Posts Tagged ‘money’

Legal Ownership Of Money

November 13, 2014

I have run the idea of the legal ownership of money past a number of the people that have been responsible for my own awakening. But I have received no response at all.

The idea is getting no milage at all.

Yet, I don’t see how this concept is not the lynchpin of the entire construct.

The Kenynesians decry the glut of savings and argue for greater state intervention and centralisation. The Austrians decry the debasement of the currency and decry state intervention and the centralisation of power.

Neither theory however, takes into account the fundamental asymmetrical exchange brought about by the unilateral ownership of the currency.

Of course, the Austrians are closer to the mark because in advocating sound money they effectively advocate greater power for individuals and entities to freely interact. But as far as I can tell, even Austrians are not explicitly in favour of full unencumbered ownership of money by society.

The nature of money is the single fundamental construct upon which everything else is built. Politics, taxation, Collateralised Debt Obligations or Credit Default Swaps are all derivatives of the nature of money. Politics does not influence the nature of money but rather exploits it. Similarly, fiscality or any of the fancy credit instruments mentioned above, have no bearing on the nature of money. Quite the contrary rather. They exploit it.

Politics could of course take the upper hand in advocating a different monetary system. This would entail however taking some rather uncomfortable if not dangerous positions against rather powerful and entrenched interests.

In my view therefore, the fundamental reality of the exchange of something we own outright for something we do not own and owe interest on, is the ultimate driver of all political, economic and social development.

Not only that.

But the continuous exchange of something that is intrinsically valuable (skills, ideas and time) for something that arithmetically does not maintain its original value of exchange (money), must arithmetically and necessarily result in the concentration of wealth in the hands of the ultimate owner of the currency. Thus this is a dynamic that can only result in the concentration of power and the full dependence of society on a progressively ever more pervasive and obtrusive state with all the concomitant ramifications regarding personal liberty that entails.

The ultimate owner of the currency has successfully drawn a boundary around society. Regardless of what happens within that boundary at the political, economic or social levels, the owner of the currency will always and everywhere expand the amount of money and credit in circulation. Thus, regardless of what happens within the boundary, the owner of the currency will enjoy an increasing revenue stream fuelled by compound interest calculated on an ever increasing quantity of money and credit.

This monetary construct therefore, thoroughly neutralises the political process. Political infighting between the right, the center and the left is therefore but a distraction, albeit a very useful distraction. In fact, the greater the political polarisation becomes and the more complex regulation and fiscality become, the greater is the resultant revenue stream for the ultimate owner of the currency.

In this context, wars, famines, humanitarian interventions, economic depressions, unemployment and crisis are an absolute manna for the ultimate owner of the currency who stands to gain regardless the underlying conditions. The greater the activity, the more strident the politics and the larger the dislocation, the greater the revenue stream becomes for the ultimate owner of the currency.

This monetary system is arithmetically skewed to impoverish. It cannot be otherwise. Granted the time line may be rather long but the result is arithmetically inevitable and preordained.

This monetary system cannot contemplate prosperity for all because this would inherently distribute profit in the hands of the many.

The arithmetic of this monetary system are geared towards concentration. Politics has no bearing whatsoever in changing this fundamental dynamic. Politics only serve to bring about ever greater regulation, intervention and complexity thus driving ever greater profits towards the owner of the currency. And the evidence is everywhere.

Advertisements

A general awakening is taking place

December 7, 2013

Unless some great human tragedy should befall Western society shortly, the monetary system must at some point come into focus.

Even though few of the people that might have a say in what can be done have made the leap to actually and unequivocally admit the inevitable arithmetical reality afflicting our economies, the main stream press is indeed increasingly reporting on the tangible ramifications of this particular variety of monetary system.

Starting with this bit of research:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2011/10/22/the-147-companies-that-control-everything/

Three systems theorists at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich have taken a database listing 37 million companies and investors worldwide and analyzed all 43,060 transnational corporations and share ownerships linking them. They built a model of who owns what and what their revenues are and mapped the whole edifice of economic power. They discovered that global corporate control has a distinct bow-tie shape, with a dominant core of 147 firms radiating out from the middle. Each of these 147 own interlocking stakes of one another and together they control 40% of the wealth in the network. A total of 737 control 80% of it all. The top 20 are at the bottom of the post. This is, say the paper’s authors, the first map of the structure of global corporate control.

If one understands the arithmetical reality of our monetary system, then one must inherently and necessarily understand that the outcome can only be the concentration of profits thus the concentration of ownership.

The key aspects of this monetary system that make this the inevitable conclusion are:

– Unilateral and arbitrary imposition by force of this monetary system to the exclusion of any other
– Privilege of money and credit creation is bestowed on an entity that produces nothing but demands interest be paid to it
– Money and credit enter the wider economy through exclusive gates rather than entering simultaneously at all levels of the economy
– Constant and aggressive creation of money & credit results in steady debasement thereby awarding asymmetrical purchasing power advantage to the guardians of the gates
– The diminishing marginal efficiency of constant monetary & credit creation ensure that ever greater amounts of money & credit must be created – go to step 3, rinse and repeat

Once this dynamic is understood, the inescapable conclusion must be that, regardless the health of the economy, profit will concentrate towards the top of the pyramid thus ownership of productive capital will too. Profit concentrates in the hands of those entities that are closest to the source of monetary & credit creation.

The following too is more evidence of this inevitable reality:

http://www.policymic.com/articles/71255/10-corporations-control-almost-everything-you-buy-this-chart-shows-how

Ten mega corporations control the output of almost everything you buy; from household products to pet food to jeans. According to this chart via Reddit, called “The Illusion of Choice,” these corporations create a chain that begins at one of 10 super companies. You’ve heard of the biggest names, but it’s amazing to see what these giants own or influence.

And of course, due to the same dynamic, the main stream press is fully captured too.

One more graph:

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/12/financial-industry-interconnectedness/

If you understand the monetary dynamic and if you understand that this monetary system has been imposed without debate nor indeed vote, then clearly the only other conclusion that can be inferred is that there must absolutely be an entity that has deemed it useful for this to be so.

If you understand the above, then you should also begin to understand why in a system predicated on electoral politics and regardless the persuasion, economic policy will always and everywhere result in increased deficit spending and expanding sovereign debt till the point where ideologies that were once at opposing conceptual spectrums will inevitably converge.

A bon entendeur, salut!

The Trillion Dollar Coin

January 19, 2013

The proposal has been killed as it should have been.

Is this proof that our politicians are sensible?

Not at all of course. What happened here is merely a calculation aimed at self preservation. Someone realized that in going through with the plan, society would begin to question the role of the central bank; as they indeed should.

If Treasury is legally entitled to repay the entirety of the debt generated by a Debt Based Fiat Monetary system (DBFM), then why don’t we just do it? Similarly, if Treasury is legally able to create the currency, why exactly do we need a central bank? More importantly, why should government borrow money from a third party and pay interest when government can create its own money?

These are questions that central banks do not want asked.

Please note. I am not advocating that Treasury should take over monetary policy perpetuating DBFM. Monetary policy should be in the hands of the public and politicians should not have free rein in managing the monetary system just as unaccountable and unelected central bankers should not either. In this respect a value based monetary system or a fixed amount of fiat money would be desirable and would serve to, at once, eliminate the central bank and restrict government excesses.