A New Economic Order and Climate Change

..is what people would buy if we had a truly free market, and how much they would spend if we had sound money.

One thing I've learned since I started buying silver is that it satisfies the need to have some sort of physical representation of ones labor. I believe that the reason people spend so wantonly is because having digits on a screen or a bunch of paper does nothing to show that one is making some sort of progress. When all ones income is siphoned off by the Government and the rest is funneled into banks it's even more difficult to feel comfortable or satisfied.

We're basically required to leave all our "labor representations" in the hands of others, and under the influence of others. Those that influence and control these representations charge you for the privilege, debase or scheme off of your paper/digits, and leave you holding the bag if it comes to that.

To me, this inspires the spend now on something "real" mentality.

There's also the fact that sound money would increase in value if it was saved, thus encouraging savings.

Obviously this wouldn't have an effect on everyone, but if we had a free market we'd at least be able to invest in the products and services we believe in. As it is, so many alternatives deemed necessary or effective to curb pollution and waste are inhibited by regulation, taxation, or law. Alternative energies have been overly regulated since we began discussing them decades ago, but we've had quite a few oil based wars in that time. What if we'd spent that time researching alternatives and perfecting them through market-based competition?

It's my belief that the reason we've made the push to inhibit growth in alternatives is because oil was very profitable and gave those who controlled oil control over the populace. Perhaps also because if alternatives were readily available we'd have an easier time rejecting Cap/Trade and the Copenhagen Treaty. We'd be well on our way out of any woods we're supposedly in if we'd taken the hint back in the 70's.

If we could all become self-sufficient we'd need no middleman in our lives. That would alter our course all by itself (especially after this economic mess.)

This doesn't necessarily mean that we'll all become farmers, but that we'd take steps to provide our own energy, which would alleviate a huge and often unpredictable burden within our lives.

There are countries around the world that have easy-to-construct and energy efficient housing, but those technologies are illegal here. The Think and Reva electric cars are also illegal here, while we're producing hybrids and electric sports cars and SUV's, and experimenting with typically monstrous American townhouses with solar/wind power. Very little is offered that scales down the McMansion lifestyle, and I believe this isn't because there would be no demand for an alternative, but precisely because there would be a demand. Simpler, easy-to-build homes mean low (or no) mortgages. Low (or no) energy costs means less dependence on those who control and tax energy.

If I could own land without any Government claims upon it (no property tax or imminent domain impositions), keep it simple and energy efficient, have an electric car with a solar garage, and a little greenhouse, I'd have very little need to work. If I was paid for my labor in Gold/Silver I'd know that as the economy grows, so would the value of my savings.

I could go about my day without interference from anyone and live my life in relative comfort.

If people have choices. they'll choose the most sensible option. Without choices they're forced to select from what they've been offered, at the price at which it's offered, and with all the strings/implications/repercussions that go along with it. In that circumstance they're also never truly satisfied and they'll likely die in debt, which means everything they've worked for is claimed by those who bought it on their behalf at an elevated price.

A debt-based economy with fiat currency is for suckers. It severely stunts all aspects of growth, and it strips away the wealth of the people (except the wealth of those who control the currency, impose regulations, and force compliance upon everyone but themselves - this is happening before our very eyes...)

I'd prefer to give people a chance and let the free market determine the growth of society and the progress of the human race, rather than leave our progress to those who benefit by keeping our options limited, making sure we're beholden to them, and placing us under their thumb.

There's also a sense of separation between us all because of Government intervention.

When our money is taken from us to give to another, we begin to view them as "other" and blame them for our financial woes. We often choose to blame this "other" rather than blame those who placed us on different sides of an economic equation. If we made the choice to assist each other of our own free will we'd make a connection with those within our society. We'd feel good about ourselves and our neighbors, and we'd build a sense of community.

We'd be able to choose in what ways we could assist and when to do so, and the Government wouldn't skim off the top along the way. We'd probably also elect better representatives if the issues weren't always so muddled with superficially induced competitiveness and pointless distractions.

I wonder what action will come from the talks in Copenhagen on climate change.

do you really think we have:

unlimited desire by humans that strips the world of its precious resources, pollutes its waters, devastates its rain forests, and causes mass plant and animal extinctions.

A truly free-market will value these things. If they're important (which they obviously are), they'll survive. If they're not, they won't.

Think? Try.