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.
[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.]