Get rid of the money system, then get rid of goverrments

Thanks for the epic thread Levi Philos, glad to see you are still keeping it real.

Here is truth: Money, so called, is just work in fungible form. I work for one day, say I get 200 USD for that day's work. In the end, what form it takes, can be diseased or can be 100% fascist like the greenback. But as a worker, I kinda realize that we need a sort of Iron King like Lycurgus of Sparta who will keep the money real.

QUESTION FOR ALL: What is the form of "anti debauchery of money"? How would a King or any Executive with the power to kill, keep the money from being debauched? That is square one on this gameboard.

If you cannot have your people work, and have their work monetized for their carry and trade, without that monetizing medium being debauched 24/7 by the coinwrecking goldensteins and shecklemongers, well, if you can't protect the monetized work aka MONEY from being eaten by the bank-termite who eat all productive labor, well then you are a pretty useless King, ya know?

Typically I think most Kings and Queens take the bankers side in the coin shaving and debauching operations of history. It is rare to have a good King who established good and true monetization of labor aka money. And it's a daily battle to keep that money real. Eventually a King like that must rise. He will have to be like a General in warfare, he must protect the supply lines of "monetizing labor in the hands of the worker" aka WORK = MONEY paradigm.

The world as such, is built on a slave planet principle, so teaching the people not to be slaves for a job, might be step one, but eventually, even if they aren't workers but worse, mercenaries, still, mercs will demand real money. But any King that raises mercs in his own country, has already failed treasonously imo.

Why name coins?

Some are named Eagles and Half-Eagles; others "Dollars"

Some are Dinar, others Peso and Lira.

The answer lies in a curious quirk of human psychology.

Chew on that question; I did - for nearly five years.

Why not write a simple law that says "Final settlement of differences of contracts shall be made by presentation of elements of pure gold, or of pure silver, or of pure platinum by weight in grams of the pure element." and "No fixed value relationship can be set between these elements because of Gresham's law." (??)

Why name Coins? Is the exchange about the name?

Or, is the exchange about the specie metal?

If the exchange is about the specie metal, then the simple law designating exchange by weight and purity is the simple solution.

If the exchange is about the name, then stamp the name on some easily obtained and plentiful metals. That is why I suggest gun-cartridge brass. Doesn't seem to be any shortage of that material. Just maintain a reasonable quantity in circulation in relation to population demographics. Bill Still, in his latest large video THE SECRET OF OZ mentions Quantity several times. I think a lot of people don't like Still's voice and presentation. They don't criticize the message, but they do ignore the video.

The quantity theory I like is to maintain (as closely as possible) a quantity of circulating media in relation to population demographics.

Let the government print the greenbacks and cartridge brass coinage and spend it into circulation and tax some back out of circulation.

But the congress-critters are all tied up with videos and paper records of their past indiscretions or simply on the take of payoffs. The bankers own nearly every one of them.

The Bill Still video is here: [link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

About the video: [link to www.themoneymasters.com]

Bill Still on Mises and gold as money:
[link to www.billstill.com]

*********************************

QUOTE

The first 2 minutes of Max Keiser's latest is so interesting regarding the von Mises Institute.


[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

Many are questioning now -- for the first time -- the previously accepted dogma that gold is good. Why do smart folks like Peter Schiff, Ed Griffin and Ron Paul refuse to take a fresh look at this question when they are spouting the same philosophy that J.P. Morgan espoused 100 years ago.

My take on Ed Griffin is that he is a patriot and well-intended. He, like Ron Paul, grew up at that time when the von Mises folks were in their ascendency. Their real agenda was hidden. Schiff, Griffin and Paul would have to admit they were wrong. They would have to admit that the von Mises/old school Libertarians were -- at best -- nothing but anarchists -- and worse than that, plutocrats.

The von Mises folk believe that the average person is too stupid to effectively participate in self-governance, so, therefore, all governance should default to non-governance??? History clearly shows that a state of non-governance will quickly default into the hands of the few -- the crown and its banks -- plutocracy. In either case, they do not believe in humanity's thousand-year great experiment in self-governance.

Freedom is a delicate balance between too much governance and too little. What the von Mises folk won't admit is that serfdom exists at either end of that balance. Von Mises folk don't realize that the anarchism professed openly by Prof. Murray Rothbard & company does not yield maximal human political freedom. Nature abhors a vacuum. Every anarchy in world history is followed in short order by tyranny and maximal centralization of power.

Ed Griffin and Ron Paul would rather go to their graves than admit they had swallowed this poison pill of the last 4 decades, hook, line and sinker.

I'm studying J.P. Morgan and the Rockefellers right now. Morgan constantly supported the gold standard calling it "sound money." He also considered himself a pirate -- oops, I mean a "privateer" -- in the service of the British Crown and the City. That's why he called all 4 of his yachts, "Corsair", and painted them black. Not surprisingly, he stopped short of flying the "Jolly Roger", however.

Gold money is the ultimate centralization of the money power. Yes, it IS sound money. The quantity is easily controlled, but it does not democratize the money power to operate to the benefit of we, the people. It centralizes it into the hands of those few best able to buy up the commodity serving as the monetary base -- gold. This would, in fact, be the bankers.

I believe that a sovereign money must serve the public interest -- by definition.
I believe that gold money does not serve the public interest.
I believe power should be decentralized to the maximum extent which is politically practical. Too much decentralization slips over into anarchy and yields the same as too much centralization in the first place.

********************************************************

END QUOTE; observe the very last line - "I believe power should be decentralized to the maximum extent which is politically practical. Too much decentralization slips over into anarchy..."

What have I posted again and again? Centralized money and centralized power form a symbiotic pair. Neither can exist without the other. The solution I suggest is a system of decentralized mutual credit administered locally with no centralized monetary authority." This solution will put power back in the hands of the people.

Unfortunately, I have not yet discovered exactly how this can be accomplished. That is why I suggest everyone read Thomas Greco and Jem Bendell and the people at Positive Money UK: [link to www.positivemoney.org] (Greco: [link to beyondmoney.net]

On Bill Still's advice I watched Keiser Report #334.

Classic material!

More of his stuff:
[link to www.youtube.com]

Max Keiser is a severe critic of the banking industry and most of the current crop of economists.

Right behind Max Keiser is Gerald Celente.

This is Gerald Celente's tube channel:

[link to www.youtube.com]

Money is a cultural decision making machine; to change the culture you must change the money system.

Recognizing that the credit of the nation is the property of the people is an important first step.

Government enslaves: Who are they to say we cannot exist without their rule? We are meant to be free, free from the archonic matrix that has been artifically created by these rulers.

Last Edited by Organic Light on 02/12/2013 11:56 AM

From this Celente video: [link to www.youtube.com]

Down in the comments QUOTE:

Catherine White 5 days ago

The USA wonders why it's reputation is in the toilet when they arrest five year olds over five dollars, and allow the bankers to get away with robbing the American people blind.
********************************

Catherine White may or may not clearly comprehend that the theft began under Roosevelt - first the gold was confiscated, then the nation's credit was centralized and given to the bankers. That was implementation of the fifth plank of the communist manifesto and the beginning of the theft of all of the property of the nation.

Both private property and public property have been hypothecated to meet the demands of interest bearing credit entries as the basis for a monetary system.

I must confess to having zero knowledge or comprehension of what "Archons" are. Richard Cook is placing entries on his blog about "Aeons" as in "Return of the Aeons."

Are Aeons and Archons related?

It is my stated opinion that enslavement of the people is taking place through propaganda and mechanisms of the monetary system. And written law is an enabling tool.

Richard Cook blog: [link to www.richardccook.com]

What would the difference be OP there will still be those with nothing to trade?!!!!

If you didn't have anything of value you would still starve! HAVE FUN WITH THAT!!!!!

From page one of this thread: Thread: Can anyone tell me what money really is?

That's a decent definition of money IMO. I like Walter Williams but haven't heard much from him lately.

Found previously in this thread, but just now re-created on page two here: Thread: Can anyone tell me what money really is? (Page 2)

Search string for today:

financial stability forum

or:

financial stability board

These are the people who tell the bankers what to do and they work for the benefit of the hidden elites.

If you bookmark and check this forum from time to time:

[link to finance.groups.yahoo.com]

You will learn over time what the intellectuals are discussing. The forum moderator is Arno Mong Daastoel who is Norwegian but also spends time in Germany.

I was a recognized member of that forum with full un-moderated posting privileges until I posted some material they couldn't handle. (~5 years ago)

West Coast Radio (probably Vancouver British Columbia Canada) is to have G Edward Griffin on as a guest today February 13.

[link to www.westcoasttruth.com]

The archive should be available in another day or two; questions for Griffin can be submitted to this thread:

Thread: I'm INTERVIEWING author of 'The Creature from Jekyll Island' G. EDWARD GRIFFIN this Friday. If you have questions, I will ask them (Page 2)

The True Story of the Time the Government Printed a $100,000 Bill by Rob Wile

Sixteen images with little actual text from Mr. Wile, so go to this link to gain the story - the story is told mostly with the images and interpretations from Wile.

[link to finance.yahoo.com]

Rob Wile projected the concept that issuing high value notes or coins is a good method for stabilization of a monetary system.

Wrong answer; the correct answer lies in seizure of the banking system along with all assets of the banking system followed by a write-off of all debt and all credit - a total liquidation with return of the assets to the people.

THEN reinvent the money system.

[link to www.reinventingmoney.com]

Left to their own devices with continuation of the intrigue and deception the congress-critters, banksters and apparatchiks will apply various patches and repairs along with some write-down of debt; net result is the new new deal is the same old screw-you - I-got-mine - old deal. And the new lies will resemble the old lies - just coming from a new set of faces.

Search string for today:

Doctrine of Odious Debts

Fraudulent debt is more applicable in my opinion and the beneficiaries of such debt should lose all they gained, but the apparent presumption in the writings seems to be allow the gains and simply stop the process with a write off. (Jubilee)

[link to alcuinbramerton.blogspot.com]

Applying the Odious Debts Doctrine while Preserving Legitimate Lending

Seema Jayachandran
Michael Kremer
Jonathan Shafter1
June 2006

[link to iis-db.stanford.edu] (26 pages)

[link to www.georgewashington2.blogspot.com]

Michael Hudson noted in 2004:

Mesopotamian economic thought c. 2000 BC rested on a more realistic mathematical foundation than does today’s orthodoxy. At least the Babylonians appear to have recognized that over time the debt overhead became more and more intrusive as it tended to exceed the ability to pay, culminating in a concentration of property ownership in the hands of creditors.

***

Babylonians recognized that while debts grew exponentially, the rest of the economy (what today is called the “real” economy) grows less rapidly. Today’s economists have not come to terms with this problem with such clarity. Instead of a conceptual view that calls for a strong ruler or state to maintain equity and to restore economic balance when it is disturbed, today’s general equilibrium models reflect the play of supply and demand in debt-free economies that do not tend to polarize or to generate other structural problems.

Michael Hudson, in reference to Iceland Global Research, April 05, 2009:
[link to www.globalresearch.ca]

Murray Rothbard on repudiating the national debt with reference to odious debt - written 1992 (Rothbard passed away 1995)

[link to mises.org]

My opinion: Fraudulent debt is more applicable and the beneficiaries of such debt should lose all they gained, but the apparent presumption in the writings seems to be allow the gains and simply stop the process with a write off. (Jubilee)

We still need full time professional administration to run a dependable monetary system, but a far superior method of paying such professional administration can be by the process of demurrage (everyone pays). This process is something supported by Bernard Lietaer of Germany who has just released the new book MONEY AND SUSTAINABILITY - THE MISSING LINK. This book was written with help from Christian Arnsperger, Sally Goerner, and Stefan Brunnhuber and is subtitled "A report from the Club of Rome - EU Chapter"

People who believe only gold and silver coin shall be money find the demurrage principle a severe blow to their belief system. However, using human time as the basis for redemption of a note enables a far better rationalization. (Time passes away while gold endures)

A far better method of using gold (and other precious metals) is as a recognized method of saving - thus divorcing the medium of exchange from the store of value - and where such precious metal coinage can be used as a partial backing to promissory notes - a performance bond role.

More on the "Doctrine of Odious Debt"

[link to www.zerohedge.com]

Some fine discussion on the concept of volunteerism found on page 13 of the thread Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?

My injection will be in the next post.

We (all of the people) get involved in institutions where we may or may not have been directly involved in the original creation of said institution(s).

Anyway to the extent that said institution is working to our advantage or to our detriment we are likely to defend or attack such institution.

In the process, the defend and/or attack mode usually overshadows the fact that we can modify or replace such institutions and simply avoid destruction and bloodshed.

The money system is just such an institution.

A system of multiple money systems running in competition should be more stable and each person can volunteer to participate in one or more money systems.

A thought for the day.

David M was on the track prior to this piece of writing; Notes of Debt are Not Income which was a composite piece that began with a post from the Handyman of Louisiana to which I pasted significant information from "The Informer" (N. Carolina).

The final document you find in PDF form was composed by "Fred"

[link to duckduckgo.com (secure)]

The underlying but hidden question revolves around the question of seigniorage. (many references prior in this thread)

If we are to use credit entries as money, then whom should the bookkeeping enter as the original creditor?

"How would you get food without trading for something? How would you trade for anything, without something?"

well, err, can't we all destroy concrete jungles, create fertile plains and harvest crops / grow fruit bearing trees? can't we all fish for food?

well, nice theoretically, but, realistically, humans are too selfish and spineless for such a revolution to happen.

we're all assholes.

My Uncle Samuel stole my credit card while I had my back turned. He is a trouble maker who gambles wildly and frequently loses. He starts fights all over the place and is a spendthrift.

Now, my Uncle is complaining because I haven't been keeping up the payments...

stop working for yids