My Blog
Money = Debt
Tue, August 14, 2007 - 8:28 AM
Even though I was generally bored to tears by the curriculum, I did pretty well. Considering that I almost flunked out of High School, I got all A's and B's in college, except for one class....Financial Management. Economics was pretty tough as well (Statistics was pretty fuckin' awesome, though). For some reason, I could not wrap my mind around how money works. They would teach us how the monetary system works and about stocks and bonds and what not, but it always seemed like it was a shell game. I would sit there in total confusion, my mind flummoxed about how all this was logically possible. I'd ask the professor, "wait, how is all this decided...who decides this?" And he'd say, "the FED... that's just how it is." Everyone around me seemed to get it, they just listened to what he said and memorized it, but my mind would just crack in there. I know now that what my mind was doing was reacting to the complete absurdity of the whole thing. It's a hard thing to recognize that the whole system is a made up game that is by no means interested in the public good....that really, the whole thing is pretty much the grandest scam ever perpetuated. In business school, I'd get little glimpses at it, cuz I was on my way to being an "insider." All you have to do is drink the kool aid and not ask too many questions, just learn the rules and maybe you can get a cut out of the heist. My entire person was recoiling at the prospect, but at the time, I just figured I didn't "get it". Subconciously I did get it....and it all pretty much boils down to "What the fuck?" Even in 4 years of business school, they never really told us about what follows. This was just never mentioned, it was the man behind the curtain...it was just referred to as "The Fed". Anyway, I truly hope you all will take some time to review the following videos...it's an excellent description of an incredibly complex subject, and it's done with cartoons :) But beware, if you didn't know all this already, it's pretty disconcerting....but more truly informative than 4 years of business school....
Part 1:
www.youtube.com/watch
Part 2:
www.youtube.com/watch
Part 3:
www.youtube.com/watch
Part 4:
www.youtube.com/watch
Part 5:
www.youtube.com/watch
Tue, August 14, 2007 - 8:28 AM -
permalink -
6 Comments
6 Comments |
add a comment |
|
Tue, August 14, 2007 - 2:06 PM
Smoke & Mirrors?
Thanks for posting this Cam :)
I watched the entire series and my understanding so far (based on other information & insight as well) is that our "Debt-Based" monetary system is essentially about making and upholding Agreements in our transactions of value. In the early times, people could just trade whatever they valued. These things could just be taken away by someone either strong or wily enough to do so. At some point, people figured out an easier way to represent all these "things of value" that were of various shapes, sizes and weight, by creating a mutually agreed upon representation of value -ie. paper money. Now since "things of value" were still being represented by the paper notes, those "things" were being stored in a central location that could be marauded. So now, rather than having all things of value being stored in a central location, the "Debt-System" in essence _de-centralizes_ commodities so that no one place can be stormed and deprived of the valued things the paper money represents. Since our money is essentially now based on what things we already possess (making us each the "bank" if you will), then it prevents true theft -because how can you steal from yourself? The singular problem that appears to be in our current system is how other people are making money off of our possessions & labor. But it seems to me what we're actually being "charged" for is a service that enforces our agreements with each other in commerce. After all, if there was no interest charged to our loans, what incentive would we have to pay it off in a timely manner? If we default on our debts, then someone has to enforce the agreement(s) we made, and that takes people who have to be paid to do that work. All of that seems fair enough to me. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't see what's particularly wrong with the system. If anything, it seems to make more sense and have more security for our commodities by making us each accountable for our agreements in our transactions. Furthermore, it seems to me that our Debt-Based System is derived from people who are consuming more than they actually put back into the Natural World. When you think about it, what does it take to make a car for example? What kind of resources does it take? What would it take for an individual with the know-how to actually fabricate their own car? A lot of people aren't putting back into the world what it takes to create something like a car or a house, so it creates a deficit or vacuum. The videos I just saw seem to demonize the system that we have collectively created which simply reflects our natural order in effect and doesn't seem to acknowledge the inherent flaw created by the people who for all intents and purposes are impacting the world as parasites rather than contributors. One can look at our welfare system as just one blaring example of how we have a systemized means for some to lazily live off the labor of others. In a more immediate example, one can experience this with beggars on the streets who ask you to give them something for nothing. It seems to me the banking system isn't about *bankers* taking something for nothing. Rather, the bankers enforce the system that merely reflects the parasitic tendencies of all those people out there who are trying to get something for nothing. Our overall system seems based on smoke & mirrors that keep people in the delusion that they are victims to all kinds of monsters rather than seeing that they themselves are the monsters they are fighting with. Our system seems to reinforce people not having accountability for their own impact in the world and thus upon each other and even themselves. It's always easier to pass the buck or point the finger, but ultimately I believe our system will collapse under the weight of our own hypocrisy as we collectively evolve in our consciousness towards a higher state of personal responsibility that emanates from our Divine Heritage as Creators. The videos DO address what a sustainable economy could look like, which I fully agree with, but it doesn't really address the deeper issue of consciousness & human nature from which our system is but the fruit of. The videos mention LETS, which I actually participated in while living in Berkeley years ago, but one person's time isn't necessarily equal to that of another's in terms of skill, knowledge and even natural talent. An hour of a highly educated, trained and experienced person is naturally more valuable than an hour of an uneducated, untrained, inexperienced person for the same work. I don't think it's an equitable exchange to trade heart surgery for gluing a rock to a tree and calling it art. Is this making sense? Am I totally misunderstanding how this works? |
|
Tue, August 14, 2007 - 3:33 PM
Hmmm...
There's a lot of stuff in this reply that I could chat about in person, way too much to reply to, but I will try to address at least the first part. You said:
"I watched the entire series and my understanding so far (based on other information & insight as well) is that our "Debt-Based" monetary system is essentially about making and upholding Agreements in our transactions of value. In the early times, people could just trade whatever they valued. These things could just be taken away by someone either strong or wily enough to do so. At some point, people figured out an easier way to represent all these "things of value" that were of various shapes, sizes and weight, by creating a mutually agreed upon representation of value -ie. paper money. " This is exactly the point, there is no actual value there...it's a shell game. We're trading DEBT. Literally. The value part was taken out many years ago and replaced with thin air. Yes, there were agreements that are being upheld, but those agreements were hammered out in secret behind closed doors by a very small group of insiders who then manipulated a larger group of lawmakers to legitimize and legalize blatant robbery of massive proportions. And it's not the banks that hold up this criminal behavior, it's the government that upholds it ultimately (LEO's, IRS, Military i.e.things that can ruin your life). It absolutely is not sustainable, but, hell...I'm not even interested too much in getting into the value aspects of it...I believe it's totally unfair and twisted, but hey, life's not fair. But I'm sayin' wow, what a mind fuck...what a paradox...that the more money you have, literally, the more accumulated debt you have. Now we can talk about value, and true assets and true wealth, but it's clear that money (as currently defined) represents none of these. It represents one hell of a brilliant and utterly pervasive scheme. Ahhhh, but we humans love a good myth....no? |
|
Tue, August 14, 2007 - 8:01 PM
Let beer decide
As you said Cam, there's too much to discuss here.
I think we can come up with all the necessary solutions over beer-pong and/or beer & bowling. And if we don't we'll still have fun spending our hard-earned worthless money ;) You know where to find me :) |
|
Wed, August 15, 2007 - 4:20 PM
Errr...Sunyata - ever taken a serious look at fractional lending? If that's not a scam, I'll vote Republican! And the concept of charging interest is quite simply creating money from nothing, which is the biggest scam of all. Not to mention having a free-floating Dollar which isn't pegged to anything of value (we ain't on the gold standard no more) and the central banks' ability to simply print more money as needed, again creating capital out of nothing...it goes on and on. Our whole system of banking is an absolute scam, but so few people actually understand how banks actually operate that the system continues unabated.
|
|
Thu, August 16, 2007 - 4:11 PM
Doc, maybe I didn't explain my thoughts well enough because it seems you don't understand my point regarding the the restructuring of commodities and accountability by design.
Or, perhaps I don't know what the hell I'm talking about and can be further educated on this :) I'm no economist, but it seems to me that since gold became the universally accepted representation of other commodities that it in itself is symbolic and a rather subjective and/or arbitrary object of value. Granted, it *stores* better than grain, pigs, trees, etc. -but then again so does *information* -which for all intents and purposes is all that a dollar really represents. The dollar is a *symbol* or representation of commodities of ALL kinds. Gold has no *direct* value to a starving man or to one who needs clothing or shelter. So my take on the "gold standard" is that it's pretty much arbitrary and replaceable with anything we as a society choose. If you took $100 from me, that would suck because I can use that to exchange for food, clothing, a movie, etc -so that is what gives the dollar value, right? Regarding "fractionalized banking", interest, etc., if we *didn't* have interest on our loans, then what incentive would anyone have to pay it off? Loans create a vacuum that is not natural in nature. In nature there is a system of balance. The same is true in relationships. So I don't see what's wrong with charing interest on loans that Nature would tolerate in the first place. I was raised to earn the money it takes for my food, my shelter, my car, etc. If I took out a loan, the interest would be my incentive to uphold balance in the system by working my butt off to pay off that loan as soon as possible. In essence, the interest I pay is for a *service* -but also sort of a "put my money where my mouth is when I say I'll be accountable for my word". Money talks, bullshit walks and all that. Now regarding interest on my *income* -I simply don't see that in any effect in my life. I earn money, I spend money. I don't see any interest being charged on what I earn. So again, maybe I'm still not understanding something here, and someone can enlighten me :) |
|
Thu, August 16, 2007 - 8:11 PM
correction
*charging interest* -not charing.
A vacuum that Nature would *not* tolerate is what I meant to say. |