Rog and Ranjan, Amazing Grace, What isn't on the page?
Vulture Capitalism and Pierro Sraffa
Title: A Critical Analysis of Political Discourse and Economic Theory
In a recent interview, the conversation between Aaron Bastani and Grace Blakeley sparked a thought-provoking discussion on diverging views in the realm of political and economic ideologies. This interview led me to reflect on a previous conversation between Douglas Carswell and Grace Blakeley, which delved into the intricacies of monetary reform and its implications on economic theory.
The discourse surrounding monetary reform is often intertwined with the principles of Austrian economics, a perspective that holds significant weight in shaping policy and economic thought. The interview with Douglas Carswell, a proponent of monetary reform, shed light on the varying perspectives within this realm, emphasizing the importance of empirical evidence and theoretical foundations.
As I revisited these discussions, I found myself drawn to the works of Zarlenger and his exploration of the lost science of money. Zarlenger's insights into the historical and philosophical dimensions of money challenged conventional economic theories, particularly those rooted in Austrian economics. His critique of Von Mises' theory of money as a purely theoretical construct underscored the need for a more comprehensive understanding of monetary systems.
Furthermore, the interview with Grace Blakeley revealed her staunch advocacy for socialist principles, drawing from the ideologies of Marx and Gramsci. However, her emphasis on social relations and Marxist theory seemed to overlook the nuances of monetary reform and its implications on economic structures. It became evident that her perspective could benefit from a deeper engagement with alternative economic theories, such as those proposed by Sraffa and other revolutionary economists.
April 23, 2019
#NOVARRAMEDIA #AARONBASTANI STRAWMANNING , SHADOW BOXING AND OTHERWISE TALKING TO HIMSELF. CULTURAL MARXISM AND THE ART OF APPEARING RIGHT.
In the realm of political discourse, the conversation between Bastani and Blakeley highlighted the complexities of defining socialism and communism. While Bastani articulated his views on non-hierarchical workers' democracy, Blakeley's adherence to Marxist principles seemed to overshadow the broader spectrum of revolutionary Marxist thought. The omission of key figures such as Sraffa and Stafford Beer in her discourse underscored the need for a more comprehensive understanding of industrial democracy and economic structures.
Moreover, the interview shed light on the challenges of navigating political discourse within the confines of established ideologies. The absence of critical engagement with foundational economic principles, particularly those related to money and monetary systems, revealed a lacuna in contemporary political debates. The failure to address the fundamental nature of money as a causal factor in economic systems hindered the depth of the conversation, highlighting the need for a more holistic approach to economic and political theory.
Drawing from Aristotle's insights into money as a product of societal laws, it becomes apparent that the historical and philosophical dimensions of money are integral to understanding economic structures. The significance of offerings to temples and the religious connotations of monetary systems underscored the multifaceted nature of money, challenging conventional economic narratives that overlook its broader implications.
Furthermore, the absence of logical coherence in contemporary political discourse reflects a broader trend in the lack of grounding principles and first-order logic. The disconnect between political ideologies and economic theories highlights the need for a more integrated approach to policy formulation and discourse. The failure to engage with foundational economic concepts, such as interest rates and monetary systems, perpetuates a superficial understanding of economic structures, hindering meaningful progress in policy formulation.
In conclusion, the interviews with Grace Blakeley and Douglas Carswell shed light on the complexities of political and economic discourse. The divergence in perspectives underscored the need for a more comprehensive understanding of monetary reform and its implications on economic theory. As we navigate contemporary political debates, it is imperative to engage with alternative economic theories and foundational principles to foster a more nuanced and integrated approach to policy formulation.
References:
1. John Wards Call to Action - Wiki Tactical Voting
2. The Road to Wigan Pier - Wikipedia
3. Homage to Catalonia - Wikipedia
4. Scientific Socialism - Wikipedia
5. Share of Finance Sector Profits: Parasites and Hosts - Longhairedmusings
6. Post-Climate Change Land Use and Monetary Policy: The New Trifecta - Longhairedmusings
As we continue to navigate these complex conversations, it is essential to foster a more integrated and comprehensive approach to political and economic discourse. Only through critical engagement with foundational principles can we hope to address the challenges of contemporary policy formulation and ideological divergence.
The Conquest of Dough
A New Novel By Roger G Lewis
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-conquest-of-dough-roger-lewis/1145041443?ean=2940179468547
Vulture Capitalism Corporate Crimes, Backdoor Bailouts and the Death of Freedom
Grace , Aaron and a rude interuption from the excluded middle.
The Road From "BRINO" to WikiBallot Via IABATO
A Slog Retrospective.
https://wikitacticalvoting.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page#John_Wards_Call_to_Action.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Wigan_Pier
Part Two
In contrast to the straightforward documentary of the first part of the book, in part two Orwell discusses the relevance of socialism to improving living conditions. This section proved controversial.
Orwell sets out his initial premises very simply:
Are the appalling conditions described in part one tolerable? (No)
Is socialism "wholeheartedly applied as a world system" capable of improving those conditions? (Yes)
Why then are we not all socialists?
The rest of the book consists of Orwell's attempt to answer this difficult question. He points out that most people who argue against socialism do not do so because of straightforward selfish motives, or because they do not believe that the system would work, but for more complex emotional reasons, which (according to Orwell) most socialists misunderstand. He identifies five main problems:
Class prejudice. This is real and it is visceral. Middle-class socialists do themselves no favours by pretending it does not exist and – by glorifying the manual worker – they tend to alienate the large section of the population that is economically working-class but culturally middle-class.
Machine worship. Orwell finds most socialists guilty of this. Orwell himself is suspicious of technological progress for its own sake and thinks it inevitably leads to softness and decadence. He points out that most fictional technically advanced socialist utopias are deadly dull. H. G. Wells in particular is criticised on these grounds.
Crankiness. Among many other types of people Orwell specifies people who have beards or wear sandals, vegetarians, and nudists as contributing to socialism's negative reputation among many more conventional people.
Turgid language. Those who pepper their sentences with "notwithstandings" and "heretofores" and become over excited when discussing dialectical materialism are unlikely to gain much popular support.
Failure to concentrate on the basics. Socialism should be about common decency and fair shares for all rather than political orthodoxy or philosophical consistency.
In presenting these arguments Orwell takes on the role of devil's advocate. He states very plainly that he himself is in favour of socialism but feels it necessary to point out reasons why many people, who would benefit from socialism, and should logically support it, are in practice likely to be strong opponents.
Orwell’s publisher, Victor Gollancz, was so concerned that these passages would be misinterpreted, and that the (mostly middle-class) members of the Left Book Club would be offended, that he added a foreword in which he raises some caveats about Orwell's claims in Part Two. He suggests, for instance, that Orwell may exaggerate the visceral contempt that the English middle classes hold for the working class, adding, however, that, "I may be a bad judge of the question, for I am a Jew, and passed the years of my early boyhood in a fairly close Jewish community; and, among Jews of this type, class distinctions do not exist."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homage_to_Catalonia
After putting the finishing touches on his book The Road to Wigan Pier,[13] he departed for Spain on 23 December 1936
Chapter seven (orig. ch. 8)[edit]
Orwell shares memories of the 115 days he spent on the war front, and its influence on his political ideas, "... the prevailing mental atmosphere was that of Socialism ... the ordinary class-division of society had disappeared to an extent that is almost unthinkable in the money-tainted air of England ... the effect was to make my desire to see Socialism established much more actual than it had been before."[26] By the time he left Spain, he had become a "convinced democratic Socialist." The chapter ends with Orwell's arrival in Barcelona on the afternoon of 26 April 1937. "And after that the trouble began."
Chapter eight (orig. ch. 9)[edit]
Orwell details noteworthy changes in the social and political atmosphere of Barcelona when he returns after three months at the front. He describes a lack of revolutionary atmosphere and the class division that he had thought would not reappear, i.e., with visible division between rich and poor and the return of servile language. Orwell had been determined to leave the POUM, and confesses here that he "would have liked to join the Anarchists," but instead sought a recommendation to join the International Column, so that he could go to the Madrid front. The latter half of this chapter is devoted to describing the conflict between the anarchist CNT and the socialist Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT) and the resulting cancellation of the May Day demonstration and the build-up to the street fighting of the "Barcelona May Days". "It was the antagonism between those who wished the revolution to go forward and those who wished to check or prevent it—ultimately, between Anarchists and Communists."[27]
Chapter nine (orig. ch. 10)[edit]
Orwell relates his involvement in the "May Days"' Barcelona street fighting that began on 3 May when the Government Assault Guards tried to take the Telephone Exchange from the CNT workers who controlled it. For his part, Orwell acted as part of the POUM, guarding a POUM-controlled building. Although he realises that he is fighting on the side of the working class, Orwell describes his dismay at coming back to Barcelona on leave from the front only to get mixed up in street fighting. Assault Guards from Valencia arrive—"All of them were armed with brand-new rifles ... vastly better than the dreadful old blunderbusses we had at the front." The Communist-controlled Unified Socialist Party of Catalonia newspapers declare POUM to be a disguised Fascist organisation—"No one who was in Barcelona then, or for months later, will forget the horrible atmosphere produced by fear, suspicion, hatred, censored newspapers, crammed jails, enormous food queues, and prowling gangs of armed men."[28] In his second appendix to the book, Orwell discusses the political issues at stake in the May 1937 Barcelona fighting, as he saw them at the time and later on, looking back.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_socialism
Scientific socialism is a term which was coined in 1840 by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in his book What is Property?[1] to mean a society ruled by a scientific government, i.e., one whose sovereignty rests upon reason, rather than sheer will:[2]
Thus, in a given society, the authority of man over man is inversely proportional to the stage of intellectual development which that society has reached; and the probable duration of that authority can be calculated from the more or less general desire for a true government, — that is, for a scientific government. And just as the right of force and the right of artifice retreat before the steady advance of justice, and must finally be extinguished in equality, so the sovereignty of the will yields to the sovereignty of the reason, and must at last be lost in scientific socialism.
Never touch the money system qed
October 6, 2019
ON DEBT JUBILEES, THE RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE OF DEBT FORGIVENESS @GRUBSTREETJOURNAL #QUANTA @WIKI_BALLOT
The Kiss Precise
by
Frederick Soddy
For pairs of lips to kiss maybe
Involves no trigonometry.
'Tis not so when four circles kiss
Each one the other three.
To bring this off the four must be
As three in one or one in three.
If one in three, beyond a doubt
Each gets three kisses from without.
If three in one, then is that one
Thrice kissed internally.
Four circles to the kissing come.
The smaller are the benter.
The bend is just the inverse of
The distance from the center.
Though their intrigue left Euclid dumb
There's now no need for rule of thumb.
Since zero bend's a dead straight line
And concave bends have minus sign,
The sum of the squares of all four bends
Is half the square of their sum.
To spy out spherical affairs
An oscular surveyor
Might find the task laborious,
The sphere is much the gayer,
And now besides the pair of pairs
A fifth sphere in the kissing shares.
Yet, signs and zero as before,
For each to kiss the other four,
The square of the sum of all five bends
Is thrice the sum of their squares.
In _Nature_, June 20, 1936
Soddy money
November 24, 2011
THE CHURCH AND THE PRESENT CRISIS IS IT RELEVANT.
International Banks * Big Oil * Armaments* Corporate Governemnt = Industrial Military Complex = WAR.= PROFIT.
They do say follow the trail of money and Profit is the objective of Capitalism.
Is the Right to issuing the worlds money rightly in the hands of Central Banks should it be more regionalised even localised. Should the Money Power be placed back in the hands of the people or their elected representatives through public trusts.
What is a Stakeholder Economy who are the stakeholders in the international Global economy.
What is the Public Institute of Finance what is PositiveMoney.uk.org who the hell is Ben Bernake whats his real job?
Who is Fredrick Soddy who is Steve Keen,David Greiber, Michael Hudson, David Harvey , Nicolas Taleb. Emanuel Kant anyone?
What is MMT, What is FIAT money, What is Fractional reserve Banking, what really causes inflation and who benefits?
Was Adam Smith a plagerist, who was John Stewart Milne was Karl Marx a Philiosopher Economist? Was Milton Freidman mis represented by Thatcher and Reagan?
So who writes the Narrative and to what purpose, If it aint broke don’t fix it? So who says its not Broke. What was all the fuss about at Muscle Shoals.
History Repeats itself first as Farce and then as Tragedy ( Karl Marx) we are up to the tragedy bit again? less…
The Going Direct Paradigm Mindmap
In today's global economy, the intertwining of international banks, big oil, armaments, and corporate government has given rise to what is commonly known as the Industrial Military Complex. This complex is driven by the pursuit of profit, and it has become increasingly clear that the trail of money leads directly to the perpetuation of war.
At the heart of this issue lies the question of who holds the right to issue the world's money. Currently, this power is concentrated in the hands of central banks, which operate on a global scale. However, there is growing debate about whether this system should be more regionalized or even localized. Many argue that the money power should be placed back in the hands of the people or their elected representatives through public trusts.
This concept ties into the idea of a stakeholder economy, which emphasizes the importance of considering all stakeholders in the international global economy. This includes not only large corporations and financial institutions but also individuals, communities, and the environment. By taking a more inclusive approach, the aim is to create a more equitable and sustainable economic system.
Amidst these discussions, organizations like the Public Institute of Finance and PositiveMoney.uk.org have emerged as advocates for reforming the current financial system. These groups seek to challenge the status quo and promote alternative models that prioritize the public good over private interests.
In exploring these topics, it is important to consider the perspectives of influential figures in economics and finance. Individuals such as Fredrick Soddy, Steve Keen, David Graeber, Michael Hudson, David Harvey, and Nassim Nicholas Taleb have all contributed valuable insights into the workings of the modern economy. Additionally, the philosophical underpinnings of economic thought, as exemplified by thinkers like Immanuel Kant, continue to inform contemporary debates.
One particularly contentious issue is that of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and its implications for economic policy. MMT challenges conventional wisdom about government spending and deficits, advocating for a more expansive role for fiscal policy in managing the economy. This ties into broader questions about fiat money, fractional reserve banking, and the root causes of inflation, all of which have significant implications for economic stability and social equity.
The historical context in which these debates unfold cannot be overlooked. The legacy of influential figures such as Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Karl Marx, and Milton Friedman continues to shape economic discourse to this day. Their ideas have been both celebrated and contested, and their relevance in contemporary times remains a subject of ongoing scrutiny.
Amidst these discussions, it is crucial to consider who writes the narrative and for what purpose. The shaping of public discourse around economic issues is a complex interplay of academic research, media representation, and political agendas. The adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" begs the question: who determines whether the current system is indeed functioning as intended? Furthermore, historical episodes such as the events at Muscle Shoals serve as reminders of the enduring tensions surrounding economic policy and resource allocation.
As we grapple with these complex issues, it is worth heeding the cautionary words of Karl Marx: "History repeats itself first as farce and then as tragedy." Are we witnessing a repetition of tragic patterns in our economic systems, or can we chart a new course towards a more just and sustainable future? These are questions that demand our collective attention and thoughtful consideration.
Maths envy
bernanke said this right up to the last nothing to do with me it was all a regulatory shortfall
54:16
and it's very easy for everybody to do that so nothing changes because they don't want to admit their
54:22
own complicity in what happened so i think it's very important that people that are outside that system
54:28
start to make a stronger and stronger intellectual case for thinking about the basic beliefs and
54:35
also about the institutional relationships
54:40
and i will just finish here i think there is in fact a lot of stuff going on i've got the cep we've got the new inet
54:48
group we've got a lot of independent thinkers
54:53
associated with the um the iaea in the uk in the uk thinking about these things
55:00
we're seeing a developing literature now in complexity and i started off talking about that and
55:06
i'll finish up with it a recent book that i just read uh by a guy called
55:12
um uh davison uh who's he's written a book which is
55:17
called uh from the classics um sorry called the recovery of classical
55:24
economics and he traces a path basically from the classical people
55:29
through hayek and the austrians and the people who worry about complex systems
55:35
to modern complexity with all of the thinking that's gone into that
55:40
and all i can say i'm not sort of a great scholar of these things but even after
55:47
40 years in this business where i guess i've had to spend most of
55:52
my time saying i'm sorry but it seemed like a good idea at the time
55:57
i think there are still some openings now at the intellectual level thinking about this stuff complexity and
56:04
learning from other disciplines you know who have been dealing with these problems for a long time
56:09
i think it's very exciting and i think there's still a lot of progress that can and should be made so i thank you for
56:16
your attention
please Format the Questions form the audience and tyher speakers answers. and a For a Blog Post.?
Thank you for providing the input. I will now reformat the questions and answers from the given text.
Q: Could you expand on the concept of narrow banking?
A: Narrow banking goes back to the Chicago school in the 1930s and involves taking away from banks the capacity to create money. While it may address some issues, it may not be the best solution due to its potential impact on economic growth.
Q: What are your thoughts on the transition from classical economics to modern macroeconomics?
A: The transition from the belief that price stability was a necessary condition for macroeconomic stability to it being a sufficient condition is a complex issue. There are various factors that contributed to this shift, and it's a topic that requires further exploration.
Q: How do you view private money or bitcoins as potential solutions to our monetary system problems?
A: While there are discussions around the potential of private money or bitcoins, it's essential to consider their implications and impact on the overall financial system. It's a topic that requires careful consideration and analysis.
Q: Who are the powerful entities reinforcing false beliefs in monetary policy?
A: The powerful entities influencing monetary policy include bankers, individuals in the financial sector, and possibly industrialists. There is also a concern about the influence of large companies and their impact on legislation.
Q: Do you see any realistic possibility of monetary policy coordination at the global level in the future?
A: The challenge lies in the fact that the U.S. and its Federal Reserve play a significant role in global monetary dynamics, yet they primarily focus on domestic mandates. Achieving global monetary policy coordination presents significant hurdles.
Q: Do you believe that monetary policy makers can fundamentally change the long-term growth path of the world economy?
A: Monetary policy can have long-term implications for economic growth, especially in the context of financial crises and their impact on innovation and structural changes. It's a complex issue that requires a comprehensive approach.
Q: What advice would you offer to the Swiss government or national bank?
A: Policies should be state contingent, taking into account the specific context and history of Switzerland. Without sufficient knowledge of Switzerland's intricacies, it would be inappropriate to offer specific advice without a thorough understanding of the country's economic landscape.
https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2017/08/18/plasma-cosmology-challenging-big-bang-and-scientism-in-modern-physics-and-climatology/ … Economics has become a priesthood founded upon a notion of deterministic unconditional election of elites with laterly the indulgences of Carbon Trading and an eschatology of Climate catastrophe thrown in. Ideology is, of course, an aspect of Economic thought including ethics and politics, pretending that those areas simply do not colour if not define the outcomes which are treated as Determinable and discoverable is a not so noble lie at the heart of the current failings of the Dismal science Jose. Pierce was a peerless logician his contempt for the procrustean busy fools of the Economics Academy of 2019 I think would be boundless. I will finish with this speech from the Late Great John Mirlees
James Mirrlees - Mathematics and Real Economics
February 28, 2020
REPORT ON PROBABILITY A. THE MATHEMATICS OF LANGUAGE, THE MANDELBROT SET, AND WHOLE SYSTEM PERTURBATION. #PELAGIUS #NEITZSCHE #MIRLEES #FULLMEISTER #HOYLE #ALVEN #LEIBNITZ #CHOMSKY @WIKI_BALLOT #4PAMPHLETEERS @GRUBSTREETJORNO @WIKI_BALLOT @FINANCIALEYES @JOEBLOB20
June 1, 2019
THE EU IS DEEPLY ANTI-DEMOCRATIC. THE UK SPRING WILL BE A EUROPEAN SPRING NO AMOUNT OF POTEMKIN VILLAGE PRETENCE WILL FOOL THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC FURTHER, ONCE BITTEN TWICE SHY, EN MARCHE OR ON YER BIKE? ENGLISH DEMOCRATS JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE, DISCUSSED. #OWENJONESHASLETHIMSELFGO
August 31, 2016
THE MAGIC MONEY TREE AND PRIVATE BANKS , MISUNDERSTOOD AND KIND TO SMALL CHILDREN AND ANIMALS?OR JUST ANOTHER FIX OF CRONY CAPITALISTS
ORIGINAL POST-AUGUST 2016, UPDATED FOR ELECTION 2017.
NEO-LIBERALISM, BILLY NO MATES? , OR, JUST MISUNDERSTOOD AND KIND TO SMALL CHILDREN AND ANIMALS
DISCUSSION WITH FOUNDER MEMBER OF THE PEOPLE’S PARTY/ECOLOGY PARTY AND NOW THE GREENS CLIVE LORD.
In the recent hustings for the Green Party leadership for the Green Party of England and Wales, I have had a few interesting dialogues with Clive Lord and sought out some of his writing to see what made and still makes him Tick. I have also had a similar exchange of tweets and comments with Dereck Wall another former speaker candidate for the Green Party of England and Wales.
Clives Stich is citizens income or universal basic income. Its mine too so we have a common objective and our reasoning to get to that place one would think would be similar. Well to answer that yes and no. Clive and I agree that exponential growth on a finite planet is impossible and that the strain on the Common resources of the planet is too great and decisions uninformed by externalities are less than sensible. We are in a completely different place on Political Economy though and our understanding of Money and Money creation.
Clive recently Blogged under the title.
SOCIALISTS AND NEOLIBERALS CAN AND MUST BE FRIENDS
28/08/2016· by Clive Lord
Here is our dialogue so far my last comment awaits moderation. Other folk who read my blog here please read Clives Blog and this post and join the dialogue as I say often there is more than one way to skin the Political Economy cat and the ways of ´´Doing Money´´
4 RESPONSES TO “SOCIALISTS AND NEOLIBERALS CAN AND MUST BE FRIENDS”
ROGERGLEWIS 28/08/2016 at 15:15 · · Reply →
Hi Clive,
Neo-Liberalism is a pretty broad political philosophy but starts with the notion Look after the Economy and the large economic Players and the rest will look after itself. It is “classical Liberalisms” very close First Cousin. Neo-Conservatism is also its sibling
I was reading some of your published work on these questions last week also and wonder how far you have got in your thinking with Money creation and the question of Interest on money. This is for me the nub of the matter something I have in common with Joseph Proudhon, explained by Peter Kropotkin in the Encyclopedia Britannica thus.
https://archive.org/stream/PeterKropotkinEntryOnanarchismFromTheEncyclopdiaBritannica/Peter-Kropotkin-Anarchism-Encyclopdia-Britannica-Eleventh-Edition_djvu.txt
”Now Proudhon advocated a society without government and
used the word Anarchy to describe it. Proudhon repudiated,
as is known, all schemes of Communism, according to which
mankind would be driven into communistic monasteries or
barracks, as also all the schemes of state or state-aided Socialism
which were advocated by Louis Blanc and the Collectivists. When
he proclaimed in his first memoir on property that ” Property
is theft,” he meant only property in its present, Roman-law,
sense of ” right of use and abuse ” ; in property-rights, on the other
hand, understood in the limited sense of possession, he saw the
best protection against the encroachments of the state. At the
same time, he did not want violently to dispossess the present
owners of land, dwelling-houses, mines, factories and so on. He
preferred to attain the same end by rendering capital incapable
of earning interest; and this he proposed to obtain by means of
a national bank, based on the mutual confidence of all those who
are engaged in production, who would agree to exchange among
themselves their produces at cost-value, by means of labour
cheques representing the hours of labour required to produce
every given commodity. Under such a system, which Proudhon
described as ” Mutuellisme,” all the exchanges of services would be
strictly equivalent. Besides, such a bank would be enabled to
lend money without interest, levying only something like 1 %,
or even less, for covering the cost of administration. Everyone
being thus enabled to borrow the money that would be required
to buy a house, nobody would agree to pay any more a yearly
rent for the use of it. A general ” social liquidation ” would
thus be rendered easy, without violent expropriation. The same
applied to mines, railways, factories and so on. ”We can learn a lot from the Swiss referendum on Citizens Income as discussed here.
´However, the nearly universal misunderstanding of money is a major obstacle. For too long we’ve allowed a small coterie of bankers and “court economists” to hold the secrets and “tutor” us. So, it’s time for total openness.
First, regarding the claim that the Swiss proposal would’ve been too costly, what’s entirely omitted from the discussion is that the proposal (and similar proposals elsewhere) appear to call for re-distribution of existing money—taking money from certain sectors through taxation and re-allocating it to the people-at-large.
The implication is that the money supply is basically static and that re-distributing limited funds would require tough budget decisions—sparking tax hikes and associated spending increases in several areas; hence the claim “costs too much.”
But a successful basic-income plan can and must be based on the creation of new money, or “distributism,” not on reshuffling existing money, which is “re-distributism.” That’s the “state secret” that no one wants to touch.
The issuance of new money needs to happen to overcome the huge “gap” between today’s paltry purchasing power and the massive mountain of debt and the towering totality of prices on all available goods and services. We have full stores and empty wallets. (Ideally and importantly, governments should reclaim their interest-free money-creation rights and forbid private central banks from creating money any longer).´´
http://leconomistamascherato.blogspot.se/2016/07/basic-income-lets-name-real-problems.html
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (full movie)
Can This Man PROVE That God Exists? Piers Morgan vs Stephen Meyer
Rog and Ranjan, Amazing Grace, What isn't on the page?
Vulture Capitalism and Pierro Sraffa
https://grubstreetinexile.substack.com/p/rog-and-ranjan-amazing-grace-what
The Road From "BRINO" to WikiBallot Via IABATO
A Slog Retrospective.
https://grubstreetinexile.substack.com/p/the-road-from-brino-to-wikiballot
Vulture Capitalism Corporate Crimes, Backdoor Bailouts and the Death of Freedom
Grace , Aaron and a rude interuption from the excluded middle.
https://grubstreetinexile.substack.com/p/vulture-capitalism-corporate-crimes
Desperate Centrists cite imaginary Russian interference (in EU elections)
Paedo Brino a rulling class under compromat.
https://grubstreetinexile.substack.com/p/desperate-centrists-cite-imaginary
April 25, 2017
TIMONISM, THE CALVINIST STRAIN IN NEO LIBERAL MISANTHROPY. ZIONISM, THE MONEY POWER USURY AND THE PETRO DOLLAR. FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE 2.0. #OCCUPYTHEEUROPEANSPRING
Some Books and Themes Informing a Cynical and not Timonist view of Neo-Liberal Fascism.
18 THOUGHTS ON “TIMONISM, THE CALVINIST STRAIN IN NEO LIBERAL MISANTHROPY. ZIONISM, THE MONEY POWER USURY AND THE PETRO DOLLAR. FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE 2.0. #OCCUPYTHEEUROPEANSPRING”
Pingback: 50 years Behind Hand, Edmund Burke and Radio Free Europe. – RogersLongHairBlog Edit
Pingback: man’s status is better and higher for the very reason for which it is thought to be inferior: Pelagius. – RogersLongHairBlog Edit
Pingback: Further Thoughts on Market Measures as Procrustean Delusions. – RogersLongHairBlog Edit
Pingback: Six Ways to Sunday, Deep State and Fake News ( More on Distorted Narratives, Divide and Rule) – RogersLongHairBlog Edit
Pingback: Social Conditioning and Conventional Pieties. #Conspiracy #Hypothesis #Theory #Crime #StateCrimesAgainstDemocracy #SCADS Conspiracy of Context! – RogersLongHairBlog Edit
Pingback: Jeremy (Free Will ) Corbyn Vs Theresa (The Determinator) May. The quarrel between Heraclitus and Parmenides – RogersLongHairBlog Edit
Pingback: Whaley Bridge Damn, The UN, Wilding, Somerset Levels and IPFSA. The Religion of Climate Pornography #FeralMonbiot #ReWilding #Flooding #ForestFires #Agenda21 #Agenda2030 #SustainableDevelopmentGoals #FascistUNAgendas #UNMisanthropy #EUMisanthropy #Globa Edit
Pingback: The Sunday Bloggers. A digest of Blogs , perspectives on the UK General Election 2017. TINA, she who must be obeyed. #IABATO #GrubStreetJournal #TheThreePamphlateers @financialeyes @Wiki_Ballot @JoeBlob20” “An at-will employee just another nobody in t Edit
Pingback: Show ponies and Stalking Horses, Chicken Shit Economics and #ClimateChangeIdocracy An Informal Convergence / Alex Thompson) #GE2019Stalking Horses, Show Ponies and Grooms of Tina’s Stools. #TwoFingers2Brino @wiki_ballot #4Pamphleteers @GrubStreetJorno @ Edit
Pingback: THE MOST IMPORTANT VIDEO YOU WILL EVER WATCH ABOUT NWO PLANS BEING IMPLEMNETED. #CalonLân #CovidPurpose #no60Ghznet #ConquestofDough #TheRoadtoSerfdom nihil sub sole novum. @davidgraeber @financialeyes @JoeBlob20 #DebtBomb @DominicFrisby #5gKillGrid @201 Edit
Pingback: THE MOST IMPORTANT VIDEO YOU WILL EVER WATCH ABOUT NWO PLANS BEING IMPLEMNETED. #CalonLân #CovidPurpose #no60Ghznet #ConquestofDough #TheRoadtoSerfdom nihil sub sole novum. @davidgraeber @financialeyes @JoeBlob20 #DebtBomb @DominicFrisby #5gKillGrid @201 Edit
Pingback: THE MOST IMPORTANT VIDEO YOU WILL EVER WATCH ABOUT NWO PLANS BEING IMPLEMNETED. #CalonLân #CovidPurpose #no60Ghznet #ConquestofDough #TheRoadtoSerfdom nihil sub sole novum. @davidgraeber @financialeyes @JoeBlob20 #DebtBomb @DominicFrisby #5gKillGrid @201 Edit
Pingback: Faith Certainty and The Necessary Beliefs of Covid-19. The Reality Based Herd. #AnimalFarm Drinking the Kool-Aid “The War on Covid-19” NIHIL SUB SOLE NOVUM. @DAVIDGRAEBER @FINANCIALEYES @JOEBLOB20 #DEBTBOMB @DOMINICFRISBY” – Not The Gr Edit
Pingback: Faith Certainty and The Necessary Beliefs of Covid-19. The Reality Based Herd. #AnimalFarm Drinking the Kool-Aid “The War on Covid-19” NIHIL SUB SOLE NOVUM. @DAVIDGRAEBER @FINANCIALEYES @JOEBLOB20 #DEBTBOMB @DOMINICFRISBY” – Not The Gr Edit
Pingback: Holiday in Covidovia , Corona Kool Aid , when the drugs don’t work? #CovidPurpose and #CovidPropaganda . @DAVIDGRAEBER @FINANCIALEYES @JOEBLOB20 #DEBTBOMB @DOMINICFRISBY – Not The Grub Street Journal Edit
Pingback: Faith Certainty and The Necessary Beliefs of Covid-19. The Reality Based Herd. #AnimalFarm Drinking the Kool-Aid “The War on Covid-19” NIHIL SUB SOLE NOVUM. @DAVIDGRAEBER @FINANCIALEYES @JOEBLOB20 #DEBTBOMB @DOMINICFRISBY” – Not The Gr Edit
Pingback: WHY TRUMP? #Trump2020 #StillTrump #TrumpCard #Ovid #Metamorphoses AND THE PEOPLE PLAYED THE TRUMP CARD. @REALDONALDTRUMP “The passion for freedom dieth not.”(Leonadis) @BILLGATES @FINANCIALEYES @JOEBLOB20 #COVIDPURPOSE @CLARKEMICAH #CONQUESTOFDOUGH @W Edit
Pingback: WHY TRUMP? #Trump2020 #StillTrump #TrumpCard #Ovid #Metamorphoses AND THE PEOPLE PLAYED THE TRUMP CARD. @REALDONALDTRUMP “The passion for freedom dieth not.”(Leonidas) @BILLGATES @FINANCIALEYES @JOEBLOB20 #COVIDPURPOSE @CLARKEMICAH #CONQUESTOFDOUGH @W Edit
PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PRINCIPLE “NO MORE TRADE THAN
CAPITAL” WITH RESPECT TO COLONIAL GOVERNMENT, ECONOMY AND PEACE
What is it that would be the loss, suppose it to amount to
any thing, that a nation would sustain by the giving up of any
colony? The difference between the profit to be made by the
employing in that trade so much capital as would be employed in
it were the colony kept, and the profit that would be made by the
employment of the same capital in any other way, suppose in the
improvement of land. The loss is nothing, if the same capital
employed in the improvement of land would be more productive: and
it would be more productive by the amount of so much as would go
to form the annual rent: for deducting that rent, capital
employed in the improvement of land produces as much as if
employed in any other way. If the loss were any thing, would it
then amount to the whole difference between the profit upon that
trade, and the profit upon the next most profitable one? no: but
only to the difference between so much of that difference as
would be produced if the colony were retained in subjection, and
so much as would be produced if the colony were declared free.
The value of a colony to the mother country, according to the
common mode of computation, is equal to the sum total of imports
from that colony and exports to it put together.
From this statement, if the foregoing observation be just,
the following deductions will come to be made.
1. The whole value of the exports to the colony.
2. So much of the imports as is balanced by the exports.
3. Such a portion of the above remainder as answers to so
much of the trade as would be equally carried on, were the colony
independent.
4. So much of that reduced profit as would be made, were the
same capital employed in any other trade or branch of industry
lost by the independence of the colony.
5. But the same capital, if employed in agriculture. would
have produced a rent over and above the ordinary profits of
capital: which rent, according to a general and undisputed
computation, may be stated at a sum equal to the amount of those
profits. Thence arises a further deduction, viz. the loss to the
nation caused by employing the capital in the trade to the
colony, in preference to the improvement of land, and thence upon
the supposition that the continuance of the trade depended upon
the keeping the colony in subjection.
The other mischiefs resulting from the keeping of a colony in
subjection, are:
1. The expence of its establishment, civil and military.
2. The contingent expence of wars and other coercive measures
for keeping it in subjection.
3. The contingent expence of wars for the defence of it
against foreign powers.
4. The force, military and naval, constantly kept on foot
under the apprehension of such wars.
5. The occasional danger to political liberty from the force
thus kept up.
6. The contingent expence of wars produced by alliances
contracted for the purpose of supporting wars that may be brought
on by the defence of it.
7. The corruptive effects of the influence resulting from the
patronage of the establishment, civil and military.
8. The damage that must be done to the national stock of
intelligence by the false views of the national interest, which
must be kept up in order to prevent the nation from opening their
eyes and insisting upon the enfranchisement of the colony.
9. The sacrifice that must be made of the real interest of
the colony to this imaginary interest of the mother-country. It
is for the purpose of governing it badly, and for no other, that
you wish to get or keep a colony. Govern it well, it is of no use
to you.
To govern its inhabitants as well as they would govern
themselves, you must choose to govern them those only whom they
would themselves choose, you must sacrifice none of their
interests to your own, you must bestow as much time and attention
to their interests as they would themselves, in a word, you must
take those very measures and no others, which they themselves
would take. But would this be governing? And what would it be
worth to you, if it were?
After all, it would be impossible for you to govern them so
well as they would themselves, on account of the distance.
10. The bad government resulting to the mother-country from
the complication, the indistinct views of things, and the
consumption of time occasioned by this load of distant
dependencies.
March 7, 2019
BREXIT, OCEANA OR EURASIA THE TRUE CHOICE ALL ALONG? AND STILL THE DISTRACTIONS, COD PIECES AND ALL.
TOM V TOMMY
I abhor Political Correctness and I am an Unashamed Leftist Anarchist of the Bachunin/Prouhdon/Kropotkin Variety. I am actualy very conservative, I much prefer Burke to Bentham, although Bentham against the US Declaration of independence.
https://t.co/SIJyI3UPfz
and also Against COlonies appended to In defence of Usury
From this statement, if the foregoing observation be just,
the following deductions will come to be made.
http://socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/bentham/usury
are very good reads.
I prefer Chesterton and Belloc ( Distributism) and, Henry George to any form of Free Market Classical Liberalism or indeed Capitalism. Above all, though I can not stand one rule for the Posh and another for the not posh. Legal Snobbery or placing so-called Elites above the Law.
Meanwhile Cox fiddles with his cod piece whilst Rome Burns, or does it.
Brexit is beginning to show that Brexit all along has just been factions of the Oligarchy choosing between Oceana or Eurasia.
May Wants Eurasia and the others want Oceana.
NOT THE GRUB STREET JOURNAL
Exegesis Hermeneutics Flux Capacitor of Truthiness
Toggle Sidebar
February 19, 2017
MEET THE FUGGERS, BREXIT, THE EURO AND CLUELESS ELITES.
Meet the Fuggers or, its the Money Power stupid.
Brexit, The Euro and clueless Elites.
The Eastern Roman empire under Justinian saw the seeds of its final fall to The Ottomans when Abd El Melik started paying tribute in Gold coinage under his own Political Branding you might say.
July 2, 2019
JOURNAL OF INTEGRAL THEORY AND PRACTICE. NOTES FOR CONTEXTUAL SEARCH ENGINE OFFERING INTEGRAL FRAMEWORK PERSPECTIVES. GRUB STREET JOURNAL NOTE 1. #OBJECTIVEKHUNTS
via Journal of Integral Theory and Practice
Notes for Contextual Search engine offering Integral Framework perspectives.
Guide for the Perplexed, Contradiction.
A sort of Guide for the perplexed.
News feeds in the corporate media have become esoteric these days and consulting Maimonides is not such a bad idea.
Maimonides
Introductory Remarks. [ON METHOD] THERE are seven causes of inconsistencies and contradictions to be met within a literary work.
The first cause arises from the fact that the author collects the opinions of various men, each differing from the other, but neglects to mention the name of the author of any particular opinion. In such a work contradictions or inconsistencies must occur, since any two statements may belong to two different authors.
Second cause: The author holds at first one opinion which he subsequently rejects: in his work., however, both his original and altered views are retained.
Third cause: The passages in question are not all to be taken literally: some only are to be understood in their literal sense, while in others figurative language is employed, which includes another meaning besides the literal one: or, in the apparently inconsistent passages, figurative language is employed which, if taken literally, would seem to be contradictories or contraries.
Fourth cause: The premises are not identical in both statements, but for certain reasons they are not fully stated in these passages: or two propositions with different subjects which are expressed by the same term without having the difference in meaning pointed out, occur in two passages. The contradiction is therefore only apparent, but there is no contradiction in reality.
The fifth cause is traceable to the use of a certain method adopted in teaching and expounding profound problems. Namely, a difficult and obscure theorem must sometimes be mentioned and assumed as known, for the illustration of some elementary and intelligible subject which must be taught beforehand the commencement being always made with the easier thing. The teacher must therefore facilitate, in any manner which he can devise, the explanation of those theorems, which have to be assumed as known, and he must content himself with giving a general though somewhat inaccurate notion on the subject. It is, for the present, explained according to the capacity of the students, that they may comprehend it as far as they are required to understand the subject. Later on, the same subject is thoroughly treated and fully developed in its right place.
Sixth cause: The contradiction is not apparent, and only becomes evident through a series of premises. The larger the number of premises necessary to prove the contradiction between the two conclusions, the greater is the chance that it will escape detection, and that the author will not perceive his own inconsistency. Only when from each conclusion, by means of suitable premises, an inference is made, and from the enunciation thus inferred, by means of proper arguments, other conclusions are formed, and after that process has been repeated many times, then it becomes clear that the original conclusions are contradictories or contraries. Even able writers are liable to overlook such inconsistencies. If, however, the contradiction between the original statements can at once be discovered, and the author, while writing the second, does not think of the first, he evinces a greater deficiency, and his words deserve no notice whatever.
Seventh cause: It is sometimes necessary to introduce such metaphysical matter as may partly be disclosed, but must partly be concealed: while, therefore, on one occasion the object which the author has in view may demand that the metaphysical problem be treated as solved in one way, it may be convenient on another occasion to treat it as solved in the opposite way. The author must endeavour, by concealing the fact as much as possible, to prevent the uneducated reader from perceiving the contradiction.
Jain Many SidedNess
Anekāntavāda (Sanskrit: अनेकान्तवाद, “many-sidedness”) refers to the Jain doctrine about metaphysical truths that emerged in ancient India.[1] It states that the ultimate truth and reality is complex and has multiple aspects.[2] Anekantavada has also been interpreted to mean non-absolutism, “intellectual Ahimsa”,[3] religious pluralism,[4] as well as a rejection of fanaticism that leads to terror attacks and mass violence.[5] Some scholars state that modern revisionism has attempted to reinterpret anekantavada with religious tolerance, openmindedness and pluralism.[6][7]
Affirmation: syād-asti—in some ways, it is,
Denial: syān-nāsti—in some ways, it is not,
Joint but successive affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti—in some ways, it is, and it is not,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syān-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is indescribable.
AN Integral Analysis of these Present Discontents
https://twitter.com/land_real71778/status/1790397765312287206