#94: Q & A – Various Topics

Q: Concerning banks, what's your particular gripe with them?

A: Banks do two things which, were they allowed elsewhere, would be deemed criminal;

1) they lend what they do not have and employ their “credit” to do so (So Riegel was right, they don't lend money and furthermore since the loans are straight create and repay plus interest, the net result is less money – money lent this way takes money out of the system) and further

2) they take back that which was never created / issued the interest on their loans. It's the subtlest con in the world that has been going on and allowed to go on since forever, because some people don't have any money and the only thing the rest of society seems to think appropriate to do about it is that even the poor should go into debt borrowing money at interest to live on. Let all that sink in, if you please.

The former fraud we call fractional reserve lending and the latter fraud is usury. We cannot do anything about either of them, sorry. Railing about them, getting angry, getting politically worked up about them, studying them in minute detail so one knows the particulars of this or that financial crime, emotional or intellectual entanglements of any kind, none of that amounts to … anything productive or positive. It's THEIR system and THEIR money. That simple perception is what literally separates men from boys.

From now on, we draw a line in the sand between the “children” and the grown-ups. There aren't many grown-ups either. Read Quigley's Tragedy and Hope and perhaps get a few lessons in real history. Some of you might even have a “right of passage” kind of mental experience. There's too much THEY have invested at every level so that people remain children. The hasty children are the “gold bugs” who continue to say things like that there could ever be a free market in precious metals, or that if we just priced them high enough we could “back” our money with them and that would somehow stop inflation, etc. all without the slightest consideration whether in fact banks and governments should have the right to issue money in the first place. These people envision a world where pieces of metal actually circulate in trade and people carry them around in sacks. They would also carry loaded firearms around in such a society.

When it comes to designing the honest monetary system for a future civilization, these people are jackasses, and idiots! I do listen to them to follow their take on the present system however, because they are critical of it. It doesn't make them right about their solutions, because they are cursed by idealistic thinking which is a waste of time and they usually do not know the innermost workings of the present system and to what lengths THEY will go to keep it from failing. These “children” may be capable of providing news, and that is all. They have NOTHING TO OFFER as a replacement monetary system for the present one.

We do. The precious metals in our system would exist as a buffer between us and them, makes us buyers in THEIR rigged markets (and we don't care about any of that since those are THEIR markets). It may allow us to remove more precious metals from THEIR system as perhaps THEIR money is dumped in favour of ours. But clearly all that is a maybe, as there are probably a thousand children to one genuine grown-up these days.

Since we never consented to it, the present monetary system we all use is a tyranny. There is no sensible explanation otherwise. Anyone coming forth who professes that the present system is “scientific” or otherwise deserving of some unwarranted awe and respect are likewise … rather immature characters. Since the present means of exchange (including bitcoin which has just been identified as a CIA toy) is decidedly a tyranny, that means there's no reasonable concessions, no possible repairs, and certainly no compromises at all possible. THEIRS has to go its own way and OURS another.

It's one further reason we really do need our own parallel system and our own parallel money. It's only parallel until theirs fails, because, both of these time old banking practices are in defiance of natural law and make any organizations built upon them subject to failure due in often part to the exposure of the inevitable corruption required to keep it alive and a fatal loss of confidence among the public, plus the looting, plundering, and war that it all causes as a result. They and their system have failed before and they will certainly fail again. According to Jim Willie and others, the biggest banks are already dead.

We cannot do anything about THEM. So what do we propose for our system?

The proposed remedy to fractional reserve lending is to forbid it within our own institutions; our exchanges, our VEN, IVES, etc. We also separate the transaction clearing and money lending functions, so that the latter take on their own risk and should they fold, the entire system is not affected. The Valun remains the same and all ordinary transactions remain uninterrupted. In all cases, fulfillment of Credit Contracts within the VEN raises one's reputation. These would be credit scores available to all members throughout the VEN, enabling each of us to determine our credit worthiness, a very important factor when anything bigger than just buying your daily or monthly subsistence is concerned.

We address usury chiefly by outlawing it – since it is against natural law anyway - and substituting in its place the practice of paying the price to borrow the money up front. If you do that then obviously that price, whatever it is, has come from already existing money and if you can't come up with the rental fee up front, you don't get to borrow the money. Maybe we should call this the “down payment method,” since the concept is similar; one puts down “earnest money,” which is in fact the fee for borrowing some larger sum of money and that sum is tendered based on the lender's appraisal of the borrower's credit rating within the VEN. As we say, this is more than about money, this is about building real reputation in a community and who knows? perhaps extending that worldwide; establishing the renown of your own innate wealth throughout the VEN.

We'll say it again. What paying up front, the “down payment” or “earnest money” method does, is cause borrowers to obtain, from already existing money, the price of borrowing additional money, rather than being asked to pay back that which was never created. If people knew how much it costs to borrow, they would perhaps be less likely to borrow excessively and get themselves into serious debt. Our Credit Contract rating system, and there will also be one for Labour Contracts successfully completed, will give each of us an idea of our various reputations.

A few details; Labour Contract (LC) ratings would have no Valuns listed. We don't care how many Valuns someone issued. That's private. We care how many LCs were successfully completed. Perhaps a lender would like to know the current income in Valuns of the borrower. That's reasonable. The way one acquires credit worthiness is the same in our system as in theirs, except we make the information available as part of the business of each exchange, to members only of course.

Q: Since a healthy economy requires inputs of additional money as you say, where's this money, in sufficient quantities to borrow, to come from in your system?

A: Simply put, finance (buying something you can't afford, taking your “time preference” and paying for it, etc.) would be raised from each member's excess Valuns; savings and ONLY if any when they are pledged to receive a return from being lent by a financial business.

This relates to what we associated with electrical force or water pressure, the pools of liquidity, setting in motion the functional momentum of the monetary system.

Under the proposal, Valuns come from a few sources:

1) Each A member gets V200 to start. Believe it or not, someone in a discussion early on about the proposed Valun system called it the “Monopoly grant” to each member, a reference to the Monopoly board game: You pass go, collect V200.

2) Each A member may elect to begin running LCs and generate/issue more Valuns as they work their present jobs. Unfortunately the limiting factor is income taxes, which all must be paid in THEIR money. So you will need to be paid in THEIR money at least enough to pay THEIR taxes.

3) Each A member falling below the subsistence level adopted by each exchange would issue Valuns for subsistence.

4) A and B members may decide to trade in their dollars, euros, pounds, yen, yuan, rubles, etc. for Valuns. Each instance of this adds more Valuns to the supply. The precious metals are retained against taxes, etc. by each exchange. Valuns issued through this kind of exchange are non-redeemable, as you would be exchanging your “public” money, for the monetary base itself (Valuns issued by us) and there is no exchange out of it. This prevents ALL money laundering and other dishonest speculative practices, such as daunt all crypto-currency efforts (bitcoin, recently revealed to be a CIA toy), etc.

But of course those other misbegotten attempts at money, yeah that's right, every last one of the crypto-currencies out there, are based on things not people and they are commodities pricing all other commodities, like measuring with an elastic measuring stick that gives you different lengths for an inch each day, so they aren't by literal definition very good money at all, not reliable to measure value in any way, though they may be money in the sense of performing the usual split barter function of money; only that someone may be paid or be receiving income in them.

Q: You said that you would allow all Social Security recipients and those with other kinds of pensions to issue Valuns. Would you allow these same people to issue even more Valuns for their subsistence? I'm confused. 

A: If you receive Social Security (excluding Medicare, etc.) or receive distributions from a pension, or both, it would be the policy of each exchange to allow you to issue a comparable number of Valuns, usually determined on a monthly basis. If this amount exceeds the subsistence level set by the exchange, then no further Valuns would be issued.

We even suggested that these members would have the right to what would have been their allowed issuance of Valuns right back to inception. But in order to do that, they would have to provide the comparable dollar, euro, etc. amount that was allowed them on or around 11/2/2011 and they would have to agree to accepting that amount for all the months since, not an amount that might have gone up over the years due to cost of living adjustments. We realized we were giving the elderly, retired and disabled somewhat of an edge in this regard, but we would rather these “pools of liquidity” be in these people's accounts.

Q: Somewhere you mentioned museums as sources of income for an exchange. Please explain.

A: This was a speculative idea I had when we discussed the proposal years ago, but I never wrote it up because there were other matters I considered more important to understand about the proposal first.

A museum is after all a treasure storehouse that people visit to get to look at the treasures inside. In various countries they have collections of the treasures of their cultural heritage that are preserved usually in state museums, though occasionally one finds great private museums too. In discussion, we advocated a means to add more Valuns into a community through the appraisal and democratic judgement of various treasures to be housed and preserved in a museum. Each exchange could have one, or perhaps a few exchanges could sponsor one.

Objects would be submitted for inclusion that would be appraised as worth at least V1,000 (at 8/11/16 V1 = $2.64 or $2,640). These objects would then be judged by all members and perhaps the top 10 only would be selected. Those members whose objects were selected to go into the museum would be rewarded the proceeds in Valuns. Then when the museum gets some notoriety, members pay in Valuns (less, perhaps ½ Valun), non members in “public” currency (slightly more, perhaps $3) to visit. That money which is not Valuns gets turned into the exchange, sold for precious metals and the Valuns from that used to pay the staff of the museum. Treasures in the museum might be sold to members for the number of Valuns that placed them there; if the original owners were paid V10,000 for their artifact, if the same thing is sold it should fetch at least V10,000. The Valuns would go into the account of the museum to perhaps add more to the facilities or add some other treasures, or for whatever the museum proprietors might require. See, I'm assuming this is a private enterprise business.

Some museums may specialize in some particular kind of thing like classic cars / trucks, or a museum of geologic or mineral displays, or an old farm equipment museum, or a regular art museum, or something perhaps quite different. It would sort of be up to the community that sponsored it to determine what it would be.

Much better to have such places adjacent to or associated with larger “members only” or “members preferred places,” perhaps resorts, where recreational facilities are close by. For most of this, members get very reduced fees compared with non members. These museums and possible associated resort parks, etc. would probably be B members of each exchange; independent private enterprise businesses.

[8/30/16: I see that I didn't fully state something important about this proposal. I merely hinted at it where I said, “Treasures in the museum might be sold to members for the number of Valuns that placed them there; if the original owners were paid V10,000 for their artifact, if the same thing is sold it should fetch at least V10,000.” Certainly everything in such a place would be assumed to appreciate in value which is contrary to most things. Anything that appreciates in value relative to everything else does so based on perceptions of quality and rarity which we might as well agree are both only possible under terms of civilization; the natural recognition of SANITY and the desire to live one's life with the REASONABLE EXPECTATION of continuing peace. Museums and the concepts behind them are not the usual products of barbarisms, no mater how technocratic they may be.] 

Q: Just how do you ever see Valuns breaking into being used to pay rent?

A: This was the question the young man in Tacoma asked professor Tom Greco. It may come slowly. The older and more secure the properties would probably begin using Valuns first, and once and if the Valun economy gets traction behind it, perhaps some split payment in some “public” money and some Valuns is possible, rather than the entire rent in “public” money. The landlord might like to see your LC ratings or CC ratings (Credit Contracts) to determine whether you're good for it, etc. A lease is even possible in some instances of course.

Q: Could you see Valuns perhaps used in occasional employment around a neighbourhood as long as some of their money is paid too?

A: Perhaps. The minimum wage jobs would see the greatest benefit as they could raise their relative income without changing the amount of “public” money they were receiving. You can see though that it amounts to much more than just having and sharing your money. Your money has to be spent for things you really need. People have to get back to finding needs and filling them as the Valun system makes that once again a realistic possibility for more people because OUR money creates OUR markets. It could do all of that, but It takes organization, because basing money on people requires people to know about it and enroll and begin using it.

Q: Could you provide the relationship between a Constitutional dollar and a Valun?

A: Yes, that's possible.

The stated 1792 Constitutional dollar ($1 Const.) consisted of 731 ¼ grains or .7734375 troy ounces of silver. So we're talking a coin about ¾ of an ounce, slightly larger

We have for 8/16/16 V1 = $2.64 and silver at $19.85 the troy ounce spot and up to $24.81 bid or V9.43 (9 valuns 43 cends) per oz of silver. Now take the Constitutional dollar size and one gets V7.29.

Therefore 1 Constitutional dollar = V7.29 on 8/16/16 – or $19.25 which gives you almost 20 to 1 between an FRN and a Constitutional dollar. On this date, V7.29 = $1 Const.

Q: I would have you consider that by your suggested terms, no one would be trading any money for Valuns as they could never get any of it back out. You would nevertheless adhere to the exchange rate even if little or no exchange ever takes place? And also have you ever considered the effect of some individual member with a lot of money exchanging it for Valuns and basically owning the entire community through this alternative money?

To answer the first question, of course we would. To answer the second, we may indeed desire to limit such exchanges for just such reasons. It had indeed occurred to me that this could be a real problem. It isn't that we are fans of the usual three apocalyptic little frogs; liberty, equality and fraternity; it's just that we have adequate experience to know that those with a whole lot more money than all the rest of us put together might cause us some amount of trouble. We recently heard, not that we're surprised, that the CIA is heavily involved with bitcoin. Need we have to say any more about this affront to an honest solution involving real money that comes from us and not from some elites? We certainly do not want our system to be invaded by these types, though we assume some will anyway, as they seek survival as much as any of us.

There is something about our members occasionally wanting to exchange some of their “public” money for ours, and quite another for a single member to want to exchange several hundred thousand dollars, euros, pounds, yen, etc. for Valuns. We think as a matter of fact that there may be tax implications these days for moving more than $10,000 through their system. You do that and you alert the IRS. I'm sure there are similar arrangements in other countries. So there will definitely have to be exchange limits.

Because of this, one implication of accepting this proposal is that all “public” money is automatically determined to be used to pay for “public” bills, including all debts in THEIR money, public or private. For all the rest, including a growing share of your living expenses, you'd spend your Valens. They would mostly circulate in your own local community and spur small business in ways that would be otherwise impossible.

But there is one way someone could invest in Valuns and end up with dollars, euros, etc. It's basic, want to know what it is? First a member makes an exchange of dollars, euros, pounds, yesn, etc. for Valuns. We'd say that the member could not be a B member (a business) because we'd have no way of knowing (and we really can't know anyway) the origin of that “public” money. So for now we limit money exchange to A members only. The “public” money is immediately exchanged for precious metals by the exchange and the Valuns are presented to the member as either a deposit to his/her account or as V-Checks. Now that member pays for something (materials) in Valuns, the labour in Valuns is self financing but participates in determining the finished product price in Valuns – but then that product is sold instead for dollars, euros, pounds, yen, etc. and then obviously through the production process, the “investor” might get their “public” money back.

Those of you who have been following the discussion will instantly see the incredibly stupid nature of this line of reasoning; that we habitually believe that any money we have on us or in accounts with our names on them is really ours. Someone could actually do as described. What do we do if we don't like it? We let it happen, because eventually THEIR money will be no more and then everyone will be using OUR money. That's the intention.

After all, E. C. Riegel certainly deserves credit for first enunciating the clear proposal to eventually renounce the use of all “public” money as inherently illegitimate by the nature of its issuance (and we include here all silver and gold and platinum and palladium, etc. ), as we identify it as issued from STOLEN FIAT by the bankers, if blame be necessary (though as we see it, absolutely pointless), and perhaps (not certain this case can always be made) through the unwitting connivance of certain kinds of people who fancy themselves “change agents,” or otherwise gifted to be leaders of society to push and prod us, usually “the masses” to them, into doing some fairly ridiculous things, like making weapons and going to war, when we aren't otherwise being subjected to a full spectrum dominance free range slavery; yes, politicians and the rest of the government and those interests immediately behind them. Who benefits? Who controls the money? That's right.

I'd like you to ponder one thing before we leave: the actual mode of banking has always been to lend money into existence from their own credit. The money they lend out is repaid by the money paid back (and canceled, so it cannot add to inflation directly) - PLUS INTEREST, which was never created and ends up in the pockets of the bankers. This frankly proves beyond any reasonable argument the parasitic nature of the present monetary order. Your money? No, THEIR money, stupid! Really, it's time to be getting our own.

David Burton
dpbmss@mail.com

Current Hypothetical Value of a Hypothetical Value Unit

[8/22/16:Q: Perhaps I'm getting that the price stability that matters would be in Valuns. What then would the price of gold be in Valuns? Silver too?

A: Yes, price stability only matters in Valuns, that's correct. We expect that prices in all THEIR money will rise as that's what their monetary system is designed to allow to happen; ALL THEIR money tends to inflate. Gold and silver inflate as well as judged in any of THEIR other money. At inception V1,000 = 1 oz Au BU and so even if $2,160 = 1 oz Au is ever exceeded, a new inception is started above the old transaction, never below it. The price for 1 troy oz of gold in Valuns should remain around V1,000.  Should gold reach $3,000 spot close, we allow up to 25% for bid making it $3,750 and at that new inception V1 = $3.75 instantaneously; all Valuns in existence assume the new valuation. Then as the price of gold falls, if it ever does again in dollars, the value of Valuns increases. And if dollars are ever incapable of pricing gold or silver they become instantly provincial and parochial money and lose instantly their worldwide reserve currency status. Then the properly constituted IVES seeks another of their strongest currencies which is capable of pricing gold and silver for us and we set a new inception by this stronger money, whatever it is. It could be Chinese Yuan.  In any case, the price for a troy oz. of gold should remain at or close to V1,000.  Silver being based on the gold price is going to fluctuate more in price, because that's how bimetalic systems must work.  Silver began at V19.55 and might stay close to there, though I would expect a little more price relativity in Valuns for silver than for gold. 

Q: I had a question concerning residence and VEN membership. If I lived somewhere but traveled a lot on business, would I be able to be a member of lots of different exchanges, anywhere I went?

A: Good question. You would be an A member of one exchange, where you would have your A membership account. Any other exchange you would do business with as a B member; if you wanted to set up an account to hold Valuns for you locally while you were there, which could be convenient for you. Assuming there are exchanges in any of the places you would normally go, you could establish B membership accounts in as many as you wanted. You would only be able to issue Valuns from one account, your A membership account and all your B membership accounts would be required to maintain a positive balance.

Q: If I took some V-Checks from one exchange and wanted to spend them in the vicinity of another exchange would they be accepted? What about local redemption/deposits?

A: Every V-Check would have an ID# and there could be simple aps designed to detect and verify these numbers. As Riegel said, it's all one ledger, not thousands of them. If you're in Minneapolis (and an A member there) and visit Acapulco and there is an exchange there, you go in and present your ID to the clerk identifying you as a member. They can open a B member account for you in Acapulco, temporary or permanent, arrange all typical money transfers, etc. They can exchange your Minneapolis V-Checks for Acapulco ones too. If they're expired, you'll probably have to run them through a B member account, which could take a few days. There is only one ledger, though it is scattered and decentralized.]

[8/23/16: Q: You say that your Valun is based on people but it's based on a transaction involving dollars and gold. Please explain.

A: THEIR money is all based on the quantity of THEIR money; the things themselves, while ours is based on how much of OUR money each A member gets to issue literally on the credit of the community; how many so called “free” units of exchange, money, would be allowed in this proposed Riegel based system, how many each exchange would allow an A member (a human being, an everyman only) to claim for indigence, etc.

All circulating Valuns will identify themselves from whence they are issued on the obverse sides of circulating V-Checks with things like The People of Someplace or perhaps some other identifying acronym chosen by the local members to distinguish themselves as an independent exchange, an IE, a private business whose members will all be its owners, as they will be issuing and backing their own money. 

You nearly got the basis of the Valun correct. You omitted the TIME of the transaction and details, which are important. We stated the transaction as 1 oz. Au = V1,000 where 1 oz. Au = $2,160 on 11/2/2011. This gives our initial fair market value for the Valun of $2.16. Now what's the current value of that Valun?

We've given it to you in US dollars, you'd have to determine what it is in your own currency and have that recognized by the properly constituted International Valun Exchange Society (IVES).

We offered that €1.57 (EUR) = V1 at inception
that ₤1.36 (GBP) = V1 at inception
that ¥170 (JPY) = V1 at inception

Now what about today's gold and silver prices? We arrived at the initial prices the same way. You want to find out what the nearest close on the price of gold in your “public” currency is and then add 25% to that as a possible bid to actually acquire the gold or silver. All our calculations take this into account. We want to be acquiring gold and silver if we take in any of THEIR money. If we end up acquiring more simply because we are willing to pay more, then so be it!

We take that bid price and divide it by 1,000 and that becomes the current thousandth part of an oz of gold (our how much current gold is in our Valun; the CGP or current gold portion). We then compare that with the inception. Subtract this latest number from the initial amount. In most cases you'll have a negative number. If it's a positive number, then the latest gold close has exceeded inception and a new inception may result. Now you take the negative of the initial Valun (always -2.16 unless a new inception happens) and add the negative difference to it (you will have a larger negative number) and multiply the sum by -1 to reverse the sign and you have today's Valun.

Today's Au spot close = $1340.40
Inception Au spot close = $1,728.00

Today's Au bid = $1,675.50 (8/19/16)
Inception Au bid $2,160.00 (11/2/11)

Today's 1/1000^th of an oz of gold = $1.68 (This the current gold portion or the gold content of a Valun – the rest is purchasing power represented by the extra gold or silver required to achieve inception of $2.16.)

Inception = $2.16 (until a new inception which would always be higher not lower.)

$1.68 - $2.16 = -$.48

The difference = -.48
Add the negative initial Valun -2.16 (a constant until new inception, if ever)

-.48 – 2.16 = -2.64 (x -1) = $2.64 The present Valun in their money.

Today's Ag (Silver) price is $19.30

Today's Ag bid = $24.13

Simply divide this by the present Valun
24.13 / 2.64 = 9.14

The present value of 1 oz. Ag = V9.14

Multiply that by .7734375 to get your $1 Const. In Valuns on 8/19/16 of V7.07

Q: Could you give us your opinion of the work of Eustace Mullins?

A: Well, Mullins was the secretary to Ezra Pound, who was in fact one of the most important literary figures of the 20^th century. Pound was responsible for the literary making of both Ernest Hemingway and James Joyce and others. Pound tasked Mullins with researching the Federal Reserve system. His torch has been picked up by others such as G. Edward Griffin and Bill Still. 

Despite his deep research, Mullins had an imperfect understanding of money and certainly would not have quite understood where all of the arguments must ultimately lead; if a monetary system is really nothing but a huge accounting machine with one ledger where the tokens are mere instances of this exchange system, and since money is destroyed hence it must be issued, ELSE ECONOMIES DIE, then tell me, who has the real first right to issue money? That's right; you and I do. It's called OUR fiat; we issue money on the proviso that we would work or trade to acquire back what we have issued: that is called “backing.” Doing that, one cancels one's issue and hence one's issue cannot contribute meaningfully to inflation. Mullins wouldn't have understood much of that. He was probably a committed “gold bug.” We would contend as he did that making wars to create debt does a lot more to actually squeeze more money out of the river of money that flows at interest from the banks, than letting the poor have their right to issue by their own fiat for their subsistence. But you asked me about Mullins.

As far as I know, Eustace Mullins was as honest a researcher as we have had and that goes for those who picked up his torch too. These men all seemingly believe that what they report is the truth. Their revelations and evidence have been conclusively substantiated by the work of many others. Richard Grove, Stefan Molyneux and Texe Marrs, to name just three, would know all of this evidence and even more by now. People are waking up to the central bankers' tremendous bloody scam. What the people at large (everyman) have yet to convince themselves of, is that there is not a thing wrong with money issue by fiat and that in fact others have, with or without intent, stolen that right from everyman. We have shown that the fiat we consider in our proposal would in fact result in far less excess money issued than is generated now by the present system.

A big difference between THEIR system and our proposed one, perhaps the actual biggest difference, is that each A member is an actual owner of the entire system. The money it affords you the right to issue really would belong to you. This is authentic democracy because no matter how rich the richest A member might become, they are still a single human being. Every A member has one vote at elections of all exchange officers, etc.] 

[8/24/16: Q: Did you happen to catch James Corbett's interview with a man in Japan running a bitcoin group?

A: (Gosh darn-it! I did not want to have to say another word about bitcoin.)

The most important things these gentlemen said (and both are assuredly gentlemen) were that bitcoin was still in the development stage and was viewed as a way forward. We have made our points quite clear and consistent (and we would easily breach the confidence of some by changing course in any way whatsoever from what we have always advocated):

1) bitcoin, and believe me, most if not all crypto currencies, are commodities pricing other commodities and since that is so, there are no advantage over any other money. In fact what on earth is any money good for, if prices fall while the money becomes or remains scarce? Any quantity of anything capable of being counted (that's what it means) is capable of attracting speculators, who will gladly wager, play guessing games on the future prices of this or that; making money on their money without having to produce or provide anything in return; capitalism. Commodities speculation is capitalism and those doing it are capitalists. If you aren't rich enough, forget it, you can't be one, by definition.

2) Stretching the possible definitions of capitalism, an ism with capital, is for the most part strong delusion and is done chiefly to sucker as many narcissistic “investors” as possible, fleece for the wolves. Promising talent is talked into playing along with “the system” all the time, when the system is all about central planning, “big useless plans,” and “build it and they will come,” idealism, without any slight concern about what money is and what it must accomplish and why exactly it doesn't. And bitcoin wont matter.

3) Speculators (who bet on the rises and falls in bitcoin by employing the typical buy and hold strategies) sometimes speculate having little or no real information, but are merely using their often tremendous capital (cash in whatever money) to “make a market” where one is weak or may not even previously exist. There are quite a lot of people out there promoting bitcoin; trying to drum up business for it, etc.

4) The principal objection to money as a quantity measuring the trading value of any other commodity is that this makes the price determination mechanism flexible, like having a different increment for an inch every day, utterly useless in making real long term financial decisions. If one switched to something bankers have a lot of, like gold or silver, well the bankers will be happy to oblige. They'll merely be returning to their older version of their dialectic; either THEIR credit or THEIR gold. They'll of course run their fractional reserve and usury scams (all “Austrian” economists certainly agree with and approve of these) and applying these only to partial stores of value in precious metals (not even their own money) and the other end of the bankers' dialectic will be in play and they can do as they please. How will that solve anything? It wont of course.

How could you have gotten so easily fooled? You took THEIR word for it, and you had no right to do that. Don't ask an “Austrian.” They all believe in usury as a natural right, when it is in mathematical certainty, stealing. If you don't happen to see it our way, check yourself into the criminal social parasite category, as that's where you belong. How can you ever get an “honest” monetary system from a bunch of dishonest economists? 

And so help me, when is anyone else going to see the obvious? Showing us a worthless Zimbabwean trillion dollar note proves nothing about fiat currencies, absolutely nothing, since ALL OF THEM, EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE YOU CAN NAME, WAS ISSUED BY A BANK OR A GOVERNMENT AND NOT BY THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES! All fiat to issue money has been stolen from us.

Our proposal is based on a unit of purchasing power defined by TIME not some quantity. So far, the experiment, established on principles specified by E. C. Riegel and Arthur Kitson before him, has proven correct; the proposed international standard Value Unit (Valun) has since its inception held its own against ALL of THEIR money including precious metals because it was designed to accomplish this. 

Since a Valun is not a quantity, any unit of it is always going to be the same worldwide. It is based on a transaction involving gold not on gold itself. It is not “backed” by gold at issue, it is “backed” by the people (everyman) that issue it. It is based on people not things! It proposes a solution to the money problem, including the certainty that all money eventually dies in depreciation, therefore money must be issued or all economies die! The reason all THEIR systems eventually fail is that they purposely play games with the supply of money, causing economic booms and busts, bubbles and wars. The Valun is issued by its membership, all private, never issued by any business, government or bank. As you work, you earn Valuns which you previously loaned to your employer without interest so that he pays you back in money you actually issued.

If at inception V1,000 would secure you a troy oz. of gold, then perhaps today, with gold being 24% below its price at inception, you might get an oz. gold coin for fewer Valuns. Who determines that? Supply and demand. Who makes the market? Anyone with something to sell.

What are the natural limitations?

FORCE: how much money is available to buy gold at prices below V1,000? At V900? At V800? … when the fair trade exchange is at V762.64 (Seven-hundred sixty-two Valuns, sixty-four cends, fen, etc.)? An oz. of gold bullion will likely not trade below V763 and likely would not fall much below V1,000. 

RESISTANCE: the prices above which little moves. V1,000 is probably the top end of the prices for 1oz gold bullion coins within the VEN. VEN here means Valun exchange network, our market in Valuns. 

CURRENT: is the universal flow made possible by a currency representing a method of settling barter transactions (which is all money ever is, so yes all money must be inherently worthless else it is a commodity and not money) by adoption of the same first transaction as its basis: currently 1 oz Au BU = V1,000 = $2,160 on 11/2/11, an easy day to remember. 

There would be a different inception amount for each currency capable of pricing gold (and silver). All exchanges from their money into ours will be handled ultimately in gold and silver only and all of these transactions will be one way, non refundable. That kills the prospects of speculators and all money launderers. This does NOT make the proposed Valun a “gold backed” money. The subject of “backing” for all money is woefully misunderstood. Tell me what “backing” does any bank have for its notes if the money it lends exceeds the amount of other people's deposits (reserves) it claims it can come up with to clear its paper? That's all any “gold backed” solution really gets you, PLUS the determination of what any gold and silver can actually buy is made by other people, not you or me. 

Gold backed money? What a stupid solution! Sorry! You can't come up with anything better than that? You all really need to give this blog's proposal your serious attention. It's cheaper, private, better, more honest, more likely to succeed, doesn't demand anything from any government or bank, cuts out certain kinds of dishonest business practices, gives everyone a fresh start, provides a basis for growing community economies and reorganizing skill sets, levels and pay scales, provides a real economic lifeboat system independent of any state, corporation or bank. 

SORRY, not, but we are fast losing the ability to trust, worship or want to serve or work for any state, corporation or bank. We regard with healthy suspicion any economist that still wants to support, repair, reform or otherwise disguise the brazen criminal structure of the present order, including who owns gold and silver mines, controls markets for precious metals, determines who gets preferential treatment when it comes to making sizable bids for it on their markets, who actually gets delivery, etc. 

Now we do advocate everyone having some gold and silver coins, but who recommended that you buy your first gold and silver? I bet it was someone forty or fifty years back talking about the imminent crash of the system, right? Hoping everyone sees the obvious dialectic; either THEIR credit or THEIR gold. NONE of it has EVER belonged to you or me. It doesn't even belong to the governments whose name is on most of it, just as the money in your bank accounts doesn't really belong to you; it's just “assigned” to you, that's all.

No, in order for you to have your own money, you have to issue your own money. The only possible way of accomplishing this is through joining together with everyone else who wants to accomplish the same thing. This would be taking our fiat back. Where did the governments and banks get their fiat? They took it from us. What right do they have to it? They don't. Understood? Let's hope the gentlemen in Japan read and understand this as well.]