to laugh. How much longer can you afford to be so stupid? I'll read more of Gary North - while listening to Alex Jones, and I may comment further. Hold on: Alex Jones says: "Most Americans would..." Obey orders to walk into a mass grave to be shot to death, with their own children at hand? If we are so broke, as to believe that we owe legal criminals for the privilege of being their victims, the we are certainly broke - that broke? Who is on that list of "we"? Back to Gary North: The constant absorption of capital by the U.S. government cannot go on forever. No, Gary, the legal criminals have actually recorded the money trail in their published documents called Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, and they are people, the criminals are people, they have names, they willfully plan on that "constant absorption of capital by" them, those names on those reports, or the names of the people behind the false fronts named on those reports, the limited liability corporations, or whatever label is on the paper. The actual power is wielded by actual people. The power flows to actual accounts, where actual people have the power to use the money in those accounts to purchase; they have names; actual signatures from actual human beings cause the power to flow as directed by the person signing, authorizing, and making the transfers happen, and the "U.S. government" cannot be responsible, and "it" can't be held accountable, so that error, of blaming a thing, for the crimes committed by people, is part of the fraud, parroting the fraud, supporting the fraud, being the fraud. Why parrot the lies one more time? What is the pay off? This means that when the Federal Reserve finally stops buying U.S. debt, there will be a great default. I mean finally. I do not mean temporarily. I do not mean this year. The fear of another recession may keep the safe-haven money flowing into the Treasury this year. But, at some point, investors will demand higher interest rates. Geithner's letter raises this specter of higher interest rates if the debt ceiling is not raised. But this threat will also exist if the debt ceiling is raised and raised again, as it will be. None of that means anything to anyone not connected to that legal monopoly money, so why care about it? Why put any power in it? Why not divorce yourself from it, and connect to honest productive people instead, connect with a new connection, connect with competitive honest money instead, and the honest money, if it is higher quality, and if it is lower cost, will be designed to effectively prevent connections to the legal criminals. Honest productive Americans are now connected to the legal criminals by way of the legal monopoly money power, the dollar unit of currency, and that can end, and no owner of that money can demand interest payments from anyone not connected by that fraudulent connection. There is no demand for any interest payment when the victims are no longer stupefied and victimized by that legal money fraud. A replacement money, a competitive money, an honest money, a secure money, in place, removes that flow of power. Honest productive Americans stop the flow that weakens them, and stops the same flow that strengthens the legal criminals, and thereby the legal criminals can no longer demand interest payments. Who would pay those demands once a competitive choice is less expensive, less costly, and much more powerful for the person, and the people, choosing the better option? There is no longer a power to enforce such demands of interest payments, or principle payments, or mortgage payments, or even tax payments, not in dollars, no longer in dollars, since honest productive Americans invent and use their own honest productive American currency. What is the problem? Rising interest rates? Really? Who says so? A dollar supporter? Someone betting the farm on the good faith and credit of the dollar unit of currency? The dollar is controlled by criminals, why use that money? Why fight the criminals at all? Why not ignore them? Why not cut the credit card? They borrow money and then they say the lender owes them principle and interest. How stupid can people get? The Federal Reserve at some point will start buying Treasury debt again to keep rising rates from crippling the economy. This means price inflation will return, as it did in the late 1970s. Then it will move above that era's rate of rising prices. This is why the FED will eventually have to face the music: either hyperinflation or the Great Default. I believe that it will choose the Great Default. If it refuses, then the dollar will collapse. That is entirely a dollar denominated network of individuals connected by that single legal currency, and it has nothing to do with anyone who manages to get by with something better than the dollar, anyone, or any group, managing to invent, and maintain, a better legal money has no interest in that dollar denominated crisis, or fraud, or gravy train, or whatever it is to whomever benefits from it, or whomever is injured by it. Why do people consider the dollar to be the only measure of the power of the honest productive American people, as if no other measure can exist. If the measuring device is false, get one that isn't. What is the problem? At some point, interest rates will rise. Then we will see the negative consequences that Geithner described in his letter. Why will interest rates rise on the dollar unit of legal fraud money? There will be a Great Default when voters finally say, "We're not going to pay." On that day, your net worth had better not rest on a pile of IOUs issued by the U.S. government. Otherwise, you will be like Thomas Mitchell, in "Gone With the Wind," sitting at his desk in 1865, mad as a hatter, insisting that he was rich. Why? He had lots of government bonds issued by the Confederacy. Betting the farm on the ability of legal criminals to keep the power flowing from those who create power to those who steal it with the legal monopoly money fraud is cause for hedging, and the Austrians tend to suggest hedging, by betting, or by investing, or by buying gold, silver, and other measures of surplus wealth. Why not buy things that make more power out of less power? A Solar Panel. A Farm, or even a Modular Home Vertical Farming Unit or two. Knowledge, wisdom, or something other than stupid voluntary victimization, which is the measure of the legal dollar money fraud extortion racket, is an investment opportunity that leads to more power, abundant power, and avoiding bankruptcy.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 5th, 2011 02:25 pm |
|
34th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
just my opinion mind, but the meaning of capitalism is free enterprise of the individual in a society that protects and upholds contracts and punishes fraud and coercion. aLLyOuRbAsE, Society cannot punish, and therefore your definition is as ambiguous, and imprecise, as any legalese that may intend to be imprecise, so as to afford the authority who authored the words, the ability to constructively interpret the meaning of the communication authored by said authority. Your imprecise, and ambiguous, definition of capitalism falls well within the range of definitions of capitalism that is common among what has become known as State Capitalism, which is in many ways opposite in principle when compared competitively against the group of individuals who have become known as Ancaps, or Anarchist Capitalists. Anarchist Capitalists are as far apart from State Capitalists as hippy communes in the American 1960s are far from Stalin's enforced communism during his regime of legal crime that has been measured as high as 20 million legal murders of innocent "citizens"; but anarchist capitalists and state capitalists have one common connection. I have a working definition of capitalism that so far fits every single capitalist, without fail, until such time as a capitalist honestly informs me otherwise. Capitalism is a pricing method. The price of something to be exchanged, by a capitalist, is priced at "that which the market will bear", in their words, and in a more precise wording, free from euphemism, the price is set to the highest limit that the other person is willing to pay, and that method of pricing is the essence of capitalism, until an honest capitalist can correct my error, and I won't hold my breath. If a so called capitalist uses a different pricing method, such as an equitable price, or a cost price, then that so called capitalist, as far as I know to date, is the one capitalist alive that falls outside my working definition of capitalism, which would be nice to know, but where is that person, and if there are more than one, where is that group of capitalists who don't have that one common denominator, that pricing method? Back to your definition: just my opinion mind, but the meaning of capitalism is free enterprise of the individual in a society that protects and upholds contracts and punishes fraud and coercion. Up to the point at which individuals, "in a society" (which can mean any number of people connected in some way, and the sum, or aggregate, set of people connected, is "society", and "society" isn't a thing unto itself, "society" is not a responsible entity, and "society" is not an accountable entity it's self, to be clear, and to head off any misdirection, or misconception, of what is, or is not society), are free to do anything enterprising, or productive, or anything other than the willful premeditated injuring of the innocent, I can call that description: peaceful human existence, or: liberated human existence, where the innocent people are not being willfully injured by criminals. How is that capitalism? Where is the capitalism part? just my opinion mind, but the meaning of capitalism is free enterprise of the individual in a society Where is the capitalism part? Do the capitalists claim some patent on free enterprise? Where is this exclusive right to own, or use, free enterprise, this stuff that is somehow held by capitalists exclusively, if so? Moving on to the last part, but again making sure that the word "society" is not misused so as to project a false perspective of society, and so as to avoid the often made error of misunderstanding: that "society" is capable of thought, or "society" is capable of action, and "society" is therefore, falsely, blamed as being responsible for anything, or held accountable as if "society" were a being, and not merely a set of people, or sum of people, or aggregate measure of a group of independent minded human beings who are all capable of individual thought, and who are all capable of individual action, and who are all accountable, and who are all responsible, as individuals, for their individual thoughts, and their individual actions. a society that protects and upholds contracts and punishes fraud and coercion. Who does the punishing, in your definition of capitalism? Is that the thing that accurately draws the line between regular people and capitalists? Capitalists construct and maintain a society in which capitalists decide who can punish who, and for what, and if you are not a capitalist, well then, what does that make you? Love it or leave it? If you are not a capitalist, you are a terrorist? Capitalism, at it's core, the one common denominator agreed with, among all capitalists, is the method of pricing, until one, or more, honest capitalist confesses otherwise. All other considerations stem from that one common denominator and vary considerably from one to the next capitalist. There is a very wide range of how much a capitalist will push for his, or her, punishment doctrine, from the anarchist capitalists all the way up to the flaming fascists, and many variations in between, and still, the one common denominator is the pricing method. Take away the pricing method, and the essence of capitalism vanishes, and the person returns back to just another person. And you can accuse me of reading to much into your definition, while I remind you that it is your ambiguous definition, not mine. My definition of capitalism is precise, workable, and so far proven to hit the mark every single time, without exception. Capitalism is a method of pricing something to be exchanged to someone else, or to other people, at a price that is raised to the highest limit the the other people are willing to pay, or in one word, an inequitable price. Capitalism is a way of pricing an inequitable price that favors the capitalist exclusively. A capitalist will not touch my viewpoint with a ten foot pole, and I have direct experience, spanning over 25 years, with this knowledge earned over that much time. As soon as a capitalist begins to see the doors that open from my viewpoint, they slam that door shut with vengeance, and resort from then on to deception, threats of violence, or as yet personally experienced, I can assume, reasonably, that they will resort to their version of physical punishment doctrine upon me, for the crime of offering a competitive, and accurate, viewpoint. Why? You tell me, and I am being nice. I've read other competitive perspectives on the full, and accurate, base, or principle, measure of capitalism, but so far mine works best, in actual efforts to find the true measure, and I will offer three examples of other authors whereby the other authors offer their definitions of capitalism, and I will add mine, and I will add yours, and therefore there will be, now, before you, a total of 5 competitive definitions of capitalism, so as to offer you, or anyone, a means by which you, as the individual judge, can find which definition offers the highest quality, at the lowest cost, to you. Which definition works for you, best, so that you now have the best working definition of capitalism, the best definition that affords you the tool you need to accomplish your goal. whatever that goal may be. Competitive definitions of Capitalism (for anyone with lots of questions, where the idea is to find the best answers): 1. Yours just my opinion mind, but the meaning of capitalism is free enterprise of the individual in a society that protects and upholds contracts and punishes fraud and coercion. 2. Mine Pricing inequitably. 3. Marx, by way of Eric Fromm Source: http://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-Human-Destructiveness-Erich-Fromm/dp/080501604X For Marx, capital and labor were not merely two economic categories. Capital for him was the manifestation of the past, of labor transformed and amassed into things; labor was the manifestation of life, of human energy applied to nature in the process of transforming it. The choice between capitalism and socialism (as he understood it) amounted to this: Who (what) was to rule over what (whom)? What is dead over what is alive, or what is alive over what is dead? (Cf. E. Fromm, 1961, 1968) 4. Karl Menger by way of The Mises Institute Source: ...every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others. 5. I.G Farben, and the Secret Service, by way of Joseph Borkin Source: http://www.amazon.com/Crime-Punishment-I-G-Farben/dp/0760703736/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207843929&sr=1-1 The construction of I.G. Auschwitz has assured I.G. a unique place in business history. By adopting the theory and practice of Nazi morality, it was able to depart from the conventional economics of slavery in which slaves are traditionally treated as capital equipment to be maintained and serviced for optimum use and depreciated over a normal life span. Instead, I.G. reduced slave labor to a consumable raw material, a human ore from which the mineral of life was systematically extracted. When no usable energy remained, the living dross was shipped to the gassing chambers and cremation furnaces of the extermination center at Birkenau, where the S.S. recycled it into the German war economy – gold teeth for the Reichsbank, hair for mattresses, and fat for soap. Even the moans of the doomed became a work incentive, exhorting the remaining inmates to greater effort. There is a point to capitalism, a point for each capitalist, a goal, where each capitalist has a goal, a plan, a willful plan, and capitalism helps each capitalist arrive at that willful goal, and so, what is that goal, for one capitalist, and the next, and the next, where each capitalist shares that same goal, thereby defining the true meaning of capitalism, and no other thing defined by some other goal? What is the base? What is the principle? What glues all the capitalists into that one group, what bonds them by their specific willful choices, common among all of them, excluding anything other than that one capitalist bonding element? You tell me. I think I know, but I've been wrong many, many, many times, enough times to finally dawn upon my consciousness, that I can be wrong again. Don't, please, steer me down some rabbit hole, if you can possibly avoid such a willful thing that targets me specifically. So far my working definition of capitalism, which is merely inequitable pricing, is that one common bond, and any other thing, so far, is just people being people, not people being "capitalists". I can be enterprising, and I don't need a capitalist license to do so, and I can be freely enterprising, choosing not to injure innocent people during my free enterprising actions, that are willfully done by me, and I don't need a capitalist authorized patent to do that either. I can punish people if I want to, but that doesn't make me a capitalist either, as far as I know, punishers punish, that is what they do, that is what defines a punisher. What does a capitalist do, to join the club, exclusively, the thing that makes a capitalist unique to capitalism, exclusively capitalism, and not any other defined group? I'm anxious to know the true, accurate, highest quality, and lowest cost answer, and you have my best guess to date, and I've been looking.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jul 6th, 2011 05:17 pm |
|
35th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
So, we understand that corporations are global now. Electrellect, Please understand that my response is in no way designed by me to win anything, or to be argumentative for the sake of argumentation. I have been searching for honest discussion for many years, finding very few examples, and that short story brings me right here, right now, looking at that sentence, stopping at that sentence, and offering a competitive response to that sentence, before moving on to reading the rest of your original offering for discussion on this forum. I realized, and I understand, that the legal criminals (criminals who happen to be elected into positions of law enforcement) gain by the fact that their victims believe in legal fictions, and the belief is such that the legal fiction is, itself, a responsible entity, a being, and therefore an entity that can be held to account, and presumably, an entity that can be punished - while the actual legal criminals are not held to account, and are therefore left with all the power they need to perpetuate their legal crimes. If my version of your sentence amounts to the same message, the same realization, and the same understanding, then from my view I'd have to assume a whole lot of message that does not show up in your sentence, unless I read between the lines. Corporations are legal fictions, and they are incapable of thought, and they are incapable of action, and therefore they are incapable of responsibility, and they are incapable of accountability, and the legal criminals realize these facts, and their victims, as a rule, do not realize these facts, or understand these facts, with few exceptions to that rule. They are not bound to the country they originated in. Which is more important: people bound by moral consciousness, the realization, and the understanding that moral consciousness is necessary for survival as living beings, or people being bound by some legal fiction, or nation, or country, or geographical area? What is meant by the words "the country"? If you do not realize, or understand, the significance of the question being asked, then consider reading the following link, or at least the quote taken from it: http://www.lysanderspooner.org/node/35 “The trial by jury,” then, is a “trial by the country” ---that is by the people as distinguished from a trial the government. Do you use the term "The Country" to be a synonym for "The People", as being all the people, without exception, and specifically not a reference to the few people who constitute "The Government"? Having no clue as to what you mean by they words "The Country", I am able to assume that you mean "The United States of America", or "The Nation State", or anything imaginable since the term has been used often to mean, specifically, the few people who wield the power of the government, or the law enforcement power, criminal or otherwise. If you use the term to mean all the people within the geographical area that has been designated as the legal boundaries of The United States of America, generally, if not specifically ever single legal "possession' of that legal fiction, then I can go on to realize, and understand, whatever else you communicate about that all inclusive group of all of those people, without exception. They are not bound to the country they originated in. It seems to me that the legal criminals are bound very intimately to every single one of their victims, and they are connected, or bound, by the one single lawful currency, among other things - including a common language, and a language that has been renders as false as the fraudulent legal currency. You can accuse me of resorting to arguments over semantics, and I can then be accused of resorting to deceit, to accomplish some nefarious goal, but I am innocent of that accusation, I just happen to have realized, and I now understand, a fuller measure of the power of falsehood, including how that power manages to pervade our common language. It is a good idea to return to principles, before taking false steps of interest. That is the true, and honest, explanation for my decision to focus attention on specific definitions for specific word choices. Yet individual countries bail them out? There it is, a use of a word that can cover up the crimes committed by specific people and blame those criminal acts on all the people, as if all the people in a "country" collectively perpetrate the crime, or the entire population of the country, as one unit, bailed them out. Legal criminals form crime organizations. One legal criminal group has exclusive rights to exploit the victims in area X, while another legal criminal group has exclusive rights to exploit the victims in area Y, and at times one legal criminal group bails out another one. Is that the concern being voiced? Yet individual countries bail them out? Do I realize the true measure of the actual situation in question? Example: The legal criminals running The Dollar Hegemony, also known as The Federal Reserve System of extortion, also known as U.S.A. Inc. (LLC), have doubled the total number of legal dollar units in 2008, and the purchases made with that huge measure of purchasing power is a tightly held secret, but some evidence suggests that portions of that huge measure of purchasing power has been sent to finance the following laundry list: 1. Suppression of defense against legal crime in Libya, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, Columbia, Venezuela, and places not as well documented 2. Offensive aggressive violent attacks upon innocent victims in the same areas mentioned above 3. Asset purchases of productive natural resources in some of the same areas mentioned above 4. Construction of productive facilities in the some of the same areas mentioned above and other areas such as China 5. The production and publication of deceptive communications designed to cover up the legal crimes being accounted for here 6. The purchase and consumption of weapons and ammunition used in the legal crimes being accounted for here 7. The purchase and consumption of personnel used in the perpetration of the legal crimes being accounted for here 8. The planning and executing of the plan to cause World War Three as a means by which the legal monopoly power transfers from U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) to Asia (or wherever the new base of operations will be) Why should the American tax payer bail out a bank that is global? Realize, please, that the source of surplus wealth, which is the source of credit, is the honest productive people, here in America, or anywhere, and therefore the fraud that is in play, is such that the legal criminals have convinced their benefactors, their employers, are their benefactors, their employers, and their lenders of last resort. Is that too complicated to understand, and to realize? The source of surplus wealth, which is the source of purchasing power, is the honest productive people, also known as "The Tax Payers", and those same people are now convinced that they owe money to some other group. How is that even remotely possible? The producers of wealth, the powerful people, have been led to believe that they owe another group something - with interest. Not only have the honest productive people been duped into the false belief that they owe another group money, they have even been duped into believing that they owe interest on the money they owe that group. That fraud can be illustrated absurdly, because it is absurd. You walk in to a bank in your town. You hand the employee at the bank a legal notice that says: Give me all your money. They obey that law and they give you all their money. Now you return the next day after spending that money on the construction of a new bank across the street, and the new bank will now compete with the bank that you had just removed all the money, and upon your return you hand the employee at the bank another notice. On the new notice you demand repayment of the entire amount of the money you took from the bank the previous day, and now the employee of the bank believes that his bank owes you the entire sum of the money you already took the previous day. You then hand the same person at the bank another notice. On the next notice you demand, legally, that on top of the entire principle, of the money that bank owes you, for you having taken that entire sum from that bank the previous day, that bank also owes you interest payments, over 30 years, which amounts to double the entire sum of money that you took the first day. Day 1: You demand and take X amount from that Bank. Day 2: You demand and take monthly payments for the entire amount you already took, and then demand payment for that entire sum. 30 years later: You collect a total of 3 times the money you took from that bank on Day 1 Why should the American tax payer bail out a bank that is global? Why are Americans stupefied to the point where they will obey every order unconditionally? If the legal criminals can convince their victims that disobedience is not an option, they have absolute power over their victims, hell, they can cause their victims to send their beloved children off to torture and murder, and be tortured, and be murdered, at the exclusive pleasure of their masters. Anything is believable once unconditional obedience is a measurable fact. What should the moral, honest, productive American people do? How about inventing and using an honest currency as a reasonable, and understandable, starting point, say, on July 4th 2012, or sooner? I.e. Goldman Sachs got bailed out in the U.S., is getting bailed out in Greece, and other countries, etc. Many people work at Goldman Sachs, and many of those people pay taxes, and many of those people are honest productive Americans, in every sense of the words, in measurable ways, as their actions help increase the total production of surplus wealth, and other people work at Goldman Sachs. Which ones have planned on, and have executed those plans, to injure innocent people? Which people at Goldman Sachs are the people who are guilty of crimes? Is it a good idea, or a bad idea, to collectively punishes everyone for the crimes of a few people? Do you realize the full measure of the problem? Did bailing out a global corporation help the United States tax payers? Does anything done with any dollars have anything to do with any honest productive person if all the honest productive people use a competitive, honest, accurate, and powerful legal currency instead of the dollar? Entire countries owned. Unconditional obedience is what: ownership? Most Americans know that Iraq is about oil, etc. Oil is a measure of actual, physical, power, convertible to watts, or BTUs. Etc. is a measure of actual power, convertible to dollars, without one power, the other power is without power. Without unconditional obedience, how can the legal criminals maintain their connection to their victims? Do you get any benefit from our troops securing oil in the Gulf? When the victims are unconditionally obedient to the point where they are ordered to use only dollars, then their fate will be directly connected to the fate of the dollar value. Those oil fields back the purchasing power of the dollar, and those powers combine to enforce what is known as World Reserve Currency Status. When The Dollar Hegemony is no longer The World Reserve Currency, you will know the full measure of that loss of that power because the American people are unconditionally obedient enough to bet their farms on the fate of the dollar, and when the dollar falls and when a new World Reserve Currency is enforced, by the new power, the powerless fate of the dollar will drag down all the Americans who volunteer to be connected to that fate - failing to invent, produce, and maintain a higher quality, and lower cost, option. When that happens, your question may be more comprehensively understood, as that realization becomes real, and you are unable to ignore the full measure of the actual answer. Do you get any benefit from our troops securing oil in the Gulf? They are enforcing The World Reserve Currency status of The Dollar Hegemony, as planned, and the plan is to expend those troops in the effort to transfer that power from The Dollar Hegemony to whatever the new power will be, which is a trade secret, not for public consumption. Your guess is as good as anyone's, unless you are an insider at the top, and my guess is that the new World Reserve Currency power will be based in Asia, because Asia is on the Boom cycle, and America is on the Bust cycle - in a big way - both ways. I have to stop at this point and get some work done.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jul 7th, 2011 04:06 pm |
|
36th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Alex may need a break? I'll host the show if he has no other volunteers. How much Doom and Gloom can a person tolerate? The Liberty Crew has arranged an event in Reno Nevada, and it might be a very positive thing to attend, for Alex, or anyone, anyone who has had enough Doom and Gloom. You know the saying? I'll link it a quote it: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/patrick_henry.html For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it. Enough anguish of spirit, do something. I know that Alex is doing something, playing the part of Paul Revere, and many are now awakened. What does that lead to? Anguish of spirit? What is being provided for it? Here is a link: http://www.lpac2011.com/events.php Take some time off, sort of, not really time off, there is a process of discovery, there is a process of communicating the discovery, and then there are other things to do, like, for example, figuring out exactly what constitutes those other things to do, so as to reach for, and get closer to, the goal. When the goal is liberty, not a bad goal to be reaching for, a steady supply of anguish of spirit may not be working well enough.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jul 7th, 2011 07:23 pm |
|
37th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Perhaps more of the 'concept' put forth in the Constitution Overcast, This: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html Article. I. That led directly to this: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html AMENDMENT XIV Those words are not the actual actions, the actual actions prove the meaning of those words. Those words are merely words that enable specific actions. Numbers are merely numbers, as numbers account for the actual actions that are enabled by mere words. Example: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Words and numbers account for the actual willful actions perpetrated by actual people. Perhaps more of the 'concept' put forth in the Constitution Which concept are you referring to; where are those words in that enabling document? Which words led to which actions? Regardless of the politics of the time, a concept of a free nation and free market was born. That is what counts to me. When was a concept of a free nation and free market born? A time existed during which people fled persecution by criminals running criminal governments in England and Europe, and those religious and political refugees fled to the North American Continent. During which time many people struggled and then prospered, according to more than one source, they prospered, in part, because they invented and maintained competitive legal currencies, then called Colonial Script. The people running the criminal government in England ordered those honest productive Americans to obey involuntary tax laws, and the legal criminals enforced monopoly legal currency laws, and then the honest productive Americans disobeyed those laws, and then the honest productive Americans had to fight the invasion of those legal criminals as they conducted an aggressive war for profit upon those honest productive Americans. When is that historical time period does that free nation and free market become a free nation and free market? When did that free nation and free market come into being, at that time, before that time, or after that time? If you are claiming that the free nation and free market came into being after that time, as in the time when The Constitution usurped the voluntary union of 13, or so, separate and sovereign states, then I'm puzzled as to such a claim, since the actual evidence proves otherwise. A test case, of a free market, occurred on the occasion when, after the British legal criminals were driven out of America, and before the new legal criminals usurped a working voluntary union of separate and sovereign states, with The Constitution fraud, when, a group of free men, ex-revolutionary war veterans, continued the revolutionary war, by defending their liberty against a runaway criminal government, then committing legal crimes under the color of a law that was being perpetrated by criminals running the Massachusetts State government. That test case was later called, by the victors, as the victors rewrite history, as Shays's Rebellion. The test case proved the validity of a Democratic Federated Republican form of government, as the rebels, who lost that battle for liberty, and fled to Vermont, and were then allowed to remain free in Vermont, as Vermont offered a much higher quality government, at a much lower cost, compared to the criminal government, run by legal criminals, in Massachusetts. The news of the continued effort to defend against legal crime, to fight for liberty, and to continue the war for independence, spread, and was especially well understood by the settlers on the frontiers, and the legal criminals both. One group saw the events known as Shays's Rebellion as cause to continue the fight for liberty, and against criminal governments, while the other group saw a serious threat to their monopoly control over law and money. Both sides regrouped in preparation for further hostilities, as the war for independence continued. The legal criminal resorted to deceit, to threats of violence, and then acts of violence, false flags included. Those on the frontier, having lost their power over money, to the legal criminals, invented competitive currencies, including whiskey, which could be distilled as as separate product on farms, and then used as money, in the absence of Colonial Script, and in the absence of Gold, both competitive currencies were made scarce at the time, due to abuses, and tactics, used by the emerging legal crime organizations. Those legal criminals hatched a plan behind closed doors, by which they would sell a solution to a problem they had created, and the solution would be what they called a Consolidated Government, based upon the previous Monarchy - complete with a open door to create any other legal powers imaginable, since the plan hatched included the necessary property then known as constructive interpretation. The enabling document had to be ambiguous to a point of meaninglessness, leaving the power of adding meaning in the hands of those who are enabled by that document. That was The Constitutional Convention. It authorized the suppression of rebellion, it killed the spirit of liberty, it made the fight for liberty unlawful. The record of that fraud survives, despite all efforts by the legal criminals, the victors, as they rewrote history, and continued to control the ignorant masses with the lies they invented, are inventing, and will continue to invent, perfect, and disseminate, to their exclusive profit, and to the detriment of every one of their victims, past, present, and future. Failing to know the facts, is ignorance of the facts, not so bad, but claiming to know the facts, without doubt, without a welcome challenge from any perspective, is willful ignorance, in the face of evidence that contests the validity of the supposed facts. Regardless of the politics of the time, a concept of a free nation and free market was born. If you are seriously referring to The Constitution, as evidence supporting an accurate accounting for the beginning of a free nation and free market, then your evidence, as shown above, is the exact opposite. The Constitution cannot be questioned. That is a thought crime, to question The Constitution, and there are plenty of enforcers more than wiling to shout me down, as I show, as a matter of fact, the actual document, out-laws the thought of questioning it. The words are published by the authorities on the official web page. You can leave me completely out of the data, there is no need to shoot me as the messenger, it is The Constitution's own supporters document, their own words, that expose their own belief in their own false claims. The Constitution was designed by Monarchists, Nationalists, Dupes, and legal criminals, for reasons, and the reasons were meticulously exposed by the opponents of that fraud, that false front, that Nation State hidden behind a false advertisement campaign known as The Federalist Papers. It's own author, James Madison, a dupe, too late realized he had been had, and later set to the task of defending against it, with his part in the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, in a too little, and too late, attempt to reignite the defense of liberty. Too bad for the victims, the hero's of past fights for liberty failed, what to do now? Continue to pay tribute to falsehood? Seriously?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Current time is 03:19 am | Page: 1 2 |
| Power Independence > Good News > Good News > Prison Planet Forum | Top |
