Tag Archives: local

A quick bit of reality.

Foreword

The constitution prohibits the establishing of laws based on a religious belief or religious law; it is the fundamental basis of the separation of church and state.  The constitution makes no such prohibition, nor virtually any other of any kind, to the private sector.  That is to say that a private company can base its policies and procedures and/or operating guidelines on religious law and/or religious belief.  This is guaranteed by the bill of rights (freedom of religion/freedom of speech).

The Meat and Potatoes:

The concept of “Lending Money” is one so absurd and ridiculous that it belies all logic, yet it is just one more “impossible” scenario that we make a part of our daily lives.  Our civilization, as it stands in 2011 could not function at all without the lending of money, after all it is how money is created; you deposit your money in a bank, let’s say $1000.00.  The bank, under the pretense that you will not withdraw that money immediately, can take a portion of it; let’s say $500.00 and lends it to someone else as if it were theirs and charges them interest on it.  By accepting the loan from the bank (of your money) the beneficiary of the loan now has $500.00 dollars of your money that they bank lent them, but you also have the same $500.00 in your account; you’re just not using it right now.  By doing this, the bank created $500.00 dollars, or at least that’s what we believe.   In this post, I will not write any math intended to demonstrate how or why money can’t be borrowed or lent, because even though it can’t; we do it every day. In this post, I’ll stick to our present reality – to the last detail.

The lending of money is based on an analysis of credit risk. The function of credit risk analysis is to establish a person or entity’s creditworthiness. Creditworthiness is established by companies like FICO who assign a score in relation to a person’s creditworthiness.  In order to determine this score, FICO’s slated objective is to predict the likelihood that a consumer will go 90 days past due or worse in the subsequent 24 months after the score has been calculated.  Barring the fact that it is not possible to predict the future, the commercialization of predicting the future is officially classified as fortune-telling.  Fortune telling is recognized in many states as a legitimate business as evidenced by the ability to obtain an occupational or business tax license to operate a fortune telling establishment (with a disclaimer that it is for entertainment purposes only).  The reason that fortune-telling is classified as a legitimate business category is that fortune-telling is considered an aspect of witchcraft and witchcraft is officially recognized as a RELIGION in the U.S.A. and is therefore protected by the constitution.

In conclusion, even though the lives of every person in the country and most of the world, even governments are determined by their creditworthiness, there is no law regulating creditworthiness, credit scoring or credit rating, if there were, the law would be invalid because it would be based on a religious premise (witchcraft). At the same time, determining a person or company’s creditworthiness is technically an attempt to predict the future, which technically; is an act of witchcraft.  When this is applied to the general public, we are able to glimpse our reality: Every person who has a loan, mortgage or credit card or in any way has borrowed money has (whether they know it or now) technically practiced witchcraft.  There, that should light a fire or two under someone’s butt; they can’t argue the facts, however.  Banks lend money by trying to predict the future of a person’s creditworthiness.  The lending of money is the principal financial mechanism of the world’s economy; it is also the active practice of witchcraft, in reality.

It doesn’t get much more real than this.

We can do better.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The solution to the global economic crisis.

I don’t understand what all of the fuss is about.  The entire world feels like it’s on the verge of a mass nervous breakdown over this “global economic crisis”.  So severe is this crisis that those few who actually know how bad it is will never divulge as much – and I am not one of those few; which may result my being asked how I can quantify “it” in any way.  The answer to all of these questions is actually very simple:  There is no financial “crisis” or a global “recession” or anything even remotely resembling the significant “slowing down” of the planet’s economy. According to the very authorities who define everything financial or economic; such as the IMF, the U.S. Federal Reserve, the World Bank and the rest of the endless list of “entities in charge” of everything related to monney; the present financial position of the human race stands as follows, using the basic, standardized, universal and official format called A BALANCE SHEET (expressed in US Dollars “US$”, as required, given that the official reserve currency of the world is the U.S. Dollar, as per the Breton-Woods Agreement, which is still being honored by recognizing gold as the official currency of the world):

Balance sheet for Homo-Sapiens as of October 10, 2011

Fiscal year-end:  December 31, 2011

Total Assets:               US$32 Trillion

Total Liabilities:         US$84 Trillion

___________________________________

Total Assets and

Liabilities:                  -US$52 Trillion

(The figures may not be exact, but they are close enough to be verifiable by any person through any number of official sources.)

As can be seen by our balance sheet, we have no economic crisis or recession; whenever ones’ liabilities are greater than one’s assets, especially to the degree seen in our collective balance sheet, it is called INSOLVENCY.  It’s in the dictionary, you can look it up.  It’s actually pretty clear; I don’t know how every “expert” in the world missed it.  On an individual basis, if any one person should become insolvent, the pestilence that is rained upon them is truly harsh, to the point where they must file for bankruptcy, after all; isn’t not being able to pay one’s bills one of the most despicable and shameful of all social positions? This is why it’s called “insolvency” – without a solution.  These days, most people are forced to deal with coercive threats and more if they are 3 days in paying a credit card statement and yet the entire human race is clearly and indisputably insolvent, and no one noticed?  I don’t know, but doesn’t that seem a little odd?  That’s beside the point, however; I don’t want to lose my place, where were we?  Oh yes, the inhabitants of Planet Earth are summarily and collectively insolvent; a fact which needs no further supporting evidence.  As such, what is required is that bankruptcy be filed, humanity’s existing assets and cash flow would probably be placed in receivership and eventually the court will discharge the debt by virtue of liquidation of assets, or something of the sort, right?  Those are the RULES; right?  That’s what any of us would be required to do individually, RIGHT?  If it applies to any person individually, then it must also apply to all of us collectively, given the same circumstances, RIGHT???

Here are the problems with this situation:

  1. Which court has jurisdiction over the entire human race?
  2. Assuming an answer for #1, to which address should all legal paperwork be sent?
  3. Who (and this is most important) speaks for all of us?  ALL of us; because it is all of us together who are bankrupt and insolvent.  Those few who may still think they “have a few bucks” can’t weasel their way out of being human, so it’s ALL of us, just look at the numbers.  Who could, or can, speak for all of us, should this impossible hearing ever take place?  That’s simple: All of us did not make, or even participate in the decisions as to the handling our global economy that resulted in insolvency.  It was only some of us who did so.  The fact that they didn’t get permission from all of us is irrelevant at this point; we believe the figures as written, therefore we are insolvent.  It would seem logical that it should be those same few who put all of us in this position who should stand up for the rest of us in this case – they did when they screwed up our books.  Wouldn’t you say?

Okay, I think that’s enough.  None of these things are actually going to happen.  All of us don’t even know who those few who put us all in this position are, or were.  It’s ridiculous to consider that the “human race” could file for bankruptcy, yet this doesn’t change the fact that we are bankrupt and insolvent.  We can’t play by some of the rules and ignore the rest when it’s convenient.  If humanity can’t file bankruptcy, then it can’t be insolvent either; why? Because we INVENTED both of those concepts, yet we believe them to be real and true individual “things” with their own will and presence.

What is truly comical to the point of being Machiavellian is how we have known this all along.  Of course we have, just look in the dictionary.  Look up the word “insolvent”.  The entire definition deals with money and bankruptcy.  From a linguistic point of view, however, the word insolvent is composed of two component morphemes; the prefix in-, which means NOT, and the word solvent, which of course, means everything that’s listed under the word insolvency, except for that one little detail that jumps out at you if you actually look up the word solvent: It also means “having the power to solve”.  Of course, that makes sense, doesn’t it?  Then why doesn’t the definition for insolvent include “The inability to solve?”  Maybe because when it comes to solving this mess, we are unable to.  Shit, we can’t even solve the right definition.   The entire financial crisis, wealth, value, currency, money and everything else isn’t even real, we just think it is which makes it real to all of us.  In the end, what this all means is that we are actually trying to run an insolvent civilization on a bankrupt planet and that somehow a solution will be found for making something out of nothing?  Look at it this way; each day that we continue to live believing this enormous pile of shit that came out of us is like driving a car with 4 flat tires; fast and a long way.  You know what happens eventually, right?

Okay, just don’t say I didn’t speak up.

We can do better.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why?

Q:        Why are there many of us?

A:        Because it is necessary, otherwise there would be only 1.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Can you Imagine?

If all the world’s women suddenly declared that they would only have sex with men that have six testicles in their one scrotum, and everyone believed it; no one would have any more sex and the human race would disappear within a generation.

If the last step of purchasing a new car were to precisely recite the smell of the color blue, as dictated by an Ancient Eskimo Chief to his son, who died without keeping a record of the description, and everyone believed it; no new cars would be sold.

If the world’s financial authorities declared that the sum total value of all money, gold, silver and other wealth possessed by all of the people on the planet totaled $34 Trillion and that the total amount of debt owed by all of the people on the planet was valued at $84 trillion, and everyone believed it, then money and wealth would be meaningless and worthless, no one would ever actually be able to own anything and everything in life would be measured by what you owe instead of what you are.

 Oh shit, wait a minute.  That last one’s an actual fact.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Excuse me….again

Just for the sake of argument, let’s just say that the $84 trillion debt figure is real (LOL).   Let’s also say that I wanted to settle that debt, the whole thing, for everyone, and that I had the money with which to do it.  This being the case; who would I make the check out to?

It’s just a bombastic question, but a curious one to contemplate.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Are you ready for this? – Part 1

CALCULATION NO. 182173

CATALOGUE ENTRY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER:         182173

TITLE:       The exploitation of a systemic flaw is fraud, regardless of the gain.

DATE RECORDED:    06 February, 2010

Definitions

Systemic Flaw – An inherent defect (such as an invalid premise, a subjective value in an equation or anything that would otherwise be invalid) in the structure, composition, construction or operation of a system, or any of its components, which inhibits its operation in any way, to any degree.

Exploitation:

  1. use or utilization, especially for profit: the exploitation of newly discovered oil fields.
  2. selfish utilization: He got ahead through the exploitation of his friends.
  3. the combined, often varied, use of public-relations and advertising techniques to promote a person, movie, product, etc.

Also: Taking unfair advantage of something or someone else, in any way, but specifically by withholding information or simply lying. In a more traditional sense, exploitation can be defined as the premeditated application of an element, condition or factor that affects the validity or veracity of a mechanism, given the condition that there is singular and unique ownership of the information withheld and when this results in an unfair advantage with the objective of obtaining financial benefits in large amounts.

Fraud:

  1. deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.
  2. a particular instance of such deceit or trickery: mail fraud; election frauds.
  3. any deception, trickery, or humbug: That diet book is a fraud and a waste of time.
  4. a person who makes deceitful pretenses; sham; poseur.

Application and ramifications:

There are so many examples of this math in everyday life that an example should not only be unnecessary – it would also be embarrassing.  There is one specific example that is very relevant to right now and therefore must be shared.

In April 2011, The United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on investigations, committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; published a report on one of the investigations carried out by a one if the committee’s subcommittees: The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

What is this Subcommittee?

Just the name sounds important, doesn’t it?  It also sounds very much like something one would see in a James Bond movie and it really just does, doesn’t it?  Perhaps not very many people, heck; not very many Americans are familiar with the Senate Committee of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.  You can find out everything available about them here: http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/.

This post is not about this committee or its history, but there are a few details that are extremely important to mention in this summary. Here’s a quick list of some of the key distinguishing aspects/features of this very important Congressional Committee:

  1. Elements and functions of the present committee can be traced back to the 19th century; however the specific committee that evolved into this present form was the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Department, created on April 18, 1921.
  2. The Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Department was renamed the Committee on Government Operations in 1952.
  3. The Committee on Government Operations was reorganized as the Committee on Governmental Affairs in 1977 and functioned as such until February 17, 2005 when it became The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; they’ve been around for a while.

If one were to ask; what have they done? That question would yield an equally impressive answer.  The Committee has five Subcommittees of which one is Permanent, in fact this permanent subcommittee wrote the report that was briefly referred to above but has yet to be named…we’re getting there. The five subcommittees are:

  1. Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
  2. Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia
  3. Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security
  4. Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery and Intergovernmental Affairs
  5. Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight

Here a quick list of some of investigations the Committee as carried out:

  1. Report on the investigation of the McCarthy Hearings (1953-1954).
  2. Report of Credit Card Practices: Unfair Interest Rate Increases.
  3. Government Contractor abuse.
  4. The specific report mentioned in this post, also known as the Levin-Coburn Report (but try to find it under that name!)

The above points and descriptions should provide enough to convey to fact that this is a very important and powerful committee that is charged with some very tough duties. The analysis of the events that most Americans Refer to as “The Wall Street Financial Crisis” had to be the most difficult challenge for this group of Senators and yet, they published a lot of very important information.  It is doubtful that more than a handful of people actually read the 646 page PDF version of the report, but just in case you might be one that handful, you can find the full version of the report here: http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/Financial_Crisis/FinancialCrisisReport.pdf.

Again, I stress the fact that this post is not about this Subcommittee, it’s not even about their published investigations of the “Financial Crisis; it’s about the math whose title appears at the top.  There are several specific sections of the report that contain indispensible information, necessary for clarity of though and which in the most simple and straightforward manner possible indisputably exemplify and justify that the exploitation of a systemic defect is, in fact, fraud.  I’m just going to focus on one little item from the report; just one detail.  It’s on page 243 of the above linked report and it’s called “INFLATED CREIDT RATINGS….:  That is all of the focus I’m going to give it; the report needs no help from me to do what it does so clearly and so well: it proves the math.  So here’s what we’re going to do if you choose as much: Download the report from the link above and read Section V: INFLATED CREDIT RATINGS.  After you read it, do the math, give it everything you have and if you don’t immediately see and understand that the Entire financial infrastructure of the U.S.A., and the world, is only able to function by exploiting the systemic flaws indicated in the Senate report and others and that ever single loan, credit card, mortgage or other loan ever granted to everyone and anyone is an act of FRAUD and therefore illegal and invalid, then read it again because you missed it.

There are so many things that we consider so important, that in fact are not even real:  money is not real, debt is not real credit is not real, buying and hoarding gold and silver in an attempt to salvage wealth is pointless, gold is officially worthless; it’s price is fixed in dollars and dollars have been worthless for more than a while now, it’s technically and factually impossible to borrow money and the use of money to create MORE money for the world’s financial infrastructure is not just what helped get us into the mess we’re in now, it’s also, and more importantly FRAUD.

I think you can do the rest of the math from here.

We can do better, and it would be a good idea to start soon.

Next Post:  Wall Street WordPlay.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

WORLD WORDPLAY

cre·den·tial

[kri-den-shuhl]

–noun

  1. Usually, credentials. Evidence of authority, status, rights, entitlement to privileges, or the like, usually in written form: Only those with the proper credentials are admitted.
  2. anything that provides the basis for confidence, belief, credit, etc.

The only thing that any credential can give true evidence of is that a financial transaction occurred.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

MORE WORDPLAY?

The manipulation and alteration of words and language over long periods of time is a subject that I have written about on several occasions and will do so with more frequency as it becomes more and more of a factor affecting the road ahead of us. This deceitful control mechanism has been used almost continuously since we invented language; it has been an extremely convenient tool in the hands of the few and their ability to maintain control of the reins of humanity up until now. In the roughly 12,000 years since the Neolithic revolution sparked life and gave birth to the dynamic human mechanism called civilization, those few who, for whatever reason, found themselves in the position to observe its birth and development, understood what was most important to understand at that time: first, that a human civilization is not a human quality but a dynamic product of the actions of humanity and that it has only one purpose and objective: to grow, in spite of the fact that nothing can grow perpetually, period; at least nothing that we know of and second; that what civilization feeds on in order to grow, is the dynamic human energy that is the result of everything that everyone does. It does not discriminate as to the nature or origin of the human dynamic energy on which it feeds. It matters not to the dynamic of civilization if the energy that it consumes in ever increasing quantities is the result of war or if it the result of a highly productive collaboration; as long as it is energy. In the understanding of these two key aspects of civilization there was a great discovery to be made. We noticed that there were no rules as to how human activity and its resulting energy were to be structured or supervised. We could literally do anything that we could think of which would result in human activity. This little detail has always been our Achilles’ heel; we have not had any success at administering our own autonomy without succumbing to the temptation of imposing our will over others (the imposition of will is what creates the illusion of power). At the same time, it is always been that any organization or structure given to the activities of humans within a civilization have occurred by the imposition of the will or a “few” who attempt to coordinate their activities with great attention to detail to keep the rest of us in line with their agenda. These impositions and the will they represent became the rules that we structured to guide all of our actions; in order to simply keep up busy. This keeps civilization fed and full and allows for the few to do whatever they want and to use the rest of us to as tools to this end, so long as humans were active. Some of these rules were imposed in a sudden and blunt manner which required some dramatic methods to achieve (since humans don’t deal with change effectively). The incorporation of religion into the fabric of human civilization was such an imposition of will; once the concept of religion evolved to the point where it became an effective tool for control, it was imposed with the subtlety of a hurricane during an earthquake. Other rules/impositions were structured with more careful planning and contain an unusual component for a human mechanism; time. These rules are very proactive and well thought out; in particular, the manipulation of language. The results of these manipulations can not be felt for many years sometimes, which in some ways is almost contradictory to the modern pace of everything which is based on doing everything immediately. I can not pinpoint when or how or who came up with the strategy of manipulating language over time to allow for control of future generations, it may not be possible given the lack of information available to trace related events backwards in time, but it doesn’t matter; we can clearly see the manipulations if we simply look for them, no one made any attempts to disguise these subtle changes in the meaning of words and nuances in inflection and tone which changed the entire understanding of things over time, nobody needed to, we weren’t looking for them. One does not look for what one does not know is there. It took what we’re going through now to create the opportunity to ask the question and once we did, it all became immediately transparent. I hope we can all learn the lessons that can be learned by observing, with such clarity, what we have been capable of doing to ourselves, and in fact, what we have done.

One of the most impacting of these manipulations has been the inclusion and evolution of the words value and worth and the concepts that they represent.

The word and the concept of worth existed well before the word and the concept of value even though their extremely close and intimate linguistic relationship today would make it hard to believe. In fact, the two words, at the point where they became words after going through all of morphological linguistic processes that words go through in order to become words, were born from two conceptually different linguistic origins. Worth the word was born to the family of human judgment lexicons. It stems from the concept morpheme worthy and essentially means worthy of; good or important enough to merit being considered useful or important or an excellence commanding esteem, be it to the world, to a group of people in particular or even just to one person. This is the root meaning of the word “worth” at its point of origin. Some examples of its use are:

“Anagrad is a person who is fair in judgment and compassionate in action; he is worth knowing.”

“Your advice and counsel seem reasonable and useful, it is advice worth taking.”

“The place that lies beyond the trees that lie beyond field that lies beyond the place where we bury our dead that lies beyond the river that lies beyond our planted fields and orchards that lie beyond our homes is far away and a long walk, but its beauty is worth the trip.”

These are all examples of the language lexicon which expresses judgment calls. In all cases, whatever it is that has been determined of worth is of importance to one or more people, which is a fundamental variable in the calculations of value. It would be appropriate today to say that those things in the examples that were considered of worth was because they had value, since excellence of character, usefulness or importance; in fact the word “values” when used to define human behavior are those considered useful or important by a group of people, regardless of what it is that has worth or is valuable. It is important to note that everything related to both of these words existed purely in the realm of human judgment. Over time, the definition of worth began to include a more proprietary nature, indicative of that which left something or produced something important to one or more people, as in: “That ox was worth the 3 slaves and my youngest virgin daughter, it has plowed thrice the area that I could have plowed alone.” This shift in the emphasis of worth began a shift towards a relationship with wealth and money and over time, the dominating definitions of the words were related to their relationship with money. Even though the original definitions describing judgment-based criteria remained in the dictionary, the expansion of those definitions, (which were all related to money) dominated the concept. See the definition of worth here. Worth suddenly was defined as having a value of, or equal in value to, as in money: This vase is worth 12 dollars. In this way, the word worth “changed” from being a noun to a preposition, if fact, in today’s dictionary it is listed as both, with preposition in the key position. Even when referring to its original function as a noun, we can see that the descriptions of things commanding esteem or considered useful or important now included the simple definition: value, as in money. Wow, pretty straightforward, but completely different from its roots, in other words; contradictory.

The word value however, was born a noun. See the definition of value here. Here we can see that right off the bat, the #1 definition of value is “the relative worth, merit or importance; the value of a queen in chess. Here I would argue that this definition describes a preposition, it is still a judgment call, but it had to be put in there I guess to preserve the “integrity” of continuity, if nothing else. This was quickly cleared up in all the rest of the definitions, where value is defined as monetary or material worth, as in commercial trade and the worth of something in terms of the amount of other things for which it can be exchanged or in terms of some medium of exchange. Perhaps this last definition was a last ditch and desperate attempt to scream out “Hey! It’s not only money that has value; it can be other stuff too.” perhaps in the hopes of disguising the actual and total link between value and money. Maybe it was assumed that we don’t understand that the only medium of exchange in the world is money, or at least the only one worth exchanging. Do you see how they become intertwined in a knot of confusion, misdirection and deceit? Perhaps this slipped by a lot of people, after all it was designed to and we are not taught to question the dictionary, but after covering the other mandatory uses of the word “value” (like in mathematics, for example), we come to the 16th definition of the word, in which it becomes a verb, used with object and is defined as “to calculate or reckon the monetary value of; give a specified material or financial value to…” It doesn’t get much more direct that than that. Value is how we “reckon” the monetary value of….. Those things that have worth, obviously. We don’t walk into a store and say: “Excuse me, what’s the value of that painting?” We say “Excuse me, what is that painting worth?” In practice, if not in fact, they have becomes synonyms. The worth of a thing is defined by its monetary value. They essentially mean the same thing, so why keep both words? It’s simple, because worth still maintains an element of human judgment as part of its function, and that is what makes it possible for something to be worth more than what its value may be. Value is a specific measurement in terms of money; so is worth, but the latter kept a partial definition as a function of judgment, which may alter the value of a thing if the individual or group considers it important enough. This is what has allowed for a smooth-talking salesman to show someone a bottle of flax seed oil (for example), a consumable product with a value of roughly $1.00 per pint, then pick and choose the right words that will raise the importance of that oil to the potential buyer and suddenly, the same pint of oil is worth $20.00 to that person at that moment, as a result of a judgment call based on the explanation (story) they were hearing. This is why we kept the word worth in modern day language, it justifies the excuse that the value of a thing may be a fixed number in the Universe, but the monetary expression of that value is whatever a person considers it to be worth. This results in a direct and flagrant contradiction of definitions in the dictionary, and it’s also the excuse for the con, the play on words that allows for astuteness to be considered more important a quality than intelligence and capriciousness to win out over logic: because in the end, the worth of anything is a result of individual judgment. How extremely convenient a variable to use in altering the calculation of value used in economics and commerce; and how devastating.

Just ask yourself this and consider the significance to today’s world:

It used to be that the worth of a thing was determined by what it produced and held, since it has always been a law of human dynamics that the “worth” of a nation or even a person, was measured by what they produced and held (as in owned). That worth was then translated into its equivalent value in money and that resulted in its “net worth”; it was also what allowed for human beings became ‘for sale’ without technically being slaves. In short, the value of what someone or something was worth was measured by its ability to produce things of value and hold things of value, thus increasing their financial worth, which has become the only measure of value important to us.

Today, in 2011, a person, a company or even a country is only worth as much as its ability to pay the value of what it OWES, given that the aberration of the value of things caused by the use of individual judgment to allow for things to be worth more than their value resulted in an enormous fracture in the calculations of value. People began to exchange more money for something they desired than the value of that thing, as established by our own reckoning, this difference could not be financially reconciled because it was born of judgment and not accounting and therefore, over time, we were committing to exchange more than what we had (our net worth ) for virtually everything, allowing for the birth of CREDIT AND DEBT. Today, even those few people and entities that still produce things of value today do not have their worth enhanced by the value of the things they produce. If whatever a person or company or country produces isn’t immediately converted into the money representing its value – in the form of assets, which can be attached, taken or legally foreclosed upon, then they are considered “worthless”. Production of goods and services has become pointless, only the converted monetary value of a thing in the form of an asset is worth anything. A person can produce a million dollars worth of goods and services every day, but unless they convert that production into money and the money into assets, (which can be taken, or litigated or foreclosed upon) then that person is considered worthless by virtue of “insolvency”.

In conclusion, what began as considering anything that was seen as useful to have worth; today the only thing that is useful is money, which also happens to be the only thing we consider to have value. The only thing worth having is money, since that determines the value of what you can pay towards your DEBT, and everyone knows that a person isn’t worth anything until they owe money and thus establish credit, which creates value by allowing us to BUY money at an enormous markup, which in turns diminishes our worth and in the end, no matter what anyone does, we all end up owing everything that we may be worth to someone else.

There you have it: Value and worth; an incredibly detailed mind-fuck that, over time, made people worthless while maintaining money valuable. What an amazingly brilliant construct. We are capable of so much. If only we could figure out how to use that capacity collaboratively to make us ALL happy, instead of allowing for a few to feel the rush of imagined power at the expense of the rest of the suffering of the rest of humanity.

We can do better.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

MATH HUMOR?

If you have a really bad cavity in a molar, you would probably need a root canal. But if you also have another identical cavity in the same molar but on the other side,  that would require a square root canal, wouldn’t it?

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Judgement

The only person who can judge another for what may be considered a crime is the victim or the victim’s successor in the case of murder and it is the business of only those two: the offended and the offender, to determine the truth of the crime as well as its resolution, on neutral ground and in plain view of anyone wishing bear witness. The testimony and assistance of others may be accepted, but in the end only the person who has been injured by another has the right to judge that person. When the incentives of money and/or revenge are eliminated from the equation, they fail to motivate human judgment and all that is left is the victim and what their heart tells them. Everyone is born knowing the difference between right and wrong, anything else becomes an excuse to impose the will of a few.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,