Re: financial meldown

On 2008-01-29, Sgt.Sausage <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"J.H.Boersema" <joshb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:slrnfptuqa.3s6.joshb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The distribution of money is so problematic that the only way out
is to introduce new currencies. In all likelihood just a new currency
won't do it, currencies will have to be changed a number of times,
probably at least twice.
[snip]

I want some of what you're smokin'.

http://www.jhwh.be

You're pretty high right now ain't ya? Gimme some
of that. Only in your drug induced stupor

I've never used any drugs, never been drunk hardly ever drink, never
smoked. My worst drug uses are tea and coffee. Maybe you should try
that too :).

of that. Only in your drug induced stupor could any
of that actually make sense enough to be considered
a viable action in the real world.

The worse the problem, the more rough a solution would appear.

Consider a wound: normally you would clean it and bandage it.
A viable treatment. You could leave many wounds untreated, they
would heal fine, also a viable treatment. Then a wound that has been
infected, treatment would have to be more proactive, like cutting
away rotten parts. A wound that has been infected with a dangerous
bacteria: at some point the only treatment would be amputation, the
quicker the better. Does that seem outrageous to the untrained eye:
definitely. `How would you cut off a limb just for that wound ?'
Because you don't see all the flesh eating bacteria that swirl
around and enter the rest of the body already. Sometimes a treatment can
seem rough and worse then the problem, but it is the only treatment
that would work. The problem is not that treatment, the problem was
the lack of treatment before: financial malfeasance, bad law.


Now economies have rotted to such an extend that the treatment will
probably have to be that rough. Not in a small part the fault of
economists, who pretend they don't know economics or don't care to
build up a proper understanding. Which would incidentally wipe out
the finance sector mostly, so ? Science was meant to be objective.

Analogy: `Wound' would equal `large parasitic investor gains,'
`cleaning would' would be like `taxing those gains until investors stop
gambling.' `Flesh eating bacteria' would equal finance criminals
who are looking to take a state down into a dictatorship under
their control, using the ill gotten gains as a power platform. To eat
yet more unearned income and have more power etc etc, without end.
`Amputation' would be cutting out that power platform in one big
swoop using a sudden currency-change. Are we there, are people
trying to turn the USA into a dictatorship, effectively "murdering
the USA" ... I would think: looks like it is going that way far too
much for comfort. Unfortunately the logic of the financial law predicts
this was going to happen (abusive bosses are profitable for investors).

Can the financial dis-distribution be corrected while keeping the
dollar and other currencies ? Would the people who own all the big
piles of wealth simply hand it over if ordered by democratic Government ?
Have they ever: no. At least many didn't, and those are the ones that
stayed wealthy, and are now our problem. They would hide it, not just
in off shore dollar accounts, but anywhere in the world, in any wealth
carrier (commodities, ownership of companies, land, etc). It is as if
the dangerous anti-social investor bacteria has spread throughout the
entire world now. Treatment is going to require a bit more then just
targeting the very rich locally (like cutting out a rotten part in
a wound). That would have perhaps still worked in 1900, by now
stashes of wealth can and are everywhere/anywhere, in any currency, and
the people protecting it are dedicated professionals (criminals too,
often, which implies a propensity for violence, even war). It is not an
easy problem, made worse because these people will not let the world go
on on its merry ways, but would be looking to increase their control.
If they didn't always wanted more control, we could get by with
friendlier measures since all that hidden wealth would be drawn down over
time (consumption), and we could find it eventually ("why does this
guy never work but have 10 palaces ?"), and it would slowly evaporate
anyway. But the wealth is being used actively and politically too.

Unfortunately I don't think these very wealthy semi-criminal people
allow us the time to roll them up one by one or let them evaporate
financially (consumption of hidden commodities/wealth). Instead of
consuming, they could start using their wealth to fund wars and
counter-insurgencies, terrorist attacks, launch deceptive medias,
stage fake events, etc etc. There isn't a lot that a billion doesn't
buy. Hunt down every single crime ? It is far more effective to delete
the stash, cutting off their financial leverage over their minions.
Minions don't get payed, then they stop working for their finance bosses,
simple.

The issue is that the laws need to be changed one way or the other, or
things would only get worse over time, until we have a worse problem
then would be created by currency changes. The changes needed (I
say) imply the end of private for profit investment banking and the
evaporation of much/all of the high private wealth. I'm reading an
average American owns 500.000. If we want to pass a law that makes
owning more then 30 x 500.000 = 15.000.000 illegal, then there can't
be a lot of doubt that people owning much more would oppose it, some
in debate (which is fine), others would seek more drastic measures.
History says enough on this. It's not that many of these very rich
people have earned their cash from charity. It is often earned by
abusing workers (I'd think that is even the principle source).
With a financial counter strategy that zaps their funds, are these
rich people going to take up arms by themselves ? If so, they are
with only a tiny fraction. So they won't do that, and hence we can
set the law right and have a proper working economy with Justice.

Their potential goons should take note: your bosses are soon drawing
empty, you won't be getting your pay. Wonder for yourself: is it worth
working for a guy that soon enough won't be paying you at all ? Is that
worth getting into more trouble for ? You do the computations.

With luck we'll escape with first attacking the great stashes of
wealth (money & ownership), boycotting all countries (financial/trade)
that continue keep banking secrets making it easy to hide money that
locals have (who ought to submit to the National laws). After the
direct attack, then perhaps we could succeed with just one currency
change, and then another round of investigating wealth (money &
ownership). If that does it, then great. If not ... It is the end
result that we simply need to get at, which is: reasonable distribution
of wealth, deleting extremely high financial potentials hidden/owned
by high end financial parasites. We need that to make the economy
function, it needs to have some reasonable starting positions. By
allowing insane starting positions before proper law takes over, that
threatens both the implementation of proper laws, and the distribution
of wealth after proper laws have taken over. In the end, a currency
change is a big issue, but not doing it could invite much worse chaos.
I note here that the USA would be split into 3 or 4 or more Nations,
they would independently pursue currency changes, although that doesn't
mean it can't happen concurrently. This scales the problem down to make
it more manageable.

Like with a wound: if it isn't clean after pouring salt on it, you
will have to start cutting, and if that doesn't work, cut out more,
basically ad infinitum. Without treatment, the patient is dead anyway.
It is not a matter of "do we like to do this," but "we need the end
result, or the system in total remains defunct and goes on disintegrating."

It should never have come this far, and maybe it can still be corrected
through social investment activism (see link *). But the longer people
(you/me/everyone) doesn't do that (see link), the worse the situation
gets and therefore the harsher the treatment will need to be to
set it right. By now I think we are in a stage where we would need
currency chances, this because of having had bad laws and negative
financial build up for so long.
--
http://www.jhwh.be/~joshb/soundinvestment.html *) This can still work, if
you're worried about "harsh treatment," you could get going with this now.
It is anyway the best starting point for better law, with or without
currency changes. #93 http://www.xs4all.nl/~joshb/no-id-theft.html
.

Relevant Pages

  • A Bankrupt Superpower
    ... reports that in the opening days of World War II Great Britain only had ... The British turned to the Americans to finance their ability to wage ... Iraq have been red ink wars financed by foreigners, ... A troubled currency and financial system and large budget and trade deficits ...
    (misc.survivalism)
  • The importance of a strong currency
    ... Immediately prior to World War II, ... currency exchange restrictions that same month. ... That was an example of how a strong US dollar actually brought wealth to ... A reserve currency... ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Deprived of their privy members. Fit, for usurers and counterfeiters.
    ... Tax Rip-Offs and a Remedy for Reckless Central Banking ... currency depreciations started with the original promoters of the Fed ... The colourful Richard I sold property to finance his ... course has been to force government and its financial agencies to be ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: OT - Politics
    ... Currency (and it's ... represents current perceived wealth. ... to back the money supply in circulation. ... You are essentially saying that the economy is a zero-sum game. ...
    (rec.woodworking)
  • Re: OT - Politics
    ... represents current perceived wealth. ... to back the money supply in circulation. ... exchanged for currency or for other goods. ... you wealthier in a banana economy. ...
    (rec.woodworking)