[GJM] An excellent programme

[Steve Nieman]

Steve,

As usual, you bring up many good fundamental points.

Money and the economy are metaphysical (everything, actually is).  A  
leap of faith is required in order for the system to effectively  
change.  Not many people are willing to take that leap into the black  
void (which is true in the spiritual sense, too).

Change will happen incrementally.  The change could be more positive,  
or it might go backward again:  It just depends what people do.  Good  
news is we have the best tools we've ever had to bring to bear.

In every negative exists the seeds for the positive.  If George Bush  
wouldn't have come along, we would never see now how screwed up one  
US administration over a relatively short time period could make not  
just the economy, but a democratic governing way of Life.  True, the  
last 50 years of US governments (maybe more) has helped bring Bush to  
the pinnacle he has reached.

Life, money, economic activity will never be perfect.  But you are  
EXACTLY correct, that macro change starts with the micro individual.   
I come across a lot of people who say they will change (for the good)  
once good changes happen on a broader scale.  That won't work, but  
perhaps if people suffer enough, they'll learn.

Obviously, the whole world of humankind is in transition currently on  
many levels.  Technology has brought us to the doorstep of finally  
transcending the nation-state system with all its associated  
drawbacks.  I believe global change is inevitable.  It's just a  
matter of how the transition will occur.

We can all play a part if we want to.  Or we can all run and hide.

Regards,
Steve Nieman
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Jan 10, 2008, at 7:48 PM, Steve Consilvio wrote:

> I agree that it is an excellent program, but please allow me to add  
> a criticism.
>
> All four speakers, regardless of their respective interpretation,  
> should have been able to knock the reporter's question out of the  
> ballpark.  Instead, none of them barely took a swing at the  
> question, much less hit the ball.
>
> Her question was, "what should people do?"
>
> The answer, of course, depends on the financial circumstances of  
> the person.  Somebody who makes $2.00 a day can do nothing  
> different, but everybody else can handle their money differently.   
> Rodney was right that people need to get out of debt, but the  
> solution is for everyone with money to help everyone in debt to get  
> out of debt.  Debtors money is all owed to someone, and probably  
> you, directly or indirectly.  (You may even be in debt to yourself!)
>
> Rodney suggested that people getting out of debt would be bad for  
> the economy.  While I understand what he means, I disagree with the  
> point.  We need to deflate the economy of all its fiat value, (not  
> just fiat money) and the best way to do that is eliminate the  
> financial inequality between men.  He is unconsciously suggesting  
> that movements towards equality is bad for the privileged, but the  
> slave-master is no more free than the slave (as the lenders and  
> sellers are now discovering.)
>
> What the government does (and encourages others to do) is no  
> different than what people are doing privately.  The "powers that  
> be," whom people like to blame exclusively, do not really control  
> anybody but themselves, the same as everybody else.  The weak can  
> be as unwise as the powerful.  The dividing point is wisdom, not  
> power.  Whoever holds any money can manage it differently, and  
> understand it differently.  Too many people are waiting on somebody  
> else to do the right thing, rather than going ahead and doing the  
> right thing themselves.  At a minimum, that is how the reporter's  
> question should have been answered.  Doing the right thing is  
> always the right thing to do.  There is only a crisis for the  
> frightened.
>
> To put it another way, to be "the change you want to see in the  
> world," then you need to know what and how to change.  That is the  
> essence of the reporter's question.  As I have explained elsewhere,  
> inflation is caused by both profit and interest.  If true, EVERY  
> transaction causes inflation.  This would make the need for a  
> Jubilee and a correction every 50 years imperative, since left  
> unchecked we would have absolute chaos, like now.  The desperation  
> feeds the inflation, and the inflation feeds the desperation.  As  
> such, people need to think differently about their "unfortunate"  
> surplus (which is the only thing that can be invested or banked,)  
> because they are part of the imbalance.
>
> The habit of hoarding and profiting is thousands of years old, and  
> currently there is no way avoid either profit and interest.  I've  
> been trying, but with little success.  There are no forests left  
> that people can escape into like Robin Hood, but it may explain a  
> lot about the existence of Islamic tribal areas and their deep  
> suspicion of the "civilized" West.  In the modern world, it is  
> practically impossible to live at zero. Milk cost $3.75 a gallon,  
> but the cow and the grass and the sunshine are the same as they  
> always were.  Our method of counting is very uncivilized.
>
> There are signs on the horizon that some changes are being made.   
> The universities are drawing down their endowments a little, but as  
> long as they keep collecting interest and profit with their other  
> hand, it will have little effect.  (Many on this list are paid by  
> that beast, I believe, and probably have investments which are  
> guaranteed by the misery of the students they teach.)  And, if the  
> central banks keep pumping money into the economy (which is  
> creating more debt, not reducing it,) then things will track  
> worse.  The government is ALWAYS the last organization to know what  
> to do, which may explain why they fall rather than reforming  
> themselves.
>
> The most direct way to answer the reporter's question is that  
> people should get out of the ponzi scheme, because it is always the  
> right thing to do.  They do not need to get out of the bank,  
> because the bank offers convenience, but they should get out of the  
> interest-accepting mechanisms of stocks, bonds, annuities, 401k's,  
> insurance, and even the acceptance of using coupons.  Everybody  
> should be paying the same price for products.  People should  
> neither pay interest nor take interest, and keep profit to a minimum.
>
> Besides reducing debt and the number of debtors, we need to reduce  
> taxes, prices and profits.  This is something that every individual  
> can do.  Every number that rises causes another number to rise.   
> The best way to raise the standard of living is to lower the cost  
> of living.  Everybody can afford zero.  All profit returns as an  
> expense, and every transaction not at zero creates inflation.   
> Therefore, we want to keep most transactions but lose the numbers.
>
> The BIGGEST PROBLEM, however, is in the assumption behind the  
> question.  The idea that money should be "protected" and should  
> "grow" was implied in "what should people do?"  The question wasn't  
> "what should we do to help the people who are hurting?" ; the  
> question was "what should people do to keep their money safe?"  It  
> was very akin to the drivel stock advisors peddle with their pump  
> and dump strategy, who similarly ply on people's fear of losing  
> money, which is only the inverse of loving to make money grow and/ 
> or wanting to keep it "safe."
>
> A question rooted in fear feeds fear.  The economy is going to  
> meltdown again, it is mathematically unavoidable unless we change  
> our understanding.  Inflation eats everyone alive.  The big  
> challenge in making a shift to a new economy is that the planet has  
> billions of citizens with no useful skills beyond filling out  
> forms.  They have their heart set on early retirement and a casual  
> lifestyle. They believe in a system that does not work, and as  
> Moeen described, they have made economists into high-priests.   
> Fancy coinage, even triangular monies, are made at every turn.   
> Like an embellished Bible, the decoration is valued more than the  
> content.
>
> In ways great and small people hoard their wealth and misuse their  
> money.  Banks exist because we think printed paper is "valuable."   
> People trust the power of money more than they trust their neighbor  
> or God.  It is a misplaced trust.  Trusting the Euro instead of the  
> dollar simply changes the object, but the misplaced trust endures.   
> The love of money has never served men well.
>
> peace,
> steve consilvio
> www.behappyandfree.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://globaljusticemovement.net/pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20080115/185e5b4a/attachment.html