Comment: Monopoly

(See in situ)

In post: Gotta Rant?
In reply to comment: Quick thoughts (see in situ)

Monopoly

This is a question my cousin Mike challenged concerning what is wrong with Monopoly if it is a voluntary choice by everyone to use one thing?

The answer is nothing, nothing is wrong when words describe a situation where nothing is wrong, and the problem is merely semantic in nature - a lack of capacity to communicate accurately.

If one money takes over the world market because it is the highest quality and the lowest cost competitor today, and tomorrow, and so far no other competitor offers a higher quality and lower cost alternative, then who is to say that Monopoly is bad in that case, so long as that lasts.

If, on the other hand, a competitor does offer a higher quality and lower cost alternative and POWER is employed deceptively, or POWER is employed threateningly, or POWER is employed violently to CRUSH that competitor, then the word MONOPOLY takes on a different meaning.

I use the word MONOPOLY as a qualifier when I see the need to be more specific concerning Legal Crime. Monopoly can very easily exist in Liberty, why not, who is to force a Monopoly out of business, who is to fraudulently force a Monopoly out of business, if that is done, violently, or deceptively, then it isn't Liberty, it is then Crime, and if it is done under the color of law, then it is Legal Crime.

Why call it anything else, if it is Crime?

Why help support crime by covering it up, if it is crime?

Your time on Earth is so very limited and you can't be expected to read everything I've read but another source of information that has been in my way of earning my present understanding is a book titled PayPal Wars.

http://www.amazon.com/The-PayPal-Wars-Battles-Planet/dp/0974...

I gave my copy of that book to the husband of a Morman wife where he was the one who inspired me, and helped me get on the ballot in 1996, insignificant information but said none-the-less, and so I can't quote from that book.

There was in that book an explanation of how that small group, including Elon Musk, Eric Jackson, and Peter Thiel, set out to take over the world with a revolutionary competitive money. That is what they actually said, they were going to take over the world. They ran into Governments run by jealous people, of course, and that book explains the details of that process.

What stops the rapid increase in quality and the rapid decrease in costs of Legal Money world wide?

That is one of the most vital questions plaguing mankind.

Those individuals behind PayPal set out to answer the question.

Their example answers the question.

The Liberty Dollar effort answers the question.

E-Gold answers the question.

The Worgle Dollar effort answers the question.

If a competitor gains currency it reaches a point whereby the Legal Crime Monopoly Power will incorporate it, (buy it out), or CRUSH it.

Why is that not obvious?

___________________________________________________
1) Some structural problems with the program
2) Removing the obstacle that keeps people from keeping their money in the paypal system as opposed to moving it to their bank account
3) Fees are too high such that it prices itself out of the market of the majority who may otherwise use the system
____________________________________________________

Why didn't PayPal become as big, or bigger, than Microsoft, E-Bay, Amazon.com, or The Federal Reserve?

The bottom line here is such that those in POWER cannot allow competition to gain too much POWER for if competition did gain POWER then competition would be more POWERFUL relative to the Legal Crime Monopoly Money Power.

The competitors are each victim to any deceit that targets each competitor, each individual, each victim, and any threats of violence, and any violence, will be suffered if competitors gain too much power, it is that simple.

What does deceit, threats of violence, and violence do, exactly?

Deceit hides the fact that the victims are victims, and no longer powerful enough to compete in the animated contest of freedom, they are rendered powerless, they are slaves, they are sources of productive capacity whereby the power they produce is taken from them and the only power they are allowed to keep is just enough to keep them working.

Threats of violence inspire those who may question their involuntary servitude, which is a powerful thing, to be aware of being a slave, and that inspiration aimed at that individual slave intends to shut the slave up, and keep the slave working harder, and harder, for less and less, make that slave even weaker, since that slave may spread that infectious "spirit of liberty".

Violence does what? Violence pokes the exclamation point of threats onto each potential individual who may dare to question the patented absurdity of paying for your own demise. Examples must be made of these rebels, like Waco, how dare they read from their own script. It has little to do with the right or wrongness of the other script, it has to do with a failure to obey without question.

Crush them, and televise the event, make an example of what happens to those who do not obey without question, let there be no room for reading between the lines. You do this, and this is what will happen to you, your babies, your children, your teenagers, your grandpa, your grandma, their heads will roll, they will be burned to death, and they will be rolled over with tanks after they are tortured for months.

You dare question authority?

You talk about running for office, and I agree, that must be done, I did it, and guess what?

Start thinking about who may not like what you are doing, and who may not like what you are saying, and what they may do if you say the wrong things, or if you attack their sources of their POWER.

Hey.

What?

Did you know that you pay people to torture and murder babies?

No I didn't know that, nut case, go jump off a bridge.

It is only different in degree, to boldly go where no one has gone before, typing these things behind a thin mask of false anonymity on a forum and showing up for a Debate to see which candidate can make less of a fool of himself in front of an assembled audience of curious tax payers and voters.

Let there be no mistake if you go down this road: the game is rigged, and it isn't rigged in favor of those who question authority.

They torture and burn babies alive.

Do you think they will have any problem at all ordering bad things done to you?

Why is more than one person needed to defend liberty?

Is that a stupid question?

How stupid can the victims get?

Let's find out?

_______________________________
The reason I asked the question about your law is because I see if Paypal were to reset it’s fee schedule then perhaps power would be produced into oversupply (by many joiners) thus removing the obstacle posed by 1 & 2 because power would be in abundance so as to fund removing 1 & 2.
_______________________________

The Communist prescription, and even the Machiavellian Republic prescription prescribes the control of information flowing to the victims in many ways, through the control of schools, and the control of media, and the control of money, it is all about POWER, and that is why hospitals and water sources are targeted in places like Iraq. You didn't like Dr. Dahlia Wasfi speaking because she is associated with those bad people, and I agree with how bad it is to be associated with bad people, but the information offered by Dr. Dahlia Wasfi had to do with what was done in Iran with your tax payments, your earnings, and it has to do with POWER.

They take POWER away from those who threaten their POWER most, so fear not, if you do not threaten their POWER as much as babies in a hospital in Fallujah.

You are safe.

Between them and you is an army of dupes, cowards, misdirected "freedom fighters", "tea party goers", "occupiers", and football fans who just want to get along, and have their gas prices lowered so as to maintain the lifestyle to which they have grown accustomed.

They, those Legal Criminals, have not yet shot Ron Paul, or Jesse The Body Ventura, or Gerald Celente, or Alex Jones, so fear less, fearless, our time will come.

And that is the point.

Are you going to cower down and allow babies to be tortured and burned to death so that you can gain another minute before it is your turn or are you going to do the very least taxing thing in your own mind, which is to question that authority and then pay all those costs associated on that path, as those questions will then work on your soul.

Those questions will compete with all the brainwashing you have suffered through life up to date.

Your moral conscience will be tested and it may be found wanting.

Your faith will be tested, and it may be found wanting.

We are on a conveyor belt into gas chambers, and ahead of us are thousands, and millions of victims before us, piled high, higher, and all the way up to the gates of heaven.

Each innocent victim has a name. Each STOOD ON THE EARTH, or could have if allowed to, since babies can't stand until they earn the age of 2 or so.

Each could have been drinking from the well of Liberty one more second, one more minute, one more hour had we the supposed people stopped sending our power to Legal Criminals sooner.

Welcome, yes, welcome aboard Bear, and if you did not hear the immortal words of Super Chicken, then I can quote those words for you, in case you feel that someone should have warned you earlier:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKss2pBYQ6Y

"You knew the job was dangerous when you took it."

This is not so funny, and it is real.

Don't look here:

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/death/31/3...

You must have been warned by now. This isn't Sunday school.

Cowards are cowards for good reason, they want to save their own hides. They prefer not to be tortured, and they prefer not to be murdered, and it is OK as far as they are concerned if a million babies are murdered, here have my paycheck, so long as you don't take me today.

That reminds me of a song, to lighten the load:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBc7qeyfq28

OH, I got off on my rant again, but there is Ron Paul and evil democracy.

Ron Paul has a working dictionary, and it isn't ambiguous like a Legal Crime dictionary, so he uses Democracy but it isn't the democracy used by GregP.

Translations are possible among the honest Friends of Liberty because we are not reaching for the goal of deceiving our friends.

What must be done to disconnect from Legal Criminals, on the other hand, will be dictated to us by them, and we had better rally the troops in defense, or die trying.

I don't want death, and I don't want to live in fear, and I don't want my son and my daughter, my wife, or my family to be used to threaten me into submission. I don't want any of that, at all, but it isn't up to me. I don't invent this stuff, and cowards prefer to blame me for the messages I report to them, and all that is noise.

Give me Liberty or get the hell out of my way.

I am losing patience with the cowards, they will find any excuse, and I am losing patience with the counterfeit Friends of Liberty, they sold out a long time ago, and they are now well practiced in the art of deceiving themselves, reading from the script without question.

You, again, are one in a billion, and it is OK if you have to retreat, a tactical withdrawal, to live and fight another day, I've been there, I've done that, who's going to read you the riot act more than your own sense of right and wrong, in that there is no competition - save God?

Joe