|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Apr 03, 2010 6:44 pm |
|
re: re: money and debt in today's environment ... |
James Booth
| |
.
"I don't think the issue is money or debt."
This thread was not begun to raise, or to deal with, any particular "issue"
- other than perhaps the "issuance" of money as debt.
So-called *debt-money* is not the only kind of money we have available to us, for our personal use, for our interactions on any level of "society" (however society may be defined); however, in related threads in this forum, it has been suggested that ALL money represents, or authorizes, an "obligation" - whereas I believe there are forms of *real money* which SATISFY obligations BECAUSE such *real money* IS itself a form of *wealth* - that is, a tradeable commodity wholly different from the IOU form of "money" made legal in most of our societies today.
That distinction is not a "perception issue" (not a response to the "cultural focus" comment), but a fact.
Gold, silver, copper - metals - have to be dug from the earth and refined (impurities removed), and may then be used for a variety of purposes; ie. gold dental filling, copper wire, silver dinnerware, etc., or any and all may be stamped into coin to be used for exchange purposes, again, to *satisfy* an obligation, same as delivering a measure of corn in trade for a specific quantity of coal *satisfies* both parties to the exchange.
In other words, both parties have been "paid in full" and there is not ongoing "debt" to be satisfied, no further "negotiation" needed.
On the other hand, *debt-money* is NEVER more than a *promise to pay* and any transaction involving *debt-money* must yet be satisfied with delivery of what is "promised" by the (fiat money) "note" which merely represents a commodity which is supposedly stored for "pickup" at some secure location, although truth be told, there is NEVER the full amount of *commodity* in such "storage" to satisfy the entire *obligation* represented by all the *notes* in circulation at any given time.
Since the total "value" of all *notes* can not, at any given time, be *satisfied* by delivery of the *commodity* for which those notes are issued as "receipts" for deposit (a characteristic failure of the *fractional reserve system* of banking), there must be some other means to ultimately *satisfy* transactions at such point where "confidence" in the system deteriorates enough so that depositors "run" to collect what is owed to them.
As people are often quick to point out, our current debt-money system has, for more than one generation, afforded most of us a vigorous lifestyle in that we are able to "borrow on demand" - according to our demonstrated ability to "repay" what we borrow (our perception), though more truly this system is based on our ability to deliver a monthly recurring "rental fee" for the use of that credit, as noted by our being cut off from "easy credit" NOT when we are unable to pay the principal, but when we are unable to make the "minimum monthly payment" on our account(s).
Inability to pay "interest only" is given as justification for our no longer being offered credit, and that may be one of the first clues opening our awareness that *principal owed* does not necessarily represent *debt* within this system, but that the system itself is merely a scheme to collect payments which serve only to maintain profitability of the system.
Of course, once an individual realizes that what he or she has "borrowed" never existed until the "borrower" signature *authorized* its existence - that, in fact, the bank has given NOTHING of substance but only a "promise to pay" - the fraud begins to emerge from behind the veil of secrecy banks and supporting "economists" work diligently to keep in place.
If anything, I would say "our cultural focus on money as the exchange" is ingrained in our thinking by the "legitimizing" of *money as debt* as the ONLY "legal tender" means of exchange "approved" by our government(s) while other forms of exchange are deeply discouraged through taxation and regulation, or unwanted legal entanglements along with smearing one's "good name" which often results from attempts to transact outside the system.
-
About three hundred years ago, according to Dr. Carroll Quigley in "Tragedy and Hope," the labour of twenty persons was required to produce food for 21 persons.
That situation began to change around 1725 with the Agricultural Revolution which freed up 17 of those labourers.
By 1775 the Industrial Revolution was absorbing that "excess" labour, which was shifting from rural areas into towns and cities which became industrial centers as "industry" evolved from individual or local manufacture toward assembly line operations.
That "excess" of labour has also given rise to the growth of "government" as governments have used "unemployment" statistics as justification "put people to work" - for which new agencies and bureaus must be created and appropriations authorized to support increased government payrolls, creating a new "class" of citizen beholden to government as "employer" and thus willing to vote for whoever in government was "benefactor" providing those jobs.
At the same time, as mentioned above, new technology continually provides *automation* which reduces need for *manpower* - both in government and private employment arenas - so that "unemployment" can never completely be eradicated.
What had promise to "free" humanity from poverty has ever since only served to increase poverty.
Automation improves our lifestyle as it reduces the need to labour to produce what we need, helps keep costs down and supply up, and can continually improve the quality of what is produced, although by design our "economy" is still based on "cyclical consumption" for which quality is more often sacrificed for the benefit of "future profits" (continued sales).
Beside wasting resources by producing products inferior to what automation could provide, resources continue to be wasted through "creating" jobs that do not NEED to be done - except to satisfy a desire to reduce unemployment.
Manufacturing a product designed to fail within a few years, thus "requiring" it to be replaced, when machinery is available to produce a similar product which might last the lifetime of the user, is an obvious example of waste of resources as replacement requires additional raw materials along with additional energy consumption, not to mention *time* humans could devote to more productive endeavours.
Perhaps less obvious is the creation of "jobs" which are not necessary for anyone's survival (IRS, "flipping" hamburgers, convincing "consumers" what they "need") but require enourmous expenditure of "personal wealth" for energy (oil and petroleum byproducts) and equipment to move individual workers from one place to another, and back again, along with "wear and tear" on infrastructure (roads and bridges) which requires additional "consumer" outlay.
Another "unseen" source of waste is energy and equipment for transporting raw materials long distances to "industry" and from there, in our "global" economy, additional long distances between manufacturer and consumer, with additional "handling" expenses along the way, which, when automated, consume even more "energy" extracted from whatever "inventory" Earth provides.
Yet these elements and more are *necessary* to our current *debt-based economy* which cannot be sustained except through continuous *growth* - growth which cannot be sustained at the current rate of our consumption, that rate already in some cases exceeding what Earth can supply.
We are just beginning to realize we have "advanced in all areas to where the human involvement is no longer crucial" and "the majority of people cannot participate in the bounty" provided by our current systems.
Are we waking up to the fact that our "current systems" are NOT designed to benefit the "most" of us ?
I hope so, because I agree that how we have come to "assess our self worth" in current society is too often tied to our "employment" which is most often restricted by our ability to transact freely with each other.
Employment today is more and more a political tool used to marginalize those who are deemed "out of line" while rewarding those who support Money Power and those "leaders" and "lawmakers" who serve to "legitimize" that power and its aims.
Whether we, today, are able to handle the inevitable shifts in our systems of money creation and emission, in the way we utilize our planet's resources, in how we value each other and the totality of humanity and Creation itself, matters little.
Two hundred, three, four, five hundred years from now, children will cry, take their first breath in this life, and then begin to learn how to operate in whatever economic system prevails at that time.
Name calling, demeaning commentary, and other divisive actions in the present day are little more that smug self-satisfaction for individuals who could otherwise devote their time and efforts to actually making something meaningful happen.
In the meantime, we may have to sink farther into economic slavery before it becomes so oppressive that we free ourselves to once again live freely to enjoy what Nature has provided for our sustenance, for our living.
JB
Private Reply to James Booth (new win) |
|
| |
|
