Conversations
lately have involved just what we're trying to accomplish here. So
we use a few posed questions and our responses:
What's
the first message or lesson you have for everybody?
Take
a look at the money you use. None of it is yours. It belongs to
someone else, to a bank, not you. You get to use it, that's all.
From the standpoint of the people who actually own the money, you are
obviously looked down upon as slaves or serfs. After all, if it can
be demonstrated as accomplished that most are too poor ever to imagine ever traveling
far from where they began, then they are indeed serfs; tied to where
they are. That may or may not be a bad thing. It depends on many
things including money. Being in Venezuela right now would not be so
lucky.
That
all things civilized relate directly to money is the study of history
and the same in reverse. We gave our minimum reading list back here. After
all, there are some reading requirements. This blog's subject is
about as serious as it gets. We fully expect the best and brightest
to appreciate this and that the day to day operations of a local
exchange organization might appeal strongly to their sense of
responsibility. After all, we will need those taking vanguard
positions to fully understand from their own personal experience what
taking responsibility means.
We
would prefer to stick to the present political boundaries as service
areas, so each exchange would minimally serve each county. Each
exchange would be run by a minimum of three and at most thirteen
board members and the positions of president, vice president and
secretary the same as in any “public” corporation, would rotate
among twelve of them, probably having terms of a year, and the
thirteenth would in all cases be an attorney representing the
exchange. Sorry if you don't think so, but lawyers are essential;
like having a hired gun.
No
exchange will ever be set up as a stock company. Instead they will
seek membership by dues payable in the local money, with dues being
V1 (one Valun) per year. Right now, that would be $2.82 (3/14/17)
which for most people is nothing.
All
individual members are A members. A membership rules would be anyone
18 years or older recommended by two other A members and lawfully
having the right to live there and having been living there for at
least a year. BTW, homeless people, who we have to consider, who
have lived in an area for a year, would have to count for them. What
would we be looking for? Willingness to work. What do we call work?
Time out of the rest of your life for which you earn barter in terms
of money; any time you are paid to do something. It's the only way
up and out of any situation.
Since
money's chief function is to split barter, in order to gain basic
self respect for some people will require that they succeed within a
smaller known group of traders. They have to have some skilled or
semi-skilled labor to offer the rest of their community. The walls
between neighbors have to come down. We don't know each other
anymore. This association, through the local exchange will encourage
more people to get out and get to know and work with each other. It
offers everyone who participates the benefit of a truly honest
monetary system based on something that does not change; a
transaction in time between the two strongest of THEIR brands of
money; US dollars and gold. It will never fall below $2.16 in fair
trade value. Who says? We say! If gold manages to shoot the moon,
perhaps the dollar is finished and some other public money capable of
purchasing gold replaces it. If trading in gold folds, then we
revert to setting the price of gold at V1,000 = 1 AU oz as at
inception on 11/2/11. Our money wins any fight among THEIR money.
If we did not think so and could not prove it by simple math, then why
would we bother? Our money will be worth spending and saving and
will outlast all their burst bubble economics and actually tend to
mitigate against its effects long term. An alternative money supply
you say? Yes, and something that is actually yours, not THEIRS. It
will make all the difference, long term.
What's
this blog's opinion concerning states?
Our
position is exactly the same as E. C. Riegel's, plus informed by some
further experiences since his time; it is essentially that the
state is the economic and monetary prisoner of the central bank
or banks and those who privately own them (and no, you or I nor the
government can buy any of their shares, they are private
institutions). Our criticism includes the following as basic
assumptions
1) The central bank owns all the money. None of
it is ours. The current process is that all issues of all the
“public” money (which is really all THEIRS) are made in exchange
for government debt instruments (bonds). Doing so by means of STOLEN
FIAT from each of us, THEY (globalists, bankers, elites, PEDOPHILES,
SATANISTS – you are what you are by association too) have no lawful
or any other rational basis for having been granted this monopoly
over “public” money, except that THEY (the thieves of other
people's will through STOLEN FIAT) have had it for such a long
time.
2) ALL the “public” money issued is illegitimate as
money (there is something mathematically wrong with how it is issued)
because real people did not issue it themselves in the process of
carrying out trade. This leads to a few things; economic bubbles,
opportunities for speculation by capitalists (people who are rich who
make money on their money without work), relentless inflation,
impossible ever to correct, relentless taxation and ultimately
confiscation (wealth destruction), huge unpayable mountains of debt
that are the cancer on economic (co-money) systems, leading to their
death, usually in a crash or a Weimar meltdown (going on right now in
Venezuela and heading for a nation near you).
INDIVIDUAL
people are the only ones accorded by Riegel and us as having the
NATURAL right to issue legitimate money. What makes it legitimate? If one issues one's money, one is expected to accept it back in
return in trade. Literally, this is what “backs” any money;
you issue it, you take it back. If you issue money but refuse to
accept it back, you're money and your word are no good. Understood?
Your money issue is a natural extension of your will. In fact, this
is one of the rock solid bases upon which our proposed system rests.
3) It is IMPOSSIBLE to tell which particular fractions or
instances of “public” money is “sound” or “backed” from
any that isn't; all dollars look alike. Is my particular dollar
backed or not? As we've said before, nobody actually earning and
spending dollars or any other “public” money ever knows or even
cares.
“Backed” stolen fiat money has been taxed back
into the government's own treasury and re-spent. “Unbacked”
stolen fiat money (which is by far the most of it - just consider the
sovereign debt of various states these days) proliferates and
continues to do so as the government spends more without taxing it
back.
Riegel described this as the watering down of
purchasing power of each unit of money being diminished by the
government spending of more of these spurious dollars, a dilution of
their purchasing power that only benefits the government; they get
the right to buy something first before anyone else. Does THAT fact
make any sense? Why does any government deserve the right to
spend money before you or I do?
Why
is this important? Because what “backs” any money is what Riegel
said backed it; whatever it is that is purchased by money backs
the money that bought it; the transaction would have been barter,
but it is accomplished by means of money; performing its principal
reason for existence, to split-barter and relieve humanity from whole
barter.
What backed the government's spending of a few billion
on a jet plane? The jet plane. Did the government get a good deal
on the plane or not? That's another question, but in the meanwhile,
the money spent for it was actually “backed” by the plane
itself.
4) KEY POINT – If you demand that the state issue
all your money, then in order that prices not inflate, the state must
tax all of it back within a fairly short span of time, within a year
would be best. Why? Because the government is not wanted to
participate in the economy in competition with us, as that would
destroy our wealth. This is a point completely ignored by Bill
Still and others.
Let's review a few things: Wealth to
us is not wealth unless it provides a regular income. To the
extent that any machine, procedure, activity, whatever, no longer
produces an income, it becomes mere depreciating stuff. What's
important about depreciation? It's where ALL money goes to die!
Impositions of taxes and other deterrents to earning income result
in the destruction of wealth. Has anyone else ever told you
that? Not likely. Why? Because most economists only preach the
benefits of THEIR system and their first mistake has been in
believing the soundness of the institutions they promote; all of
which are polluted by the curse of usury, the mathematical
impossibility of paying back that which was never created, always
creating a scarcity of money and growing tumors of ultimately
unpayable debt everywhere.
So
looking around you, you see state after state in the process of
destroying wealth. The commonwealth was the wealth that would
provide income (a living) to the community that lived there. The
state relied on that for its own benefit. But not anymore. Now, all
states are pawns of banks. It's THEIR money, stupid! Have lots of
it stashed away in mattresses? Tough, it's still THEIRS and THEY
could take it away from you easy as that. Gold? Silver? THEY can
claim that if necessary too.
So whatever one's politics,
it is not the right or purpose of lawful states to destroy wealth.
It is the common history of despotisms of various kinds which does
however destroy wealth. We are sorry, Bill Still and others, it is
NOT the role of government to be issuing any money, nor granting any
monopoly to some private group of individuals to do so. This was
Napoleon's solution and Mugabe's solution, it can't but lead to
inflation for all the reasons described above. It is tactically and
mechanistically an INCORRECT assumption for a monetary system to
allow any states to issue money, period. To us, it is all
illegitimate and unstable for use as money and long term (perhaps
even short term) it will fail.
What
then is the role of a state?
To preserve law and order.
To proclaim law and keep order: law which is FORCE and order
required for doing anything constructive and to prevent destructive
activities. To seek to promote and protect the lives, freedoms and
property of its citizens. These are the proper roles for states.
In the United States it has been customarily believed that
the first ten amendments to the Constitution, OUR Bill of Rights,
without which the thing would never have passed, have been or are
being preserved, when current events reveal to the conscientious
observer how far the present government of the United States has
deviated from the original agreement, supposedly between the
government and the people. But it wasn't that; it was a “commercial”
agreement from the start between our ostensible government and THEM,
from whom money would be borrowed and only gold and silver would be
considered in settlement of debt because again, those precious metals
are THEIR money, stupid!
We contend that allowing any state
to issue money is fundamentally incorrect; it was never granted in
the original document and is certainly not part of the Bill of Rights
which is OURS, not THEIRS. The Constitution of the United States is
not in form or fact anything like the original and the farther up and
into the present beast system one goes, one encounters attitudes
which reveal how THEY view us and THEY care nothing for the
Constitution. They believe Constitutionalists are deluded fools.
Whose deluding them? THEY are! So what's the problem? The money,
stupid! You may have gone to some of America's finest schools and
met some charming and stunning people with dizzying intellects, but
all along you never gave a thought to the money you used every day
and how you were affected by it.
The Constitution was an
agreement to set up a government that would be able to borrow money
from THEM. The articles of the thing describe said government (and
THEY constantly try and find ways to exploit anything in there
against us at every turn to this very day). Tacked onto the original
Constitution were ten amendments; the Bill of Rights. These are OUR
side of the agreement; we want the government to abide by these
rules, and if they don't, the agreement has been abrogated, broken,
dissolved!
Constitutionalists
have been deluded into thinking we should return to a strict
interpretation of something, when the very government deciding
things, breaks the Bill of Rights any chance it gets and THEY
uniformly consider themselves above the law! Can we really expect,
or should we wait around for anything of any conceivable relief from
this system, these people, these institutions? Why bother? Hence
you have the general public's disgust for politics, politicians,
parties and even and above and behind everything, from THEIR secret
societies, THEIR intelligence organizations, etc. Most people in
fact would really like to bug out.
To keep law and order, a
state requires money. It should not borrow from any but us, which
means that all debt instruments a state ever uses to borrow money
must be sold to and traded among its lawful citizens ONLY because we
are paying the state to do its job for us. Hence all current trading
in sovereign debt as a means to settle matters of international trade
or to stabilize a currency for the benefit of some obscure
speculators making money on money without work, is inherently
destructive of national sovereignty and is in the worst possible
interests of all states and of all peoples. Who does it benefit?
Again, it benefits those who own the money; THEM.
We are
unlikely to see any state forced to rely on its citizens to support
it until our money becomes the only money that survives. Since
THEIRS has a fatal flaw built in (many actually), it is only a matter
of time before things get … unsustainable for THEM as THEIR money
fails.
Your
blog seems to contain a lot of philosophy, or something political.
Can you say what it is you are trying to start and how it might be
only a reversion to hippie communism, etc.? Do you advocate starting
a cult? Is your solution a secret society? How does it interface
with existing communities?
I
looked at this the way I have tended through experience and training
(systems analysis) to see things; as essentially human run machines.
Human institutions are nothing but machines and their procedures are
nothing but mechanical and can be understood from that direct
perspective.
Since we are dealing with machines, and in fact
deciding to set up our own, there is no philosophy or religion about
it except as I have said, a pretty universal recognition of what
SANITY is and what it isn't and most live in the REASONABLE
EXPECTATION of continuing peace. We know who we are, what we are,
what we do, what we like and what we don't like, what we need and
don't need, what we expect, etc. and it may change from place to
place, but basic civility is pretty easy to see and usually does not
require a state to enforce some external law. In most cases, people
are able to decide most issues among themselves locally. Of course
there are exceptions and for those reasons communities have resorted
to states.
So,
any human institution is a machine. The government is a machine.
Schools are machines. Farms are machines. The military branches are
machines. The banking system is a machine. Money is the current
flowing through these machines. Debt is an energy drain to all such
machines. The completely self serving idea of a limited quantity of
anything serving as money (bitcoin, gold, silver) is something that
goes back into the distant past and has enabled THEM to remain in
power. THEY and THEIR economics will claim that it limits inflation.
Riegel's common sense analysis of that issue reveals this claim to
be a flat out LIE! Inflation always results from unbaked government
issued money outnumbering (literally) any backed government issued
money (money taxed back into the treasury that is re-spent back into
the economy). There isn't any other fundamental reason except supply
and demand and the costs of transport to various distant places.
And
to answer another possible misconception; advocating the creation of
any other alternate utopian society, is not inferred or even
necessary. In fact, what we have now is the direct result of
decisions that each of us made under the circumstances and has to be
regarded as the natural standpoint from which we decide to move,
change, develop, etc. We don't need more FAKE societies. If people
want to form those among themselves, that's their own choice. All we
advocate is that the people, whoever they may be, must have recourse
to their own monetary machine. This machine would comprise an
alternative to THEIR monetary system, it would be owned by everyone
that used it, not as THEIR system is really owned by THEM not us or
even by our governments. It would be regarded as a social overlay
rather than an alternative society. It would co-exist along with the
present system until the present order fails. So in a way,
participation in a Valun system would be seen as a form of monetary
insurance.
The
kind of organization it would most resemble would be a private club,
or more exactly a network of private clubs. Each functional locus of
this network would provide the accounting required to maintain our
money, each of our individual accounts. For the time being, the
functional currency we would use would be the V-Check, the standard
the money is based upon the proposed International Standard Value
Unit or Valun.
As proposed, a Valun is a unit of purchasing
power that does not change. The current value of all Valuns is the
present value of that unit of purchasing power. There are after all
certain common sense sayings that everyone should know: there's only
one way to save money; save money. There's similarly only one way to
preserve purchasing power; preserve purchasing power.
What
determines that change and how is that perceived by us? THEY
determine what THEIR money is worth in THEIR terms. Since our Valun
does not move, we get to see how all the rest of their money fares
against ours; THEIRS gets less and less valuable and ours retains its
purchasing power.
Choosing
the unit of purchasing power to base our money on is very important.
It must be a transaction that is between two of THEIR most important
brands of money; gold and US dollars and it must be at a time near or
at the top of gold's value in dollars. We chose a date that is easy
to remember and an opening bid price that is also easy to remember:
1
AU oz = $2,160 on 11/2/2011
Take $2,160 and divide by a
thousand and that's your Valun at inception; $2.16. Right now, due
to THEIR valuation of gold (and silver), a Valun is $2.82 (3/8/17). By design, the Valun shall never fall below $2.16 as the
moment it does so would signal a new inception point for the Valun,
always higher, never lower.
Then
when precious metals fall back in price in dollars, the Valun just
gets harder, retaining its purchasing power against everything else
including gold and silver. If we didn't advocate something that was
unbeatable, why would we bother?
If the dollar can no longer
acquire gold it is DEAD to us. We'd have to seek some other
currency, THEIR strongest currency. As for why we can't base our
Valun strictly on gold, the reason is simple; THEY determine what
gold is worth in all the rest of THEIR currencies that can acquire
gold, not us. Gold and silver are still THEIR money and until we can
be said to control all the mines, mints, exchanges, etc. precious
metals will remain THEIR oldest brand of money, not ours. All who
think otherwise are dupes, deliberately lured by THEM into the oldest
lust in the world, the lust for gold, which drove all major conflicts
in ancient times and still acts behind the scenes today. All of it
has human blood on it too.
THEIR money, not ours: If we did
not issue it in trade for something that backed it, whatever it was,
then that money, whatever it is, precious metals or not, that money
is not ours. To the extent that we plan, save, determine our futures
using THEIR money, we are its slaves and THEIR slaves and of course
the literature is replete with THEIR “big useless plans”
intending that we are THEIR slaves and how best to manage us, usually
described in terms fitting either cattle or insects.
Let's
say that gold became worth a dollar an oz, what would a Valun be
worth? Around $4.32 We do intend on having the hardest money in the
world, not the most inflation prone. But a lot are losing patience
with civilization itself and are really interested in bugging out of
it. That trend foretells a Dark Ages to come if it continues.
Want
out? A lot do. People who are able to live at the edges of society
in self sustained settings are more often considered lucky these
days. But even so, though it be far less, all external and
meaningful trade is in terms of THEIR money, not yours or mine, which
at this time does not exist. Our proposal would even help these
people living outside the normal currents of society. But all of it
takes a resolution and an idea of what is involved. The kinds of
people who would likely bring this about are naturally sociable and
attractive and it doesn't take all that much to achieve either. A
cheerful disposition is always preferred. A businesslike confidence
in the project of getting something like this going is a requirement.
Interested in becoming a leader in your community? Prove it by
attracting followers. Become their lightning rod. Advocate
something truly independent that will ultimately link up perfectly
well with any similar organizations set up under the same simple
rules elsewhere around the world; let the people work/issue their own
money. People have value, not things. Why not start with each of
us? What can we do? How well do we value it? Would others be
willing to buy or exchange for it? Perhaps those who want what we
want don't have what we want. That's the problem with barter. The
alternative money which is really ours solves that.
David
Burton
dpbmss@mail.com
[3/21/17
Q: What would be your prognosis for the Valun? Does it go up or down
over the next few months? You say never lower than $2.16 so what
happens when gold becomes $3,000 an ounce? What happens if gold
reaches $5,000 an ounce?
A: We
first remind everyone that gold is THEIR money, one of THEIR oldest
brands. Gold markets are susceptible to influence on the upside by
any possible outbreak of insecurity leading to war and sometimes
price rises are a good barometer of those events, but just as likely
rises in the price of gold are the results of some local insecurity.
Whatever it is, we don't care. It's THEIR money. All we care about
is our initial transaction.
1
AU oz = $2,160 on 2/11/2011
If the price of gold rises above
$2,160 a new initial transaction supplants the present one, always
higher, never lower, by absolute design. So if the price should rise
to $2,500, the new initial transaction becomes:
1
AU oz = $2,500 on Whatever Date
Divide
by a thousand and $2.50 become your new initial value and then if the
price of gold falls, which it normally will, the present value of
that new initial transaction will just go up.
Over
the next six months? Next year? Next decade? I don't know, but I
guarantee you it will always exceed $2.16 by design!
Q:
So seriously, even religion, faith and science I suppose are nothing
but machines?
A:
Yes, exactly! Now whether or not you or I think so, THEY
(globalists, bankers, elites, pedophiles, satanists, etc.) are
entirely pragmatic when it comes to all of these human institutions
which can easily be seen as essentially mechanical organizations,
therefore machines. To suggest that they accomplish nothing but
activities inimical to long term human survival is not within the
domain of this blog. That is covered elsewhere and is up to you to
become informed or not. It took all independent researchers time to
read and view and reflect upon the data, the grammar,
that was then subjected to whatever passed for logic
and became their rhetoric;
the message each researcher had to provide. This blog's proposal is
based on readily predicable results and therefore could be said to be
“scientific” but it is not particularly associated with that
machine which we identify as academic or establishment science. It
is designed to be neutral as regards any known religions; we consider
religions to be a different order of machine than a monetary system.
However, our proposal eliminates both usury and fractional reserve
lending. Under its simple rules, it will be impossible to lend money
one does not have and to ask back that which was never created. Our
advancements in account record design will allow all our members to
manage their debt burden far better than in the “public” money
accounts available to most people today. We will adhere to a fifty
year debt cycle wherein all debts must be settled within that time
and a year of jubilee is enforced every 50 years. It is not in the
genius of money as one of the greatest human inventions to enslave us
all in debt.]
