Liberty Practice Challenge
Submitted by Josf on Wed, 04/11/2012 - 10:29On the subject of Goals: a member of this forum Judge Bartley offered comments and a link concerning the practice of Liberty as a rule, or a challenge, in our world.
My words, my take on things.
To be more specific the exchange of information, or the discussion, which is a competitive endeavor seeking higher quality and lower cost viewpoints by comparative analysis on the original purpose behind The Constitution.
Please note that the question can be general or specific, and where it is general the answer will be the collective sum, or aggregate total, of many people sharing the same goal, while the specific answer will be more accurate as to the actual goal being shared by each individual person.
Generally speaking The Constitution can be understood as a thing that is used to improve government.
Yes, many people may say, I agree, as this is a common goal, to improve, so, by all means, let us improve government.
How?
It has been a long fought battle on my part to nail down the specific goals in mind for the specific people involved, so as to understand why these specific improvements were made so as to make government better, according to those people who made government better, and that general question has a very specific example in the change from The Articles of Confederation to The Constitution.
Why, specifically, was it changed, and how was the specific goal reached, in that specific case.
A. No Constitution (People subject to British Rule, fleeing Britain, Settling in America, then becoming ruled by the Monarchy step, by fearful step, once again)
B. The Declaration of Independence and The Articles of Confederation leading to Published Rebellion and Invasion by a Criminal Army sent by the Monarchy to enforce obedience upon Targeted Individuals (all who refuse to obey)
C. Elimination of the Invading Criminal Army and a sudden and rapid force employed toward the goal of altering The Articles of Confederation into The Constitution, or, in more specific terms: the removal of a working Democratic Federated Republic and the empowering of a Single Nation State.
Having my own viewpoint, not having a viewpoint handed down to me, I can not write the script written by someone else, I write the script written by me. That above is the way I see it, and I must add:
D.
Removal of Legal Money Competition under a working Democratic Federated Republic and instead of Legal Money Competition those people who created The Constitution ushered in a new age of enforced Legal Money Monopoly, because that was their goal.
In the Practice of Liberty, it seems to me, people will volunteer to meet and discuss and make deals so as to avoid something terrible, so as to avoid horrible things, so as to avoid costly actions, and so as to avoid being subject to the designs of criminals, including the goal of avoiding subjugation by Legal Criminals.
How far away from Liberty have a people become when those people don't even have a word for Legal Criminals.
In the past, it seems to me, the operating term, the word, for a Legal Criminal was a Monarchist, or Nationalist, or a Tory or Loyalist.
"Oh, yea, the guy down the block, he is a Tory, a Loyalist, one of those guys who feeds the Army that is now occupying our homes, stealing from us, raping our women, killing us, torturing us, because we have the audacity to refuse to feed them, so that they can grow even more powerful while their targeted victims grow even weaker by that obedience to that arrangement."
"Under duress?"
"What?"
"Does he feed them under duress, you know, at the point of a bayonet?"
"No, no, no, he will trample upon, or stampede over, his own grandma to get in line to lick their boots, are you kidding me?"
"Really?"
"A toady to sociopaths is what he is, I declare."
"Sycophant!"
"Exactly, pining for a position in the new realm is my guess."
"A steady income as an informant most likely eh?"
"What else?"
"Truly"
- Login to post comments
This is off topic, but
I want to ask your opinion of
Tom Woods: "My Biggest Announcement Ever" - Liberty Classroom Launched
http://www.dailypaul.com/225651/tom-woodss-liberty-classroom...
I checked out the site and it looks interesting, but not sure if Tom Woods is a reliable source. Do you have any thoughts about it that you would care to share with me as I htink I would like to brush up on my history.
I went the same path.
I am on that same path.
When I saw that link I knew from past experience that Tom Woods is associated with Liberty, most likely linked to me through the Lew Rockwell Web Page. I'm not certain as I write this, but I will start looking for specifics.
I saw that announcement here on this valuable Forum, I tried to sign up, but I saw the Credit Card # space on the registration page and that was as far as I went down that path.
I want to challenge anyone, including any teacher, on political economy, and I know that it would be too costly for me to pay for my access to challenge them, when all they have to do is expel me from class and keep my tuition. I can't afford much these days, certainly not that much.
The additional goal, on my end, is to learn what I do not yet know.
So:
1.
Compete with anyone as to my understanding, my knowledge, concerning political economy (which is a form of learning, it is adaptation, it is side by side comparison of one perspective relative to another, and the process of accurate discernment proves out as higher quality perspectives are tested against lower quality perspectives, as one will cost less than the other over time)
2.
Find new angles of view, as yet not perceived, of which the content may completely dominate my previous understanding, or alter it on a more accurate path.
I am competitive by nature; hence the division of one thing into two things.
Learning is vital, for whatever reason imaginable.
On to Tom Woods:
"Abolish the Entire Government
All of it, says Tom Woods."
That is the first article I found in a search, as I opened the link to Lew Rockwell Dot Com Archives on Tom Woods.
Here is the problem I have with Capitalist or Right Wing Anarchists, or AnCaps Anarchist Capitalists.
When very many bad guys have formed a very larger and powerful organized crime ring and they are at the gates to your property it may be a good idea to figure out a way to gain enough power to avoid becoming their next victim.
An obvious solution involves more than the power capacity contained in one individual person.
It takes one to invent, produce, and offer a workable solution, but the solution requires more than one person to agree with it, in order for the defensive, or avoidance, power to be sufficient in any case where the aggressive, criminal, power is composed of many people.
Example:
Nazi Germany
Bolshevik Russia
Wall Street
If you have no idea as to why I put Wall Street in that list of examples of powerful aggressive criminal forces, then you may want to check out these two reports:
Buying World War II avenue A
Avenue B
The solution to the current problem isn't to run and hide, or to hope that market forces will save the day, in my opinion.
Now let me see if I can pull a quote from the above mentioned article by Tom Woods, and see what angle of view he reports.
That was not a good article for this purpose but I did find this:
"The separation of money and state"
That is not necessarily the fix, but it eludes to the fix. Please let me explain my take on this:
Power flowing to criminals from victims make criminals more powerful while victims grow weaker over time.
Separating the victims from the criminals is therefore the fix if the problem is exactly that problem, and no other problem.
How is that done?
How is that done if the criminals are already very much more powerful than the victims, according to the victims?
Who actually has the power in the first place?
Honest productive people have the power in the first place, it seems to me, and the proof is easy to see, as soon as money is separated from the criminals as that money connects those criminals to the victims. As soon as that connection is broken, there is no more power flowing to the criminals.
What happens?
The criminals will then have few choices, at least one choice less then they had before the connection was broken.
No longer an option:
1. Steal from the victims through the money connection
Options left:
2. Consume each other, as the criminals are still connected to each other with their money, they will then consume each other with that type of fraudulent money, as it is designed to favor criminals at the expense of victims.
3. Depend upon charity as charitable people offer other forms of connections to desperate former criminals, assuming that some of the honest productive people are able to produce enough extra so as to be able to afford to be truly charitable, honestly charitable, and voluntarily charitable.
4. Get honest work and begin producing surplus wealth on their own, and then enter the equitable commerce that will exist once there are no longer any useful (to criminals) connections made between victims and criminals.
My problem with the quote from Tom Woods has to do with a lack of specifics concerning what he means by the words he uses:
"The separation of money and state"
That sounds good, but it may just be vapor. It may be words that can mean one thing one second, and the opposite thing the next second.
What happens if the criminals don't like having their gravy train derailed and they set about hiring, or tricking, or forcing a very large army to enforce that connection between victims and criminals, or that connection between money and state?
Won't the victims need a way to move their individual power into a single power of some kind that can deter those criminal aggressive armies that may want to maintain the connection between money and state?
If the solution offered by Tom Woods is Free Money Markets, then that is one thing. If the solution by Tom Woods is a Democratic Federated Republican Limited Constitution Government that is another thing, and if the solution by Tom Woods is Gold and Silver as the winner of a contest for market share in a Free Money Market, then that is where I really have a hard time believing in such nonsense.
People must find a way to avoid all those connections between victims and criminals if the goal is to avoid being a victim or a criminal, and if the connection between one Honest Productive Person is anything but Equitable Commerce, in my view, there will be a flow of power from victims to criminals.
My guess is that Gold and Silver works as a shackle placed by Honest Productive People upon the specialized workers hired to help the employers avoid becoming either victims or criminals - because Gold and Silver is in such short supply that those employees won't have enough power to do anything more than exactly what they are told to do, by their employees.
If you can't make sense of that, I can explain.
The other side of that coin is that The People, the one's who hire specialized workers who are hired to help The People run a service, where the service is "to avoid becoming victims or criminals", are not shackled by those same shackles.
Like this:
1.
State is financed through the medium of Gold and Silver, limited in the work of one thing only, to help The People avoid becoming either victims or criminals.
2
The People can use any damn money they want to use, whenever they want to use it, including Gold and Silver, and including any money that is higher in quality, and lower in cost, than Gold and Silver, according to their own self-determined, voluntary, welcome, agreeable, individual, power of discernment, judgement, and practice.
My guess is that Tom Woods will speak of The State, or Government, as ideally comprised of nothing more than an Insurance policy chosen by anyone caring to invest in such a thing, at their sole discretion.
If so, I can sign onto that same understanding.
How, though, does one get from here to there?
That is what I can offer, a step by step methodology, so as to remove anyone's complaint, or at least the legitimacy of anyone's complaint, that there are no workable solutions.
I hope that the above can help fill the demand asked.
Please consider responding if inspired to do so.
Joe
I think it to be impossible
I think it to be impossible to separate victims from criminals because men's hearts are evil and predisposed to do wrong. You don't have to teach a child to lie or steal. They do it naturally because of their own human lusts.
So even if you remove the first layer of criminals, then from the victims a 2nd layer will arise until the last criminal slays the last victim. Then there will be no criminals or victims because there will be no humanity.
Thus the necessity of government which according to Dr. Ron Paul is to enforce and uphold contracts so that criminals are not allowed to victimize. Unfortunately the government then digresses to victimize for self-gain. Whichis probably why our founders advocated a society permeated with the Christian religion; i.e. the Golden Rule. And from what I understand the very continuance of the Republic would rely on the continuance of a such society.
You will have to explain more on the gold/silver thing. Dr. Paul advocates a gold/silver standard from what I understand. Yes, there is a limited supply, but that is what makes the value somewhat stable.
What do you advocate to get from here to there?
Two competitive plans
If you can bear it, I can explain 2 competitive plans side by side as I understand them to be.
To do this right I think we should start a new Forum Topic. But I'll start it here, and then see if there is any demand for it.
Imagine Ron Paul was elected President and then imagine that Joe Kelley was elected President, not at the same time, two possible future conditions of reality in our world.
I Ron Paul
A.
End The Federal Reserve (repeal legal tender laws)
B.
End The Federal Income Tax (stop enforcing legalized extortion at the National Level, States can try out legalized extortion and then we can see which States grow stronger compared to States that refrain from legalizing extortion)
C.
Bring the Troops Home
II. Joe Kelley
A.
Product 1 and Product 2 are promoted by the new President, and it is now OK to go ahead and compete with The Federal Reserve crooks, go ahead, be competitive, and try Product 1 and Product 2, as explained, if you decide to do so.
I don't know how Ron Paul will get his plan through the gauntlet that is in place, but let us assume that he is somehow elected despite the rigged election scam, and then suppose further that his 3 steps are done as promised, or at least as I understand how the plan can work.
Ending The Federal Reserve, in my view, ends the financing of World War III, on the spot, that is done, it is over, because they have not yet made America weak enough to be unable to survive World War III, and they (The Legal Criminals) have not yet made China powerful enough to win (as if there can be a winner) World War III, which is their plan, that is their plan, as I see it, and so ending The Federal Reserve ends the power flow from American to China, on the spot.
China want's to collect all that debt, so bringing the troops home helps end World War III.
We may need a power of defense here at home.
More so than anyone is willing to admit, I'm afraid.
What replaces The Federal Reserve, with it's World War III, which is supposed to follow in tandem with The World Wide Economic Collapse?
That is where the repeal of Legal Tender Laws come in, according to the plan, as I understand it. A number of States are already growing in the power they need to resist enforcement of this Legal Money Monopoly with it's drive toward Economic Collapse and World War III, so as to move The World Reserve Currency Power (fraud) to China.
Repealing legal tender laws allow those States to begin producing their own State run Gold and Silver Banks.
What does that do?
That immediately regains World Reserve Currency Status back to America and the only way any other country can take it back from us would be to produce a higher quality legal money, at a lower cost, which is almost impossible due to the ignorance of mankind, again this is merely my viewpoint, I think my plan is better.
Immediately filling the vacuum created by the elimination of The Federal Reserve System of Extortion is a new age of Honest Money in America, and from that point the sky is the limit because, simply put, the power that was being siphoned off of all the Productive Americans, Honest Americans, would no longer be consumed in propping up the bubble in China, nor would that stolen loot be consumed in destroying things, and people, all over the Globe, and what would all that power be doing, since it wasn't being used in all that destruction?
Power would be used to make more power.
Instead of power being used to destroy all competition where ever and when ever power rears it's ugly head.
Why is that not easy to see, simple, and a self-evident progression of reality resulting from those exact things Ron Paul is obviously determined to accomplish?
I don't know.
I think it is easy to see, and it will work as advertized, and if those Legal Criminals have enough power to stop our Liberty now then waiting any longer isn't in our best interest. Those Legal Criminals are at their weakest now, and we are now at our strongest, the window of opportunity won't stay open long. The Legal Criminals will buy, with our power, using their fraudulent money, Economic Collapse of us, not of them, and they will buy World War III, where we pay all the costs, and they reap all the profits, if we let them.
I can move onto my plan, which are Product 1 and Product 2, but who would listen?
Joe
So all in all, Ron Paul's
So all in all, Ron Paul's plan inhibits WWIII for starting because there is no printing of money to finance it. I did not realize it boiled down so simply to eliminating WWIII. If you like, start another post and explain product 1 and product 2. Perhaps someone besides me will listen. Are you Joe Kelley? I am going to reread your 2nd post now and mull it over to reply.
I am glad you are well now.
I am glad you are well now. Im doing family stuff now. Will check back later tonight. I skimmed both of your posts and will re-read to let it sink in. I think part of the issue for me is that all these concepts are new and have never even been a thought for me, so I have to reread to get meaning. I am not very far along in my Liberty and political thinking. I've only recently woken up to the horror we are in. Thank you for your patience.
Bear
with me, please.
I can cut down a whole lot of time and energy that anyone may spend on trying to figure out Political Economy if you want to take a short cut.
Learn this:
Power produced into oversupply reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases because power reduces the cost of production.
That is ENGLISH. I'm sure that the above can be formed into a mathematical statement, but the symbols needed must include symbols that measure human perceptions such as "value".
If power has value the value is in perpetuating good life.
If power has value it is in productive use of it, to use it to increase the quality of life while reducing the cost of life.
If power has value as a means of destruction and enslavement then the opposite is true as such:
Power produced into scarcity increases the price of power while purchasing power increases only for those who enforce power scarcity, because power used to destroy power is a crime in progress.
The formula becomes rather convoluted, but none-the-less true.
Honest people are productive people, not destructive, they produce more than they consume, and they are the source of surplus wealth, and surplus wealth is the stuff that exists when standards of living increase, measurably, while at the same time the costs of living decrease measurably, because there is more surplus wealth, more power, more power in reserve, an abundance of power, like sunlight on a nice warm day.
Everything should be made as simple as possible, not simpler. Albert Einstein (or so I've been told)
Joe
.
.
Un bearable
I hate pain, but I know it, so I have sorrow for those who bear the unbearable. During a bout with a Pulmonary Embolism my being went savage, it seems to me, where the pain sent me into an animal like condition.
Liberty is for the healthy, innocent, honest, productive people. Those who may be charitable, those who can afford to be charitable. Those who have the power to be liberated.
As to the nature of understanding, one step at a time, I can offer help in this regard. I've been very ignorant, very stupid, very confused, and those conditions persist, at least I know it.
If there are any stumbling blocks in the way of you understanding my point of view, which wasn't handed to me on a silver platter, spooned fed with a silver spoon, I can go step by step toward that goal.
I think discussion on this is vital, and I don't think you will find my viewpoint reported by Tom Woods.
I may be wrong, so I'll look into Tom Woods a little further, thanks.
Joe
I think you read my post
that I deleted about having to read yours 3 times and think about it...really it wasn't that bad. 1 more time thru and then a small repeat and I had it. My reply is above. I edited it several times so hopefully you didn't start replying while I was editing. I guess I think in layers.
I was replying about the gold/silver thing but it didn't take my post because you replied to it so I am going to say about the gold silver thing...
I understand that if we can all use whatever we want as money then there will not be a central control of money. However, there will still be those who conterfeit, steal, or swindle. The criminals will organize and there will still be victims. But at least there would not be a banking monoply as we know it.
Sorry about your embolism. I hope you are well now.
I am well now.
I hope you are too.
I did some more reading on Tom Woods and I am now confident in holding my own, side by side with his viewpoint, not to win any argument, but to offer a competitive viewpoint.
I see contradictions.
He comes from the Austrian School, so to speak, and therefore he can be known as a Gold Bug, which isn't meant to be derogatory, merely accurate.
The concept was a mystery to me until I read a few paragraphs in a work done by Karl Menger, a noted Austrian Economics Professor.
The concept is built up on...
I'd better get the quotes:
“every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.”
Carl Menger
"Wealth can therefore also be defined as the entire sum of goods at an economizing individual’s command, the quantities of which are smaller than the requirements for them. Hence, if there were a society where all goods were available in amounts exceeding the requirements for them, there would be no economic goods nor any “wealth.” "
So, I'm just an average Joe, but I do my homework.
That above is Austrian Economics in a nut-shell.
In the first quote the Author who is an Authority on Economics emphatically states that there is no such thing as Charity. I don't know how else to read that quote. Everyone (which means absolutely no one is left out of this group) will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible (again an absolute word choice, leaving no stone unturned, as completely as possible) to the exclusion of others.
Explain Parenting under that context?
I'm a parent. Parenting is a charitable institution, in my view. Someone, a parent, secures requirements for others, their reproduced copies, at least as much as will help keep them alive.
The whole thing, from that view, looks like an apology for greed, to me.
But the second quote explains more, like putting in the puzzle piece that begins to really show how the pictures takes form.
There is no wealth in abundance. That makes no sense, unless the opposite is true, whereby wealth is measured only by scarcity.
I call it Scarceonomics. My term does not gain any currency.
Here is a quote from another book on Economics:
Equitable Commerce
"Now, if it were not a part of the present system to get a price according to the degree of want or suffering of the community, there would long since have been some arrangement made to ADAPT THE SUPPLY TO THE DEMAND. This, even in the present wretched jumble of accidents, would, to a great extent, soften some of the most hideous features of our cannibal commerce."
There before you are two competitive explanations concerning wealth, and the quotes merely point to the principles involved.
1.
Wealth = Scarcity
2.
Wealth = Cost
The relationship is not exactly EQUAL so much as it is inversely proportional in the second case.
More like this:
Higher Standard of living = Lower cost of living
The former or the first case, that scarceonomics "theory" appears to tell people that there is only value when things are made scarce, on purpose, so as to produce the power to jack the price up as high as it can go, to the upper limits of "that which the market will bear".
That makes no sense, other than in a sense that the very few can gain enough power by which those very few can then have the power needed to restrict the flow of power to everyone else, and therefore everyone else will be killing each other for a spot at the table, or alter, where the few decide who can have a little bit of power, at a very high price, which turns out to be a very high cost, and all costs are borne by the many, and all profits are consumed by the few, at the exclusive pleasure of the few.
I can have that all wrong, of course, but the quotes are not mine. The words are authored by those authorities.
I've boiled down political economy to one sentence, not a volume of books, not mountains of fine print, but one simple sentence.
Power produced into oversupply reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases because power reduces the cost of production.
I call that Joe's Law, because no one else will own up to it.
It is true. It is an accurate account of Political Economy as it exists in reality.
I can explain in greater detail.
I can offer step by step methods by which the application of political economy can work to allow people to produce higher standards of living at lower costs of living and in so doing the power shifts from Despotism to Liberty.
It really isn't that difficult to understand, so long as the person doing the understanding can get past all the lies, the frauds, and the mountains of misdirections that have piled almost as high as the mass murdered victims of Legal Crime have collectively piled up, and are about to pile up much faster.
Including the Cancer victims whose lives are tortured and ended because of Crimes made Legal, including those legal criminals protecting their Monopolies as they legally destroy all competition where ever and when ever competition rears it's ugly head (ugly from a Legal Criminals view).
Joe
I had the same thought about
I had the same thought about charity as well. I don't think Menger's thesis holds up. There are people who die for others...heros. What greater sacrifice is one's own life given for someone else? In the same vain, there are people who will give their last piece of bread to help someone else. There was a widow who gave her last 2 mites... Anyways when you give to the poor you lend to the Lord, so that leads to a supernatural type of economics.
The 2nd part about scarceonomics whas harder for me to understand. But it seems to do with creating wealth by pricing at the upper limits to what the market will bear. Of course then you get into whether selling a greater quantity at a lower price is better than selling a few at a higher price. And there is always competition that can drive prices down...
I'm jumping now to higher standard of living = lower cost of living. I can only say that there is only so much money to go around so if it is all spent on the cost of living there is nothing left to increase the standard of living which is why the middle class is shrinking. All the necessities are being driven up because money is being printed, but salaries are not commenserate with the rate of printed money so the standard of living drops which then takes money out of the pockets of those that provide higher standard items.
And yes, it is sickening that cancer patients are tortured to the death while every ounce of energy with every penny is squeezed out. One man in our area lost his wife to cancer and he said his worse enemy did not deserve to go thru what his wife did. And yet the drive to survive puts us into the hands of those that profit thru sickness. My brother-in-law was told that he could access his life insurance to fight his cancer...
I have to go on a field trip tomorrow so I will be out of pocket till Friday.
Thankfully I have been cancer free for 3 years now.
Take care
Bear
I am going to run a Political Economy Open Challenge Topic, if things work out soon.
I have already in this thread a version of Ron Paul's Political Economy, which is based upon Austrian Economics A (not B - and there are 2 versions).
I have to add that I think Ludwig Von Mises is the basis for Austrian Economics A, and I think Carl Menger is the basis for Austrian Economics B. One is absolutely Free Banking, no ifs, no ands, no butts, no Legal Tender Laws, while, and perhaps, it is OK to shackle government down to only using Gold and Silver - making up the A and B collage
I can't speak for the Austrians, so I can't claim to have any authority over their thinking, but I can use what I know to illustrate the vital point of how competition works to force quality up (driving the standard of living up) and competition works to force the cost of living down (forcing prices down to cost).
I can use your questions, I can use the already written Ron Paul Political Economy 3 point plan.
I can explain my plan side by side with Ron Paul's Plan.
Competition.
That same force aught to be Legally working on Legal Money, and it is not, there really is no World Wide Legal Money Competition, because there is instead a world wide copy cat business, or race to the bottom, as all governments, with few exceptions, employ a Legal Money Monopoly Extortion Racket - leading to a World Wide Economic Collapse, and World War III.
The competition is a slow race of sorts, the loser goes too fast.
There does not have to be a single dictator looking fellow like the James Bond movie where there is only one Dictator lording over everyone, that would actually be very bad for the Legal Criminal Types, or the Legal Criminal Class, since the victims would all then know exactly who was their single worst enemy, assuming any number of them cared enough to know, considering all the power of mass media, behavioral modification, manufactured consent, false advertizements, brain washing, false propaganda, response conditioning, and all that false produce, in every form imaginable.
The Copy Cats are all in the same mold, that is the common denominator, and they will kill each other off as they fight over their prey, their turf, unless there is a driving force that keeps their kind at bay, such as a mutually assured absolute destruction of everyone, which is obviously possible now, and such as a Mutually Beneficial Arrangement of some kind, a plan to agree to disagree.
Such as:
We the aforementioned Legal Criminals agree to stop fighting each other while leaving each others victims alone, until such time as it is in our combined best interest to consume a large portion of each of our supplies of victims as needed, cannon fodder don't you known, on a regular basis, since they do tend to get wild and crazy at times, thinking for themselves, and governing themselves, as they are wont to do from time to time, if we let them.
So signed Alexander Hamilton, George the First, Second, and the American Versions etc. etc. etc.
At times there are rouges among the rouges, so much for honor among thieves, such as those hired Warmongers and War Profiteers hired by The Dollar Hegemony to run Iraq, that two timing miscreant Saddam Hussein, and the one hired to help kill off some of those Modern Day Bolsheviks invading Afghanistan not long ago, that "Freedom Fighter", at the time, Osama Bin Laden, and perhaps, even now, our own runaway Dictator in Chief, Osama Hussein Obama who may have turned sides, not following orders well enough, cancelling the Keystone pipeline deal may have stepped well over the line. Like Kennedy 1, and 2, perhaps even Hitler stopped following orders. I think, perhaps, Stalin was the model, the Ultra Deluxe Legal Criminal for hire, maybe Pol Pot out did even Stalin, obeying every command, never stepping out of line, doing what is best for the fold.
But...some of them, a few, just don’t behave, imagine that!
Feed them well enough and what can we expect?
Create a demand and what will happen?
Make it legal to profit by resort to deceit, make it legal to profit by resort to threats of violence, make it legal to profit by torturous and massive violence, known as war, and there will be people filing that demand, no doubt in my mind. Crime does pay, it is the best game in town. Why would it be inconceivable, only to the targeted victims of course, but inconceivable none-the-less to those victims, that there is a sort of, kind of, Honor among Legal Criminals, what may it be called: Legal Crime Union of Legal Criminal Workers United?
Printed on the Stationary, the LOGO, the Trademark?
I don’t know which organization is tops right now. I don’t get the memos.
The game is might makes right, they know it, and their victims think that they are playing something akin to the Golden Rule.
Talk about malivestment.
So, you may or may not read these last entries in this Thread, I will answer the other one here too.
I think it is important to also answer a few specific points:
"Anyways when you give to the poor you lend to the Lord, so that leads to a supernatural type of economics."
It is said that Jesus said something along the lines of: if someone asks for something give them more than what they ask for - I won't look for the specific quote.
I think the point is that there is a competitive Political Economy along side Capitalism, and it is one that does not require the total destruction of capitalism, or any other competition anywhere, it just is, and it isn't hiding in the dark ready to strike, and it is simple, and it is called Charity.
The Golden Rule
Call it what you want, the point is that everyone does not necessarily work to fulfill their own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others, that is not an accurate perspective, there are other thoughts, and there are other acts, that fall into a more charitable vein.
As to the supernatural economics I can't measure it, since it is supernatural, but the natural one is easy to measure, so long as there is an accurate measuring device, such as a few honest people using an honest accounting system, an equitable commerce of some kind, including an allowance, or a crediting of, competitive examples.
One is bound to be better at being honest than another, according to some of the users, and one is bound to be more accurate than another, according to other users, and one may actually be driven so high in quality as to begin to measure a supernatural economic advantage, by its users, as they see it, with their own eyes, and their own capacity to know better.
Rather than settling for worse.
"I'm jumping now to higher standard of living = lower cost of living. I can only say that there is only so much money to go around so if it is all spent on the cost of living there is nothing left to increase the standard of living which is why the middle class is shrinking."
Here is where you may have limited vision, due to a lack of competitive viewpoints from which to judge a more wide angle view of more things, not all things, just a little wider angle than a too narrow angle. I may be able to squeeze a few things into your viewpoint, things that may be hidden just outside of your view, somewhere in the peripheral.
My Product 1 and Product 2 Plan intends to illustrate this very thing, this Monopoly Viewpoint, this Too Narrow Viewpoint, where a Competitive Viewpoint, or Wider Angle Viewpoint, encompasses other options, and options that may make a whole lot of sense, where previous to the illustration there was less sense, or even nonsense, comparatively speaking.
You wrote:
"I'm jumping now to higher standard of living = lower cost of living. I can only say that there is only so much money to go around so if it is all spent on the cost of living there is nothing left to increase the standard of living which is why the middle class is shrinking."
What power or force is at play in our world when the goal is to fit the supply of money to the demand for it?
What power or force, as you know it to be, working to invent, produce, and maintain a money supply that is not too much and not too little since too much causes BOOMS and too little causes BUSTS, as if The Business Cycle were some kind of Natural Occurrence, an inevitability, something that man must control, something that there aught to be a law to stop?
Here is where it is very tricky, a Litmus Test, to see if you have a handle on the facts, the reality, or if you are suffering from a lack of understanding, or worse, to see if you are possessed of a belief in your capacity to know better, while the fact is that you don't, and therefore your hubris locks you into that state of ignorance, leaving you with no interest, and no principle, with which to escape that condition?
I know that the last paragraph may sound authoritative on my part, and it is admitted, confessed, that I have no cause to be authoritative, but the facts speak for themselves.
You wrote this:
"I'm jumping now to higher standard of living = lower cost of living. I can only say that there is only so much money to go around so if it is all spent on the cost of living there is nothing left to increase the standard of living which is why the middle class is shrinking."
I did not write that, so that is not mine, and that is a viewpoint that is directly opposite of my viewpoint, and if both viewpoints are as good as the other, then there is no authority earned by my viewpoint, at all.
Why not find out?
Why not test your viewpoint competitively, side by side, with a competitive viewpoint?
I am willing.
"I'm jumping now to higher standard of living = lower cost of living. I can only say that there is only so much money to go around so if it is all spent on the cost of living there is nothing left to increase the standard of living which is why the middle class is shrinking."
Why is there only so much money to go around?
What is the force at play in reality, now, whereby there is only so much money to go around?
It may be said that I am cheating, since I've read a whole lot of data, mountains of data, concerning many variations of competitive money products, comparing each one, trying to find fault, trying to find benefit, trying to see which is higher in quality, and which is lower in cost. I've made it my business to know better, and I've been at this for over 20 years.
I do this each day, every day. 365 days a year. Over 20 years. Very few days off. I'm possessed in this regard, by forces I do not understand. I go to sleep thinking of this problem, I wake up with new angles of viewpoints, competitive adaptations of view.
If you are challenged by this, right here, this:
"I'm jumping now to higher standard of living = lower cost of living. I can only say that there is only so much money to go around so if it is all spent on the cost of living there is nothing left to increase the standard of living which is why the middle class is shrinking."
And my question:
What is the power at play to limit the supply to the demand for money?
Please consider reading the following (and I will pull out a quote):
Competitive Viewpoint
“A field which has no fence upon one of its sides is not fenced in, no matter how high and strong its fences may be on the other sides. So, the volume of the currency is not, in any true sense, limited by prohibitions of free banking, by a return to specie basis, or by any other means, so long as negotiable paper can be freely issued by individuals; and this free issue of negotiable paper is too useful, and too well intrenched in necessity, ever hereafter to be interfered with. Commerce can be hindered and trammeled to some extent – by statute arrangements claiming to regulate the currency, whether by restrictive measures, or by flooding the community with over-issues; but the volume of the currency can no longer be adjusted by such means.
“There is, it is true, a certain temporary advantage in the specie basis, simply because it is traditionally believed in, and beliefs or ideas enter into the question of the stability of values. “
That can be cut down to a sound bite, or it can be expanded to its entirety, and it can also be added to volumes of support concerning that one point:
“A field which has no fence upon one of its sides is not fenced in, no matter how high and strong its fences may be on the other sides."
To repeat, so as to avoid being lost in the words:
You wrote:
"I'm jumping now to higher standard of living = lower cost of living. I can only say that there is only so much money to go around so if it is all spent on the cost of living there is nothing left to increase the standard of living which is why the middle class is shrinking."
I ask:
What is at play in governing the supply to meet the demand for money?
A Point worth Pondering:
“A field which has no fence upon one of its sides is not fenced in, no matter how high and strong its fences may be on the other sides."
The belief in fraud made legal is one of those side of that fence.
How high is it?
What is the solution to any problem if you can't see it, or refuse to see it?
What is the solution to a problem when the solution is the problem?
Joe
My mind is boggled...I did
My mind is boggled...I did not understand what I don't understand. Did you tell me, or leave me guessing? I do not understand what I need to see in broadened vision. Forgive my ignorance. It is not that I want to be stuck. I think I do not understand.
In my simple mind...The limited paycheck is the power at play that limits the amount of money. Therefore work more than 1 job...my husband is working multiple. But, the cost of living continues to increase so what used to be enough to go around and provide for extras is consumed by necessities. I say that is because legal crime has allowed the dollar to be depreciated 98% in the last 100 years (according to Ron Paul). If a dollar still had its same value we would have plenty, but then of course or paycheck(s) would reflect the true value of the dollar so I still don't know if there would be enough to increase standard of living. Education increases standard of living, but when one has put ones self at the dispose of the Lord's work, it is not our say what we will earn...because we are not in it for the money or in it to take stepping stones to better and higher paid positions. But the way America used to work was work hard and get more...now it is work hard and harder to buy less and less and work longer and longer (I think till May) to pay taxes... So I think I am still seeing too narrowly. Please help me expand my horizen, if you think it possible.
Am I both the solution and the problem?
Powerful Common Sense
Bear,
I missed your reply here and so my reply is now late.
“Am I both the solution and the problem?”
That is a sentence in English, and it is a question, and it exemplifies the question, or, it is a self evident fact.
It, and I mean only that sentence, is an example of communication.
If it is invented, produced, and then sent to other people, where the inventor intends to help other people while helping the inventor, then everyone wins, if the sentence accomplishes the goal that is intended by the inventor.
I say all that as a way of leading into the answer – as I see it.
Liberty = Competition
That is the answer and that is the answer because the problem (or question) is:
Despotism (Legal Crime) = Monopoly
Example:
Your invention driven by your intention arrives to me, and to anyone else listening, in the form of a competitive, adaptive, voluntary, question as such:
“Am I both the solution and the problem?”
Compare that offering to my reply, which is also a competitive, adaptive, voluntary, offering, as words, as words being communicated, so as to accomplish a goal:
The Problem is Legal Crime, which is Monopoly, and therefore the solution is Liberty which is a process of voluntarily choosing better instead of worse.
How can better be chosen instead of worse?
People must be able to see that which is better if people are going to earn the power to choose better, and therefore there must be more than ONE CHOICE.
ONE CHOICE = OBEDIENCE
That is false, that is a false choice; it is falsehood.
Do you invent lies?
Do you produce lies?
Do you maintain lies?
Do you think lies just happen to fall out of the sky, or do you know, for a fact, that there is a human being behind every lie, and that there then must be an inventor of every lie, and a producer of every lie, and someone driving that lie along as falsehood continues to grow, and as all human power is driven toward each human being destroying each other human being?
Or do you think better that that description of reality in the previous paragraph?
How about taking an adaptive viewpoint, a competitive viewpoint, and I don’t need any credit for it, it is competitive, and it works for me, so you may find it to be useful too.
Productive Power in all the forms that Productive Power exists can be used to produce more Productive Power.
Know that as a fact, and you, I, or anyone can prove that fact in many ways, by many competitive measures, but for now know that fact, or pretend to know it while I proceed in this process of knowing better.
Since Productive Power can be used to produce more Productive Power it is then humanly possible to reach a point at which Productive Power is abundant.
If you are skeptical as to that fact, which can be proven, has been proven, and will continue to be proven, as fact, in many competitive ways of measuring that fact, then please assume that it could be true, despite your skepticism for now, because I have to proceed to the next step.
Since abundant power is humanly possible, what can possibly explain the cause of failing to arrive at that point whereby Productive Power is abundant?
Are you seeing the truth yet? Get past the indoctrinations of dogma according to socialism versus capitalism and get to the point, please.
Power can be used to make more power, productive power, power producing more power, until there is an abundance of power, in all forms that productive power can exist, and know that this is possible, and know that this is actually necessary if human beings, or any living organism, are to survive for any length of time – at all.
What stops productive power from reaching a point of abundance?
Back to your question:
“Am I both the solution and the problem?”
People choose not to use power to make more power, reaching a point where there is an abundance of power, and people choose to use power to destroy power, and the result is measurable.
In context:
If you work productively then there will be more power when you are done working compared to how much power there was before you started working, or, in fact, your work would not be productive.
If your work is productive, do you get to keep it, and are you then more powerful after work, compared to the power you were before you started working?
How would you know?
If someone evil could figure out a way to take all the power you did produce when you worked, each day, what form would that crime take in our world today, supposing, of course, that there were people alive today who did want this power over you?
Despotism = Monopoly
The form that the process would take, by which your power would be taken from you, as you worked to produce more power, would be the form by which your power was used to destroy you.
Your power produced by you would be used by someone else instead of you and they would use that power to make you weaker and to make them stronger and what do you think would be the result of that process working over time?
You grow steadily weaker.
They can only grow as strong as your ability to continue to produce something worth stealing.
See?
Power used to produce more power results, inevitably, into a condition of abundant power.
Why does electricity cost so much?
Why does fuel for transportation cost so much?
Why does food cost so much?
Why does money cost so much (don’t be fooled here)?
Why does work cost so much?
Why do clothes cost so much?
Why does shelter cost so much?
Why does information cost so much (don’t be fooled here)?
Why does protection from fraud, protection from threats of violence, and protection from torturous, brutal, and massive violence upon millions of innocent victims cost so much?
Answer:
Common Sense is absent in our current lives.
Such as:
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. (Thomas Paine Common Sense 1776)
Power flows to the Legal Criminals and they use that power to steal more.
Who is left to use power to make more power so that there is an abundance of power, so that our standards of living are rising, and so that our costs of living are falling?
When enough of us wake up, we will then begin the process of keeping the power we earn and we will then invest our power our way, in our own best interest, not in the National Interest, and power will move more toward abundance instead of power being stolen and then used to destroy us.
More of us have to wake up soon. There must be enough of us using power productively, not destructively, if human beings are going to survive – ever.
Don’t be fooled. Don’t be sucked into the false demand for your power, taken from you, for your own good, because that is most likely a fraud, that is most likely a confidence scheme, and that is most likely going to be providing the means by which we suffer, instead of using the means we earn to earn more for our own good.
1. End the Federal Reserve (stop enforcing a legal money monopoly)
2. End the National Income Tax Fraud (stop providing the means by which we suffer)
3. Bring the troops home (stop enforcing the legal money monopoly world wide)
Does that make sense?
Joe
I feared my ignorance was too
I feared my ignorance was too much for you to continue to spoon feed!
I had an eBay business for 10 years. eBay kept changing the rules every 3-6 months until they finally wanted 11% fee from my exact postage shipping charges. I declined and quit turning merchandise 4 times for eBay which meant I also quit sending quarterly tax returns. Ultimately when the monopoly gets too much power it self-destructs. Perhaps that is why people are waking up now.
Only problem is the monopoly has decided it only needs 90% of the population. So monopoly self-desctruction may not come soon enough because we the people are too busy to give a darn that our liberty is being sucked dry while we chase the after the cares and pleasures of this life. I include myself in the personal pronoun because I am not doing everything humanly possible to make a difference. How can we
1. End the Federal Reserve (stop enforcing a legal money monopoly)
2. End the National Income Tax Fraud (stop providing the means by which we suffer)
3. Bring the troops home (stop enforcing the legal money monopoly world wide)
if Ron Paul is not elected. If our elected officials will not follow the constitution to which they swore? Is there really any hope 2016?
Bear wrote,
”I feared my ignorance was too much for you to continue to spoon feed!”
That is how science works, as the scientist cannot assume authority over knowledge. You and I see our present level of knowledge as a state of ignorance, and therefore we look for knowledge, as opposed to assuming authority over knowledge and from that monopolistic position we stop looking for knowledge, instead, if we had assumed authority over knowledge, we would dictate our authority over knowledge to other people – one way communication.
Two way communications is productive. One way communication is by comparative analysis with two way communication: destructive (it is incapable of adaptation).
We recognize ignorance, and therefore we look for knowledge.
We don’t assume authority over knowledge, and therefore we do not dictate knowledge to other people.
Who could ask for more?
All things are relative. You have gained the power of knowledge over ignorance where I have not, and visa versa, and the score is measured by you relative to me, and visa versa, I score the relative power my way. The point is to discuss both viewpoints and both of us find where experience suggests knowledge and both of us find where experiences suggests error.
Minds meet, compare notes, both are better, neither is injured.
This is the Power Struggle on a psychological level, we gain (supposedly) the power of knowledge so as to think of ways to gain power on a physical level, it is a Power Struggle.
We do this all the time, we use the power we have to gain more power (not at the expense of someone else), and here is an example provided by Noam Chomsky in his book On Language:
How is it that mankind has progressed to a point where there is now a vast store of knowledge; given the fact that each human life is very short in time? No single person, in one life time, could possibly have invented every single invention required to land a vehicle on Mars, for example. (my words interpreting his words which were his words interpreting other words, in that book)
This discussion stuff, the productive employment of brain power, is facilitated by tools, such as language, books, and mediums of exchange.
Forums
Bear wrote:
“Ultimately when the monopoly gets too much power it self-destructs. Perhaps that is why people are waking up now.”
This can be seen from the simplest viewpoint and then it can be seen in more and more complicated ways. The simplest viewpoint, in my opinion, is to realize that monopoly is by design destructive, therefore the only possible result is to destroy. From a more complicated viewpoint it can be understood that there can only be so many monopolists, or parasites, because someone actually does have to produce something worth stealing; as the number of monopolists grow relative to the number of victims, there is an obvious point at which there are too many parasites and not enough productive people. This also explains the function of war, which is to reduce the number of everyone, and the idea is to reduce the number of producers relative to the number of consumers. The idea, as far as the consumers/monopolists are concerned, is to reduce more consumers and keep alive more ready victims/producers. People are now seeing why they are being targeted, and it is not easy to know this fact.
Now you can see two steps of complication, from the least complicated and then one more step in complication.
1. Monopoly (Legal Crime) is destructive so when it works things are destroyed.
2. Too many monopolists (working together to destroy) and not enough producers (working together to produce) results in self-destruction, or a requirement to keep monopoly going by "culling the herd", as the number of monopolists has to be reduced relative to the number of the producers.
Legal Criminals know this fact, victims may not yet know this fact.
Legal Criminals intend to reduce the number of Legal Criminals relative to the number of Productive Victims. If you are one of them: watch your back.
Productive Victims intend to disconnect from the whole dirty business.
Now you may see a third level of complication to illustrate how this part of the power struggle works between Monopoly (Legal Crime) and Competition (Liberty) in your own experience as such:
The Creators of Legal Purchasing Power (claims on wealth or “dollars”) legally print claims on all the wealth that is produced by all the producers of wealth, which they did in 2008, for one example, as The Federal Reserve Criminals (legalized by their selves) doubled the money supply, or wrote themselves a check for as much money as everyone else combined.
They then “offer” other people a “piece of the action” in the form of banking interest. The slogan can be: “You too can be like us, and collect something for nothing, in the form of banking interest.” Here is where it becomes very complicated, but you can see this, as can anyone else with a working human brain. The idea is to create the illusion of being “one of us”, as “we” get something for nothing. That is a lie, of course, because there is no such thing as something for nothing, there must be someone, somewhere, actually working to produce the things that are worth stealing. The things that are worth earning require actual productive work. The things that are worth stealing require destructive work applied to victims (those who work productively). The idea is to confuse the two, and what happens is a move by productive people from complete rejection of any notion of joining in with the criminals to a gradual acclimatization into being one of the criminals, having a stake in it, but it is all illusion.
You can do the math.
If the rate of inflation is 10% (when they double the money supply and spend that money the rate of inflation is 50% not 10%), but if the rate of inflation is 10%, and if the savings interest rate is 3%, then the dupes who are lead to think that their money is making more money for them (something for nothing) at the tune of 3% annual interest are, they are not earning anything, they are, in fact, loosing 7%. Had they bought gold, which does not “generate interest” they would have stored their money competitively: they would not lose 7% while thinking they are earning 3%.
It is complicated on purpose - of course.
Bait and switch is the name of the game, as the Legal Criminals recruit more fellow “something for nothing” cohorts, until such time as that number of cohorts reaches an unaffordable number relative to the actual producers of the stuff that is worth stealing, and then there will be war, even if all the targeted victims prefer not to go to war, there will be war, too bad for you.
Obey
There is no option.
Options are illusions in Monopoly (Legal Crime).
Bear wrote:
“Ultimately when the monopoly gets too much power it self-destructs. Perhaps that is why people are waking up now.”
I want to move further into your reply but there is a point that I think is worth offering at this juncture, and the point is pointed out in the words of Henry Ford:
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." Henry Ford
That explains why it is vital for the Legal Criminals to project the illusion of getting “something for nothing” to the victims, to get the victims believing that we area all on the same side, in the minds of the victims, not actually being on their side, the point of all the falsehood is to keep the victims from gaining too much power - duped.
If the victims gain too much power they will then have the power to avoid being victims.
Victims must be duped. Victims must be fooled. There is one born every minute.
That is wholly different (being duped) compared to gaining the power to fight back (stop being duped), entirely different than gaining the power to use deceit, threats of violence, and acts of defensive violence in defense against crime by those Legal Criminals (becoming that which we supposedly abhor).
1. Avoid being victim or criminal
2. Become a criminal supposedly in defense against being a victim
One is true, and the other is a Patented Absurdity.
Total avoidance of any contact at all with Legal Crime is Liberty.
As soon as enough of the victims wake up, having figured it out in their sleep, according to Henry Ford, the game is over for the Legal Criminals. This can be illustrated easily by a simple example such as when a store clerk cuts the credit card of a dead beat that is at the register intending to purchase something from the store with a fraudulent credit card. The power of the producer is physiological, knowing better, not buying into the fraud, and merely cutting off the connection simply, and irrevocably.
Snip.
If Henry Ford was able to hear the sound of that connection being snipped, why can’t all the victims do that same thing, over night?
Yes, we can, to steal a phrase from one of the Legal Criminals.
We don't need no stinking Legal Criminals.
We can, and we can do so over night, or we can decide to cut that credit card on a date in the future – how about July 4th, 2012? It sounds good to me, how about you?
Who is listening?
Who really wants to opt out of the whole Legal Crime business?
Who is still operating under the illusion that they have a stake in it?
When will they, or we, finally learn, or are they, or are we, truly one of the Legal Criminals, are we all one by illusion, making sure that the victims pay up, on time, making sure that the victims consume themselves for our profits, while we all consume each other?
Friend of Liberty or Friend of Legal Crime?
How can you tell the difference?
Bear wrote:
“Only problem is the monopoly has decided it only needs 90% of the population. So monopoly self-desctruction may not come soon enough because we the people are too busy to give a darn that our liberty is being sucked dry while we chase the after the cares and pleasures of this life. I include myself in the personal pronoun because I am not doing everything humanly possible to make a difference. How can we
1. End the Federal Reserve (stop enforcing a legal money monopoly)
2. End the National Income Tax Fraud (stop providing the means by which we suffer)
3. Bring the troops home (stop enforcing the legal money monopoly world wide)”
First, if you may be able to employ my viewpoint, the idea of living life to the fullest cannot be lost, or if it is lost, then the power struggle is lost by you.
Living life to the fullest, while not doing so at someone else's expense, is the point. Disconnect from Legal Crime means living life to the fullest without that connection.
See?
It seems to me that you, and I, and everyone, must keep in mind that the point of life is to make life better, because that is the key to perpetuating life, using power to make more power, which is adaptation, which is reproduction, which is to keep life worth living, which is to keep life alive, not at the expense of others.
Loose sight of that and all is lost.
Second, there has been a very rapid increase in general understanding concerning the problem, and there has been improvement in the general demand for productive remedy, therefore the many individual successes are adding up rapidly into a combined (voluntarily combined) power that may very well overpower Legal Crime.
You and I do not know exactly how much our contributions have added to the total power of Liberty, so don’t despair, and do not loose sight of the desire to enjoy life (The Pursuit of Happiness), unless you want to give up, and unless you want to let the Legal Criminals win in your individual case, right now, or next week.
None of us can do what we can’t afford to do, and knowing what we can afford to do is the point, if you can borrow my viewpoint again:
If we all begin to demand for each other an honest, instead of a dishonest, money: we could then know better as to what we can afford, and what we cannot afford to do, as we each work in the Pursuit of Happiness, even if we are happy in the Pursuit of Property (so long as it is property earned and not property stolen, since property stolen is “Happiness at the expense of someone else’s Happiness”).
Honest accounts lay bare those who steal; hence the demand for, and the invention of, and the production of, and the maintenance of Dishonest Money by the Legal Criminals.
On to the HOW TO:
“How can we
1. End the Federal Reserve (stop enforcing a legal money monopoly)
2. End the National Income Tax Fraud (stop providing the means by which we suffer)
3. Bring the troops home (stop enforcing the legal money monopoly world wide)”
All of that is done, easily, at the individual level, each moment in each day, where each individual begins to work on those goals, because those goals cut that credit card, those goals cut that connection between the Legal Criminals and the targeted, and innocent, victims.
If you do not work on those goals, you are failing to help out all the victims, and that is OK, if you can afford to do so, while you make the best of life.
If you are not connected to Legal Crime, then it is OK to stay well away from all of it. Please do.
How is your power, that you earn, stored by you, so that you can make more power, so that you can make the best of life?
Are you connected to Legal Crime?
If your power is stored in U.S. Federal Reserve Note Denominations, then you are a victim, even if you think that you can afford to continue storing your earnings that way, you are, measurably, a victim by that connection.
Don’t be fooled, and if you are not fooled, and you are not one of the Legal Criminals, then you will invent, produce, and maintain ways to cut that credit card, you will do your part, as more and more people do their parts, and soon that Credit Card will be cut, and the Power Struggle will swing back in favor of Liberty, as Legal Crime is avoided in that way.
Former victims cannot afford not to stop feeding into Legal Crime.
I have a thing called The Liberty Day Challenge, and I can explain it, if anyone wanted to hear it. That is one invention. There are many inventors inventing ways to use productive power to make more power, in Liberty, and that will be the way out of this mess.
If we loose, if Word War III goes off on schedule, it won’t be for lack of knowledge, if I have anything to do with it – with your measurable (and rare) help.
Thanks
Joe
Our credit card is used only
Our credit card is used only for gas and restaurants and is paid off every month. We do, I agree, need to go strictly to cash though, and the sooner the better. Althought today I just got told about our flexable medical spending account starting in June which is to be managed by a singly designated credit card...looks like the hooks come out where ever they can.
The wheels have been turning about our other long turn options and I need to be doing something about those as well.
Supidity...buy a house and pay 30 years of interests all while holding retirement accounts that earn nothing. They got us though with the fear of loosing early withdrawal 25% tax/penalty. All the while we are actually loosing 50% because they paper.
Cars now cost as much as a house because they can be financed...If we all paid cash for everything the prices would be held down. i.e. since we all have medial insurance, we all need insurance...because the solution of insurance (which has become the problem) drives prices up.
Would you say retirement investing in paper is feeding the monster?
Yes, I want to hear more about being disconnected. Where do the boundaries lie?
Honest money can be Paper
I do not agree that credit cards or borrowing is bad.
This to me is the same principle at work regarding guns, or pointed sticks, or words.
When someone resorts to crime, using a tool, it is not the tool that is bad, and no amount of punishment upon the innocent will deter any crime.
Another way to look at the competitive money issue is by using the saying: Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
If honest, innocent, productive people (the actual source of all surplus wealth) are not punished for competition in money markets the result is better money.
Better money might be gold.
Better money might become silver if too many people are using gold as a weapon: buying up all the gold and then only letting so much gold out into circulation.
The point is that anyone can use anything as a weapon, including words, including pictures, and including movies.
The government does not torture people.
Why blame government?
If many people agree to behave a certain way, such as agreeing not to torture each other, that is an example of government.
If one person decides to start torturing other people, it isn't the fault of all those who are governed by the non-torture principle. It makes no sense to punish everyone for the acts of a few, it makes no sense to throw out the baby with the bath water.
Three examples:
1. Government
2. Guns
3. Paper (or digital) Money
If Criminals take over Government it makes as much sense to blame government as it does if Criminals commit crimes with guns, and then blaming the gun.
Why stop using credit cards?
The point is to stop using credit cards that are produced by criminals such as the criminals running the National Level Legal Money Monopoly.
Look at it this way please:
Suppose Ron Paul becomes President and at the same time there are 13 States in this Federation (which becomes a Federation when Ron Paul no longer enforces the Legal Money Monopoly and all that goes with it) where each of those 13 States begin their own experimental money supplies.
Suppose that The People in Alaska only use Gold, and they only use actual Gold coins, or bars, for everything, including the transfers of titles on very expensive things like houses or businesses.
You may not live in Alaska so you only read about how that works for them, and the point is that they no longer, none of them, are connected in any way to The Dollar with all that Dollar Debt that "we" supposedly owe someone.
Suppose my State is run by me, and I legalize my 2 Legal Money Products Idea whereby this particular money invention works the way I think it can work, but suppose you are not in my State either, so again you can read about it, but it does not concern you, and the point is still the same point, no one in my State is in any way connected to that whole dirty business with The Dollar Hegemony, none of us owe any of those 14 Trillions of dollars on the official Web Page, and we don't even owe anything additional like those 60 Trillion or so in Derivatives.
We owe none, as far as we are concerned all that Dollar Debt has been liquidated.
Now suppose your State uses almost the same thing everyone is using right now, same credit cards, same everything except no more connection to The Dollar that is printed, or accounted, by The Federal Reserve Extortionists.
Nothing changes in your State. The money is still called The Dollar, but your Bank is no longer a Monopoly Bank, it is a Competitive Bank, and it competes with the banks offered by those people in Alaska, and those people in my State, and those people anywhere on Earth who offer a competitive money.
You will read about the other money suppliers and you will be able to compare their money with your money, and there will be no President working for The Federal Reserve Extortionists who force you to use their money. You can use their money, but suppose your State does not force you to use their money, and you can use much better money if you prefer to use much better money?
You can see good things in Alaska money, but you don't want to carry around a bunch of gold, so you stick with your money.
You can see my money in my State, read about it, and if I have anything to do with the money supply then my money will be available to anyone, so you can use the money in my State, again assuming that I become Governor of my State and The People want my Product 1 and Product 2 Legal Money supplies.
Now suppose that the State next to you is taken over by all those Legal Criminals that were thrown out of Washington and suppose you have a relative who lives in that State as that State becomes exactly the same as our Nation State, while all the other States have been Liberated from those same Legal Criminals.
Those Legal Criminals start demanding payment for Debts they cause, and they make The people in that Criminal State pay for those Debts that they cause, and suppose your relative chooses to get out.
Do you make room for your relative who is asking if you can provide sanction for him, or her, as that relative of yours runs away from that enslavement by that bunch of Legal Criminals?
Runaway Slaves are knocking at your door, instead of you being a slave trying to get out.
That is how a Democratic Federated Republic has worked in the past, as the States may experiment in Despotic Ways, The People can try ballots to hold their employees (government office holders) to account, and if that does not work they can resort to The Cartridge Box when The Ballot Box does not work, and if that does not work, they can leave the Despotism instead of being forced to love it, and they can move to a State within the Federation where experiments in Despotism are measurably less expensive to The People.
We The People are now all forced, by our own ignorance mostly, into using the one Dishonest Money.
When that ends, what happens?
You tell me.
Joe
According to Ron Paul it will
According to Ron Paul it will end. It will come crashing down. We will either move to a world wide currency or if he has his way to a precious metal standard or something that has intrinsic value. Ron Paul would like us to be able to have competing currencies along with the Feds currency. So it all depends on whether Liberty is achieved as to what currency we will have OVER us. That is of course with the assumption that we have to be UNDER something. If the individual has Liberty then the currency would be UNDER us. Therefore power would reside with the Individual instead of the Monopoly.
It seems the way things are orchestrated that if everything comes crashind down there will be something sinister ready and waiting in its place since criminals cannibalize each other.
I don't know how we will break the centralized chains that have bound us together if we do not get a president for Liberty or a Congress that will follow the constitution. I guess states could exercize their autonomy simultaneously assuming the UN does not step in at that point.
Please keep in mind
One persons dishonest money is good, very good for them, while another person may prefer honest money.
So all the DOOM and GLOOM reported by all those people who have a stake in profiting from dishonest money will see things as "crashing" and such.
On the other hand are all those victims who will be liberated in measurable ways, so why would all those victims describe it as "crashing down"?
Joe
I say crashing down because
I say crashing down because those who desire honest money may be ill prepared as their honestly earned money is tied up in stocks. I say crashing down because it will not be without much pain and suffering even if liberation comes. I say crashing down because the illusion which has been trusted will no longer be.
Significant numbers
Power in Numbers
Each person suffering as a result of their own actions, paying their own costs, is direct cause and effect.
How does anyone learn not to stick their hand in the fire, or look at the sun?
1.
Common Sense
2.
Orders handed down from authority.
3.
Trial and error
4.
Make someone else stick their hand in the fire, and look at the sun, just to see what does happen?
Joe
My "Mamma" told me not to
My "Mamma" told me not to look at the sun or stick my hand in fire, and I guess her Mamma told her... Our Founders told us not to have a centralized bank due to their experience and historic knowledge.
Instead of following authority, we put our hands in the fire. Or should I say a fire was started under our hands...We and our Mamma's were born into it, and no one told us we were on fire and since I did not feel it or pay attention to common sense I did not know it. So I guess I have spent my life depending on orders passed down from authority.
Now perhaps I am in the trial and error phase. Mostly stuck in the error phase because I only have the trials in mind and have not acted on them.
Umm Number 4. NO that is what has been done to us and we are a blind and crippled nation as a result of our hands being put into the fire and looking into the sun. Besides history would tell us so much if we weren't bent on repeating it.
I think number 1 is probably ideal, but who is to say what is the difference between common sense and nonsense.
So I supose that is from where each person suffering from one's own actions determines true common sense comes; from which our nation seems to for the most part be devoid thru redistributive paralysis and blinding illusion.
However, if there is power in numbers, perhaps if we all suffer at one time, there will be some sort of phoenix ushering in honest money. But without a plan for good, power in numbers can also, and will most likely, usher in a greater despotism.
What is your plan? I am still stuck between trial and error.
Bear wrote
"we are a blind and crippled nation"
A Nation State is Despotism, it is Monopoly, I can prove it, if you care to know.
Don't accept such nonsense.
If we want Liberty we want, at a minimum, a Democratic Federated Republican Experimental Competitive Government; whereby monopoly is not rewarded by stealing surplus wealth from those who create it and then using the stolen loot to steal more.
Nation State = Monopoly = Legal Crime
"Indivisible" = Involuntary
Why would anyone choose to use the false language dictated by the dictators to the victims; are you a victim?
I don't know.
I can ask.
Why do you use the word Nation?
Quote:
"what is the difference between common sense and nonsense"
Common sense is obvious and measurable; because people are still alive.
Don't do things that cause your enemies to grow more powerful while those same things that you choose to do cause you to grow weaker and defenseless; because the end result is:
"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." Thomas Paine Common Sense 1776
Quote:
"What is your plan? I am still stuck between trial and error."
Competition is the plan. I can explain in exacting detail, or I can explain in general terms.
Competition is the plan, in general terms.
A step closer in detail is to enumerate 3 things:
1.
Stop enforcing a monopoly money fraud.
2.
Stop enforcing an extortion in progress (Income Tax at a "National" level)
3.
Stop enforcing the profits of a few at the expense of many as the few order Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace (Bring the Troops Home)
I go into much greater detail as the demand exists for much greater detail; meanwhile there is a need to realize the actual measure of the ongoing power struggle.
The few enforce a Legal Counterfeiting Extortion Racket World Wide, using ONE money.
As that crime in progress continues to play out the many are growing much weaker while the few grow much stronger on purpose, for profit, and the method by which that is accomplished by those few, at the expense of those many, is that Legal Monopoly of Money AND Perpetual War.
All that The People have to do is choose, as one, to opt out.
Go to bed.
Decide in your sleep.
Wake up.
All as one.
The new day is Liberty, no more transfers of surplus wealth from those who create it to those who steal it with the Legal Money Monopoly.
Opt out.
As ONE.
But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Have a replacement Legal Money working and that will be the tool that severs the connection between the victims and the Legal Criminals.
Having a power that is used to create more power is the bypass, the avoidance of that Legal Crime in Progress.
Choose something better.
Leave behind something worse.
Those who are left are those who insist upon "something for nothing" and they will cannibalize each other and their number will quickly reduce to zero.
Those who choose Liberty will thrive.
How is that not obvious?
Joe
I say Nation because my
I say Nation because my government education has indoctrinated me to think in such a way, and I am slowing understanding which ways of thinking need to be renewed.
I understand the Plan as I am able to within my ignorant and indoctrinated state, but what is the plan to get We the People to go to bed and wake up to Liberty in UNISON? Is there a necessity to have a Pre-Plan to fascilitate The Plan?
Liberty Day 2012
I have a way of thinking that may not be typical, and you can judge for yourself:
Liberty will arrive or the human species will not survive, therefore it makes no sense to me to think about human life without Liberty arriving on time. It will.
If it doesn't then there are no more good humans to think, or judge, or be liberated, and no more bad human beings left to consume each other.
So...
Liberty Day does arrive, and the human beings who live past that day will know that day in their history books, very similar to the failed Liberty Day that occurred in 1776, with that document called The Declaration of Independence, or also similar to the failed Liberty Day that occurred with that document The Magna Carta.
False Starts offer us a glimpse of what the True Start will be, when it arrives for good: not a False Start.
Those who pass the new Liberty Day in our future will look back and see that Liberty Day as it happened in their history, much like we look back at the events documented by The Magna Carta and The Declaration of Independence, the only difference is that our future historians will be looking back at a Liberty Day that lasts, rather than a Liberty Day that perishes, or goes bad, or is corrupted into Despotism (Legal Crime).
When is that new Liberty Day by my calculation?
When is that new Liberty Day by your calculation?
Is the new Liberty Day on anyone's calculations?
It won't happen if no one entertains the possibility that it can happen, and that is the point behind all the Falsehood invented by all those liars, as all those liars hire liars to lie for them in "Public Office".
Here is where our personal history may help, as we begin to look around, and as the days pass, and the weeks pass, and we start to measure the total power of Liberty as it compares to the total power of Legal Crime.
I have been watching intently, and documenting my viewpoint on a Web Page, and I think there is cause to declare that Liberty Day is approaching if World War III does not go off on schedule.
A.
World War III goes off on schedule
B.
World War III does not go off on schedule because enough people opt out.
I don't think Liberty Day will happen if World War III goes off on schedule.
I am certain that Liberty Day will happen if the powers that cause World Wars are overpowered this time, this to me is the last battle between those who are honest and productive and those who are dishonest and destructive.
Those who prefer to see human beings continue to survive will stop Legal Crime before those who prefer to consume all human life reach their goal.
That will happen.
When?
My way of thinking is to get people to start putting Liberty Day on their own Calenders, to work toward that day, and on that day, when enough people have that day on the Calender, a well published "Public" event, we win.
It is that simple.
You think not, perhaps, by why not?
Too many people are too stupid?
Too many people are criminals themselves, having a stake in the Doom Day Parade?
What?
Each individual will either work toward Liberty or their work will move us closer to our doom.
If Liberty Day is only on my Calender, then Liberty Day will probably not happen World Wide on the day I pick.
I've picked July 4th 2012.
I had already picked July 4th 2011, but we missed that day.
Google for:
Liberty Day Challenge 2012
Please tell me what you find.
You may find my work on The Prison Planet Forum, for example, and I can tell you, first hand, that the authorities running The Prison Planet Forum censored me.
That is odd behavior considering their claimed goals.
Once you begin to measure the Power Struggle between Liberty and Legal Crime you may despair.
Hang tough, failure is not really an option, failure may be a miserable death, but that should not be news, Liberty is Life.
Competitive life, something better instead of something worse, and life that is not earned at the expense of someone else through deceit, threats of violence, or by violence upon the innocent.
Joe
I did not find anything
I did not find anything definitive on Liberty Day Challenge 2012. I even tried putting Prison Planet in the search. Can you send me a link?
Here are my thoughts. I am shooting for November with a Ron Paul presidency. It is a long shot, but I pray Godspeed for him, because truly, I see his potential presidency as only something Providence can obtain that for us. It is a hope in a Dark time. I know Ron Paul cannot fix everything, but perhaps he may also obtain Godspeed within his time of service to our country. He says the right things, and has done the right things. I can only hope for as much in his presidency.
The second thing is that Liberty when humanly achieved will always deteriorate because we are at human dispose and wicked will be with us and will ultimately ruin whatever liberty is achieved.
True and lasting Liberty has been foretold in Revelation 21:
24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. 25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. 26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it. 27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth , neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.
My favorite is the last sentence.
I do not say this to say we should not try to humanly accomplish a reset of Liberty. Yes, we must try. It is our obligation to try. We do not know when this Final Lasting Liberty will be fulfilled.
I do believe though, when no one can buy or sell except they have the mark, true and lasting Liberty is close at hand. That may be what WWIII is all about, but I do not know.
Until then by all means, we must try. But most importantly, we must know whether we belong to the True Liberator because He grants individuals liberty within the heart even when physical liberty is not to be had.
Bear,
Google Search Liberty Day Challenge 2012
Prison Planet Forum History
The extent of my religious knowledge is to know that God is Truth, or god is truth, I don't know as much as God, my knowledge is very limited by comparison.
It would be nice to know more, but I don't think that knowledge is given away, or stolen.
The first link is my Google Search results for Liberty Day Challenge 2012.
The second link is linked from that Search to a Prison Planet history of some kind. I have been banished from the Prison Planet Forum so I can't load the Prison Planet Forum on my I.P. number.
Censors can ask me to leave, why would I want to go where I am not wanted?
Joe
You wrote: "It would be nice
You wrote: "It would be nice to know more, but I don't think that knowledge is given away, or stolen."
Here is my answer:
Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is , and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made . 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe . 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born , not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. 15 John bare witness of him, and cried , saying , This was he of whom I spake , He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. 16 And of his fulness have all we received , and grace for grace. 17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up : 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish , but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish , but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved . 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned : but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved . 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest , that they are wrought in God.
John 8:32 KJV
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
John 14:6 KJV
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way , the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
John 17:17 KJV
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
I have an errand and will be gone for awhile.