I'm going to have to disagree with quite a bit of this, in particular one of your key comments which is that one of the principles of 'money' is 'limited supply'.
No, no, no and no again. This is precisely the myth the cabal tell people in order to keep them subjugated, poor, and dependent. Like 'sorry, poor people, but there's no money left, there's no magic money tree [despite the fact that we, the bankers, have something called a printing press] and so we can't spend money on public services for you.' Oh, we can find money for war, sure, but ending poverty? fuck that! Decent healthcare? Education? Fuck off. We're in charge here. Get back to work. Now believe everything we tell you about money.
The other great lie is the 'value' of money having to be unfixed and open to change (which is always due to speculation and arbitrary price increases). Remember the great lie about inflation is that it's somehow intrinsic to 'economics' as if there's no human agency involved. Sorry, but prices don't put themselves up - people put prices up. The price of everything is arbitrary.
'Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it'. (Publius Cyrus, I believe - some Roman, anyway)
If you change both of these things then you solve all the problems.
Obviously you have to take over the bank and make sure it's permanently governed by decent people, but let's assume that's happened. What would decent people do?
They'd do this: 1/ fix the value of the 'currency unit' to an 'unlimited availability product' - or better still, a basket of unlimited availability products which together make up the 'necessities of existence'. Let us say 10,000 currency units equals one 'cost of living' (measured by our basket of goods) for one adult human for one year. In order to then work out the price of all of those individual necessities you simply need to do a basic physical equation - you have a list of those necessities and you simply divide each of them into the 10,000. So, for example, let's say everyone needs 10 kg of food per day - so that's 3,650 kg of food a year. Fix the price at 1 currency unit for 1kg of food. Do the same with energy. cost of shelter, and so on. This is simply an equation.
2/ You absolutely DO NOT limit the supply of money. Obviously you have to choose a product which is both intrinsically worthless (let's say paper) and is unlimited availability. Print some numbers on these bits of paper - 5, 10, 20 and so on.
3/ Give everyone 20,000 currency units each year. That's twice the cost of living. If they want more than that, they have to do some work. How much extra they get depends on their talents, effort, and perceived value to society. Set a maximum income for one adult for one year at, say 1 million. That way no one gets obscenely rich, and every luxury item must, by definition, be priced at an affordable level, otherwise you can't sell any of it and you go out of business. Most people who work would probably be earning say 50-100,000 extra a year, so the vast majority of luxury items will be priced accordingly - i.e. affordable by pretty much everyone.
4/ Obviously, I'm describing a utopia here. This kind of thing can only happen if all the bad guys are removed from positions of influence and social control, and that means well away from the money supply. And that has to be permanent.
We mustn't make the mistake of confusing the 'principle' of money or 'bank' or 'price' with the manifestation of those principles in the modern world, and historically, even. Because all of these concepts have been arbitrarily decided by the cabal for the purposes of social control. Indeed, they don't even have an 'economics' - they present it as economics, of course, in order to control people, but it's actually a lie - it's an abuse of economics and is actually preventing a natural economics governed by normal, decent, human nature. Everything, in other words, all the shit stuff, always comes right back down to the existence of the cabal.
The last thing we should do is fall for their own deception, which is judge 'money' and 'bank' and so on by the way they use it. There's nothing inherently wrong with money or bank or whatever so long as decent people control those things.
And a decent governor would never limit the supply of money to keep people poor.
Anyway - that's my two pence. That's about all I have to rub together at the moment I'm afraid.
Your comments about the limited supply of money are very interesting, and it's honestly difficult for me to think through that problem. But a feature of money is scarcity... if everyone had as much as they wanted, the system wouldn't work. But you are right that the limited supply of money as it is generally understood and sold to the public is a lie.
Perhaps I should alter my definition:
“An elaborate system of disguised extortion characterized by a centralized AND ALTERABLE ledger of circulating debt obligations, ultimately backed up by the threat of violence.”
Yeah - I get what you're saying and I should've clarified to be honest. By 'not limited' I didn't necessarily mean/advocate 'unrestricted availability' - like if you could go to an ATM and take out as much as you want anytime you like - that certainly wouldn't work.
The hypothetical system I'm really advocating here is one where 'enforced scarcity' - i.e. 'not enough' is removed (that's the social control element I meant), and replaced by a system in which everyone can get, at least as a bare minimum, an amount equal to whatever the 'cost of living' is. I.e. the cost of that 'basket of necessities' (the lowest level of the so-called 'hierarchy of needs'). This eliminates poverty of course and leads to the point where people can focus on their higher-level needs - in economic terms 'higher level needs' we could simply call 'luxury items' - even a small luxury item like a trip to the cinema, or a night out in the pub, is a 'non-necessary-for-survival product'. But if a person wants that kind of stuff then they have to do some kind of socially useful work. In terms of the money supply, the (benevolent) people in charge of the bank then simply make sure that the amount of real money (not debt money) circulating around the economy is at least equal to (keeps pace with) the total monetary value of all those goods and services (or preferably a little more to introduce good competition in there, as a motivation - 'enlightened self-interest' and all that), then you won't get inflation because no one will be forced to put their prices up simply to make their bottom line - because the total monetary value of all those goods and services is more than the amount of real money - and the value of a currency unit is calculated as the total real money available divided into the actual total of all the goods and services.
This is what I'm really talking about with my 'liberal socialism' idea, in terms of economics. Hopefully you can see, most importantly, the psychological effect that would have on a society - it would virtually eliminate civil unrest, depression, alienation and all the other things which fuck up human lives. Plus, of course, by deliberately denying people such a system, the cabal are achieving social control by causing all this mental illness and unrest and frustration and so on - they then only need to give people the 'out group' to blame for all their frustrations - from the level of a minority group right up to the level of a foreign country - which gives them their excuse for war (with the support of the frustrated people).
Anyway - glad we're clarifying it now! The whole thing's a fucking racket.
:I think Bitcoin will last as long as the internet does."
That's probably true, especially if trillion dollar asset management firms get into the mix.
"BlackRock is purchasing spot bitcoin ETPs, including its own IBIT product, for its $18 billion AUM Global Allocation Fund. BlackRock filed to incorporate spot bitcoin ETPs into its $36.7 billion AUM Strategic Income Opportunities Fund."
I interpret this as tacit recognition that the banks acknowledge that Bitcoin is now real money.
Like I said, Bitcoin doesn't solve the problem of extreme wealth inequality. This is why it took me so long to come out as a maximalist. It's not a solution to all of the world's problems, just some of them.
Being a regular reader of Doug Casey's posts, I must admit that some of your leaps-of-thought and
conclusions are interesting too !!!
Curious to see what comes out of your pipeline next ...🤔🤔🤔🤔
Crypto and its intrinsic, de-centralized and limited supply is a stronghold but its most fragile back-bone is its full reliance on an entirely UN-reliable version of internet-to-come.
I'm going to have to disagree with quite a bit of this, in particular one of your key comments which is that one of the principles of 'money' is 'limited supply'.
No, no, no and no again. This is precisely the myth the cabal tell people in order to keep them subjugated, poor, and dependent. Like 'sorry, poor people, but there's no money left, there's no magic money tree [despite the fact that we, the bankers, have something called a printing press] and so we can't spend money on public services for you.' Oh, we can find money for war, sure, but ending poverty? fuck that! Decent healthcare? Education? Fuck off. We're in charge here. Get back to work. Now believe everything we tell you about money.
The other great lie is the 'value' of money having to be unfixed and open to change (which is always due to speculation and arbitrary price increases). Remember the great lie about inflation is that it's somehow intrinsic to 'economics' as if there's no human agency involved. Sorry, but prices don't put themselves up - people put prices up. The price of everything is arbitrary.
'Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it'. (Publius Cyrus, I believe - some Roman, anyway)
If you change both of these things then you solve all the problems.
Obviously you have to take over the bank and make sure it's permanently governed by decent people, but let's assume that's happened. What would decent people do?
They'd do this: 1/ fix the value of the 'currency unit' to an 'unlimited availability product' - or better still, a basket of unlimited availability products which together make up the 'necessities of existence'. Let us say 10,000 currency units equals one 'cost of living' (measured by our basket of goods) for one adult human for one year. In order to then work out the price of all of those individual necessities you simply need to do a basic physical equation - you have a list of those necessities and you simply divide each of them into the 10,000. So, for example, let's say everyone needs 10 kg of food per day - so that's 3,650 kg of food a year. Fix the price at 1 currency unit for 1kg of food. Do the same with energy. cost of shelter, and so on. This is simply an equation.
2/ You absolutely DO NOT limit the supply of money. Obviously you have to choose a product which is both intrinsically worthless (let's say paper) and is unlimited availability. Print some numbers on these bits of paper - 5, 10, 20 and so on.
3/ Give everyone 20,000 currency units each year. That's twice the cost of living. If they want more than that, they have to do some work. How much extra they get depends on their talents, effort, and perceived value to society. Set a maximum income for one adult for one year at, say 1 million. That way no one gets obscenely rich, and every luxury item must, by definition, be priced at an affordable level, otherwise you can't sell any of it and you go out of business. Most people who work would probably be earning say 50-100,000 extra a year, so the vast majority of luxury items will be priced accordingly - i.e. affordable by pretty much everyone.
4/ Obviously, I'm describing a utopia here. This kind of thing can only happen if all the bad guys are removed from positions of influence and social control, and that means well away from the money supply. And that has to be permanent.
We mustn't make the mistake of confusing the 'principle' of money or 'bank' or 'price' with the manifestation of those principles in the modern world, and historically, even. Because all of these concepts have been arbitrarily decided by the cabal for the purposes of social control. Indeed, they don't even have an 'economics' - they present it as economics, of course, in order to control people, but it's actually a lie - it's an abuse of economics and is actually preventing a natural economics governed by normal, decent, human nature. Everything, in other words, all the shit stuff, always comes right back down to the existence of the cabal.
The last thing we should do is fall for their own deception, which is judge 'money' and 'bank' and so on by the way they use it. There's nothing inherently wrong with money or bank or whatever so long as decent people control those things.
And a decent governor would never limit the supply of money to keep people poor.
Anyway - that's my two pence. That's about all I have to rub together at the moment I'm afraid.
Your comments about the limited supply of money are very interesting, and it's honestly difficult for me to think through that problem. But a feature of money is scarcity... if everyone had as much as they wanted, the system wouldn't work. But you are right that the limited supply of money as it is generally understood and sold to the public is a lie.
Perhaps I should alter my definition:
“An elaborate system of disguised extortion characterized by a centralized AND ALTERABLE ledger of circulating debt obligations, ultimately backed up by the threat of violence.”
Yeah - I get what you're saying and I should've clarified to be honest. By 'not limited' I didn't necessarily mean/advocate 'unrestricted availability' - like if you could go to an ATM and take out as much as you want anytime you like - that certainly wouldn't work.
The hypothetical system I'm really advocating here is one where 'enforced scarcity' - i.e. 'not enough' is removed (that's the social control element I meant), and replaced by a system in which everyone can get, at least as a bare minimum, an amount equal to whatever the 'cost of living' is. I.e. the cost of that 'basket of necessities' (the lowest level of the so-called 'hierarchy of needs'). This eliminates poverty of course and leads to the point where people can focus on their higher-level needs - in economic terms 'higher level needs' we could simply call 'luxury items' - even a small luxury item like a trip to the cinema, or a night out in the pub, is a 'non-necessary-for-survival product'. But if a person wants that kind of stuff then they have to do some kind of socially useful work. In terms of the money supply, the (benevolent) people in charge of the bank then simply make sure that the amount of real money (not debt money) circulating around the economy is at least equal to (keeps pace with) the total monetary value of all those goods and services (or preferably a little more to introduce good competition in there, as a motivation - 'enlightened self-interest' and all that), then you won't get inflation because no one will be forced to put their prices up simply to make their bottom line - because the total monetary value of all those goods and services is more than the amount of real money - and the value of a currency unit is calculated as the total real money available divided into the actual total of all the goods and services.
This is what I'm really talking about with my 'liberal socialism' idea, in terms of economics. Hopefully you can see, most importantly, the psychological effect that would have on a society - it would virtually eliminate civil unrest, depression, alienation and all the other things which fuck up human lives. Plus, of course, by deliberately denying people such a system, the cabal are achieving social control by causing all this mental illness and unrest and frustration and so on - they then only need to give people the 'out group' to blame for all their frustrations - from the level of a minority group right up to the level of a foreign country - which gives them their excuse for war (with the support of the frustrated people).
Anyway - glad we're clarifying it now! The whole thing's a fucking racket.
:I think Bitcoin will last as long as the internet does."
That's probably true, especially if trillion dollar asset management firms get into the mix.
"BlackRock is purchasing spot bitcoin ETPs, including its own IBIT product, for its $18 billion AUM Global Allocation Fund. BlackRock filed to incorporate spot bitcoin ETPs into its $36.7 billion AUM Strategic Income Opportunities Fund."
https://www.coindesk.com/business/2024/03/08/blackrock-plans-to-acquire-spot-bitcoin-etps-for-its-global-allocation-fund/
I interpret this as tacit recognition that the banks acknowledge that Bitcoin is now real money.
Like I said, Bitcoin doesn't solve the problem of extreme wealth inequality. This is why it took me so long to come out as a maximalist. It's not a solution to all of the world's problems, just some of them.
N I C E !!👍👍
Being a regular reader of Doug Casey's posts, I must admit that some of your leaps-of-thought and
conclusions are interesting too !!!
Curious to see what comes out of your pipeline next ...🤔🤔🤔🤔
Crypto and its intrinsic, de-centralized and limited supply is a stronghold but its most fragile back-bone is its full reliance on an entirely UN-reliable version of internet-to-come.
Only time will tell ...