The Suffocation of Economic Central Control

Centralised control, whether 'the state' acting as if the market or, ostensibly, the 'market' acting as if 'the state', fails (as does tickling yourself fail to raise a chuckle).  What central 'control' is supposed to do is 'sense and react' and therein lays the two fundamental problems:

1/. the input is always going to be faulty (how can such a system be sensitive enough, accurate enough, smart enough to take account of every permutation)?
2/. the output is always going to be faulty (how can such a system be reactive enough, delicate enough, effective enough to take account of every permutation)?

And that does not take account of the two secondary problems, (problems that would remain even if the system of centralised control, be it faux market or state, did not suffer from the two fundamental problems):

a/. the centralised control is always going to attempt to manipulate the market by way of attempting to provide favourable conditions bias to suit its own agenda
b/. the faulty outputs and bias manipulation of the centralised control will distort the market away from the form it would otherwise naturally be drawn to.

Centralised control treats the economy as though it is one big thing and that then all the micro commercial activities will feed from that initiative, as if little piranhas swarming onto whatever gigantic carcass has been fed to them.  That may be fine for feeding identical fish but the economy is rightly comprised of totally disparate elements - it is an ultimately diverse ecosystem.

The great thing about diverse ecosystems is that, left alone, they manage themselves.  There is still a form of centralised control of economies but that is because: each and every element of the whole is a self regulating economy in itself.  The effect of each element, free to act in its own best self interest, is that a system of each element's independent economy acts upon a plethora of spontaneous and autonomous sub-economies to effectively create a whole.

It is not only imposable to replicate or replace the effectiveness of this type of system, it is unnecessary to try (unless the intention of influencing is for one sub-economy to do so in order to attempt to change the whole for reasons of self-interest).  It is unnecessary to try to replicate a system of sub-economies because: since the sub-economy system is so refined and reactive it cannot be bettered for servicing the interests of the sub-economy system as a whole.

There is no such thing as 'the economy', it is just a conceptual idea to explain the 'system of sub-economies' as a whole, just as there is not such thing as a forest, that is just a word for the conceptual idea of many trees, plants, animals living together in one place, symbiotically acting as a if a whole too.

Your Property is the Last Resort of the Fractional/Central Banking Complex

I do not have a fundamental issue with a fractional reserve banking system nor with a central bank as a banker's lender of last resort. What I do have an issue with is 'the state' using its monopoly power of violence based coercion (the threat and use of force) to tax the people and underwrite that central bank.

In a stateless society people could legitimately offer banking services which employed a fractional reserve method of money creation and dealt in a form of money brought-about in this way. These banks, by way of assurance of their eventual solvency, could employ the services of central banks to effectively 'insure' their ability to repay depositors.

What those stateless central banks could not legitimately do is force the public to underwrite their losses. It would then just be up to the prospective customers of such banks to judge if they believed their deposits were safe in such institutions. And if those banks went bust the owners and directors of the bank would be liable to the creditors for their losses, every penny of their personal assets would be liable for forfeit.

So I think it is important to, truthfully and accurately, identify the real 'elephant' in this room. The elephant is not money, not fractional reserve money creation, not the bankers, not the banks, not the central banks, not even the inflation of an over-produced fiat currency. The elephant is the relationship between 'the state', money and banks, a relationship which indemnifies the banking system from its losses at the expense of an unwitting public.

It may be that the bankers have manipulated and cajoled 'the state' into the position of offering their commercial interests this indemnity (along with the protection of limited liability incorporation); that much is apparent to those who have studied the history of banking. But that is the prerogative of businesses: take whatever advantage you 'legally' can within the prevailing system.

Clearly 'the state' should never subcontract the function of the creation of money to entities outside of itself and yet continue to offer the resources of 'the state' to back-up that non-governmental commercial banking system. But whilst there is a central power, such as 'the state', it will always be at risk of being subjected to whatever pressures can be brought to avail. Pressures to turn the power of 'the state' into the service of those who would see that 'usurpation of power' gives them an irreproachable commercial benefit.

'The state' is, first and foremost, the mechanism by which the money-power and ruling oligarchy does their bidding. That is the purpose of 'the state' and all other apparent functions just illusionary 'window dressing' to fool the people into the belief that the role of the state is to serve the interests of the people.

Capitalism, Corporatism and the State

There does not have to be a 'state' for Capitalism to work, indeed the free market is the very life-blood of a healthy economy and of a harmonious human society when unencumbered by 'the state'. The less 'the state' the more competition arises, the more competition arises the broader the economic and social benefit.

 

Corporatism is another matter and the two, Capitalism and Corporatism, should in no way be confused. Corporatism is utterly dependent on government to grant it faux personage, indemnity, patent, monopoly and privilege. True that Capitalism will seek-out whatever benefit it can derive from whatever medium in which it is set; and that includes taking whatever advantage it can derive and coerce from 'the state'. When Capitalism so feeds from 'the state' it morphs into Corporatism. That is not the fault of Capitalism that is one of the many faults of 'the state'.

End 'the state'. End Corporatism! Long live Freedom. Long live Capitalism. Long live the Free Market.

Slaves to the Banker State

The missing factor in the housing market equation is the lack of consequences or to express that another way: imaginary limitations granted to lenders and borrower's liabilities.

This is the fault of the state. How? If I lend the capital to a house purchaser and they default I suffer a loss - that focuses my mind as to the real risk and consequence. If my loans to borrowers were made with capital that I did not own but was nevertheless available to me as a result of, say, my substantial and consistent business cash-flow, that would be a risky business strategy, but I could argue I was still not actually 'trading insolvently' because the loan I had made formed an asset on my balance sheet.

How could I take such a risk (knowing if my borrower defaults I cannot pay my liabilities)? Easily if I have a state registered Limited Liability company (Ltd Co) and I measure the potential for profit exceeds the value of my Ltd Co should this loan default and the company go bust (unable to pay creditors). Most Ltd Co's do not see this sort of prospect as making commercial sense even with their directors enjoying Limited Liability protection because they do not see the potential for sufficient return against capital available and the prospect of risk as a viable equation (let alone its questionable legality within the scope of trading insolvently as a Ltd Co).

Yet banks do expose themselves to this risk. Why? Because they can create almost as much money as they require so long as they are either receiving deposits at a sufficient rate, are re-financing loans or are able to enjoy interbank lending to fund the loans they are making. And then the full risk is ultimately mitigated because the central bank will act as 'lender of last resort' should their house of cards threaten to fall. Whilst the beneficiaries of central banks are hard to identify the guarantor is not: it is the state. But what actually is 'the state'? The state is a conduit for the power of the forced taxation of human society.

The only viable and moral solution is to remove the link between the productive, wealth creation, ability of human society and the financial indemnification of all types company owners for their losses - especially banks. Bank's owners will be very focused as to the risk they are taking when they see all their private property, past and future, is at risk. Bankers want the all the reward for themselves and YOU to take all losses. Bankers have used a succession manufactured wars to indebt states to them and to force states to allow the grant of this present banking system. They have created repeated economic bubbles and crashes to force the state to borrow more of the money they create via the permitted wizardry of fractional-reserve-banking.

Whilst we continue to have human society controlled and bleed via a 'state' we continue to allow a means for the banking money power elites to tap-in to the life-blood of humanity, through the power of state taxation, for their own gains at the cost of all others. The only enduring protection is to end the state!

The Systemic Extortion Racket - Taxation

Let's face it, the word 'tax' is purely a euphemism. The real description of the process should correctly be termed 'taking money via the threat of violent force and coercion'. Remove the threat of violence and this quazi-Mafiosa revenue gathering mechanism's model fails immediately; totally and irrevocably.

So, regardless of the apparent merits of hospitalising sick kittens, fighting 'just wars' or whatever other emotive sob-story is dispensed to attempt to justify taxation, when funds are gathered in such a way 'Natural Law' is broken.

What is 'Natural Law'? It is simply those fundamental rules of human society and cooperation that do not need to be written by some imaginary power, church or state, to be logical, practical and true. Natural Law says do not hurt me, do not take my property, do not steal the fruits of my labour. Anything that breaks these fundamental natural laws is intrinsically erroneous. No body has the right to exceed Natural Law - no individual or group of individuals can grant to themselves or others powers they do no possess the right of themselves.

Beyond that of the simple family group I cannot think of any form of leadership, rule or governance that did not include the gathering of a tithe to subsidise a higher echelon.

To be most successful in this enterprise - certainly man's oldest business - there is a balance to be struck between violent force and willing consent. People who live in fear of imminent attack from wolves are happy to reward the leader of those warriors who successfully protect the settlement.

The less apparent the threat or benefit the less the immediate willingness is to pay. It is the task of the state to constantly encourage its subjects to consent to pay taxes with only the minimum visibility of the ultimate threat of force being the most desirable - so as not to 'frighten the horses'.

Roman Emperors and British Kings long understood that which Thomas Paine identified in his Rights of Man: “...taxes are not raised to carry on wars, but that wars are raised to carry on taxes”.

Taxation is the gun in the room and social benifit is the illusion.

If the state resolved to reject all use of force to enforce its dictates how long would it last?  Who would agree to pay taxes if the outcome of denying their polite requests was zilch enforcement.  If you call for a socialist state with its redistribution of wealth but you fail to recognise the 'gun in the room' you are not being honest with yourself at the least.

I don't care what magical costumes and special powers statists wish to imagine for your state's authorities, if they come for peoples money and will use violent force to make that happen that is violent theft.

I agree with Socialists that there is a "wealthy elite" who "through manipulation of our politics and economies" are taking more than they rightly should derive.  That is the fact.

So the statist's solution is what: this system is not working so we need to do even more of it, exert more control, make more rules.

I say this system of state and government is and always will be manipulated to favour the very few.  That is what it is for.  The idea that government delivers wide ranging social benefit is an illusion to grant a form of justification for the illusionary edifice of the state to exist at all.

How long would the people support the concept of the state if the people could clearly see they derived absolutely no social benefit at all, just paid taxes.  That would clearly be slavery.

If a state taxed 1% and delivered nothing it may, via the use of force, just about survive.  But at 50% and never any apparent benefit at all, ever: revolution.

A tax of 30% and a degree of social benefit people swing along with it.  Add to that 14 years of government school indoctrination and a fundamentally uncritical media and they even can start to push-up the levels of taxation.

This balancing act is not how the state works, it is the illusion it creates of how it works whilst, in reality, the truly wealthy elite own and control politics and economies.

Without the state to do the bidding of this 'truly wealthy elite' they are cut-off from the control mechanism they depend upon, have invented, to maintain their advantage whilst the people fail to see the state for what it really is, a modern form of slavery, and instead think it is all about delivering social benefit and justice.

The authority of the state will always be usurped by the few at the expense of the many

The alternative is to do away with this dangerous failed deceitful system of democracy, but not to return to yet another government of appointed officials. (The authority of the state will always be usurped by the few at the expense of the many). Rather do away with the whole busted, dated legacy of primitive tribal order. End our belief and reliance in the false illusionary paradigm of the state and its government too.

"Laissez-nous faire"
1. The individual is primary in human society.
2. Freedom is a natural right.
3. Nature is a harmonious and self-regulating system. Human society as a part of nature will be harmonious if free to be a fully self-regulating system also.

The State is Mother to Little Ducklings

It would be nice to think the warm and cuddly state looks after folk just 'cause they want to take care of them all. Yes: people are seduced into replacing their 'want to be nurtured as if children' into adulthood - they remain as childish adults. The state cultivates this as a normality.

This is a ploy - a deception. This is an outcome of the state's mechanisms: from state controlled schooling, the growing excessive state interference with all important aspects of human existence; from healthcare to banal media culture to devaluation of family and tribe to stupefying politically correct thinking and such. It cultivates immature adulthood. It brings about a submissive and unquestioning populous.

But in fact it is not so good for the people as we are trained to think. It is brought about because people would not be seduced by a state that appeared to return nothing - that clearly just took tithes via the threat of force.

The state is a self perpetuating entity. No state works to reduce itself to the smallest role possible. And worse the state is not as it appears: not for the people and of the people. It is a mechanism of control and for the gathering of taxes, opportunity and advantages - wealth that far exceeds that which it returns.

The wealth is directed to the controlling oligarchy who choreograph the theatre of governments. The main route for money from this tithe gathering system is via the interest paid to the privately controlled central banking system alongside of a labyrinth of global corporates.

The humans are tax-salves, given just enough choice and independence to not clearly perceive their situation. They are the human-tax-slave-herd. Countries are tax-farms in which the human-herd produces.

Unemployment benefits costs jobs - who will work for less than they can receive for nothing. Meanwhile other have their profits taken to subsidise the non-productive.

Supplementary benefits just subside employers at the expense of the tax payer.

Minimum wages reduce employment opportunities.

The fact is that without these interferences from the state there will be greater employment, lower taxes, more production and greater wealth produced for all to befit from. Especially without the bloodsuckers who sup upon it all.

The global elite's government fronts need this mishmash to subdue humanity into a convoluted stupor of ill-educated poverty and run-ragged servitude.

So keep begging to suckling those measly drips of stolen milk at the bosom of the state or get a grip and produce your own abundance. There is plenty to go around.

Bank of England warn quantitative easing could lead to “unwarranted depreciation of sterling”

I did not appoint these fools. I did not sign-up for this. But it looks like I'll have to suffer the consequences of their actions.

When you have an unlimited and growing financial liability to which it can be demanded that you yield - with all the 'authority' of a government by way of its absolute powers of taxation and force - you are extremely exposed. Nobody in their right mind would accept such a liability willingly.

This so called 'quantitative easing' can only lead to “a depreciation of sterling”. That is obvious. The only reason depreciation would not be apparent is if every other currency is being produced at the same rate or there is seen to be an equivalent growth of value of the specific money producing nation's total economic resource.

The situation is clearly the former: depreciation is not so apparent, with sterling yet, because most other major currencies are being produced at a similar rate. But that does not mean the value of money is not falling, it just means the value of these currencies are all falling simultaneously (like an ill equipped international school of bungee-jumping).

 

And still inflation is not yet so intensely evident. Why? Because of deflation in so many market sectors due simply to the generally failing economy. There is no scope to increase prices of any kind of goods and services which folk feel they can, if need be, do without (because the market is so soft, disposable income so thin, without they will do).

 I did not sign-off for this maybe but categorically my kids did not in any way and so if you are born into debt that is indentured servitude or, put it another-way, slavery; TAX SLAVERY! And so it is. We are the HUMAN-TAX-HERD and this place we foolishly thought of as being 'our country' is nothing of the sort. It is a giant TAX-FARM. 

Who the beneficial owners are is not so clear - I say "follow the money". But our 'democratically elected' squad of muppits are just a foil of fake accountability and their boundless army of public sector money eaters just give them a virtually guaranteed mandate. Belief in the necessity of 'The State' (of any kind or form) is the most persistent and dangerous superstitious illusion of which I am now thankfully utterly free.

Do You Give a Fig?

UK National Debt Clock - DebtBombshell

Stop paying tax! We are all trained to think that 'avoidance' is a shameful disgrace but the line must be drawn - the longer we leave this simple action the more intractable it is going to become.

The state is a sham - it is a racket and ALL the people who work for the state have nothing less than a vested interest in its continuance, all the people who take some form of benefit, from having their bins emptied to receiving every penny they spend, buy into its perpetuation - to some extent or other including me.

But the truth is it is a busted flush. It works through the use of force and that alone requires its continuance to be seen as illicit.

Those who want to force me to work to pay for their kids to go to school or have their granny's bunions removed are part of the criminal enterprise.

MPs spend £400,000 of taxpayers' cash on 12 fig trees for their offices

We are duped into permitting the continuance of the criminal enterprise called The State with minimal returns. The big returns are made by the corporate and financial enteritis who control the whole ugly enterprise, and always will, and who skim as much as they can from the top without reservation.

The state is a money gathering machine, the people are slaves to this system. Tax Slaves. They are the human herd and the nation states are the farms, Tax Farms.

All we need to do to stop this cycle is to see the truth and refuse to travel this path any more.

The State - Strangers who throw all your money into a bottomless pit

If we are on a sinking wooden boat and all we have is a captain and all that captain has is a great big hammer with a bucket full of nails; expect to hear nothing but the sound of banging, battering, clobbering, pounding, pummelling, thrashing, trouncing, walloping and whacking - in that order!

The captain will tell you this is all his men can do. But you know: the weight of all these nails is going to sink that darn boat anyway, regardless. The boat is sinking, you are on it and it is miles from land. And the funny thing is the ones who are doing all the hammering, having holed the hull in the first place, are the only ones with life-jackets on, indeed with your life-jackets on.

What are you going to do? Push those fellows with the hammer in the sea and tip their bucket of nails in with them too. I reckon with a little luck we could make it to the shore - this is, after all, a wooden boat.

Here is another thing. If you owned a money printing machine, not fake money but real money, would you ever be broke again? Only if you were really very stupid. And would you give that machine away on the agreement that you will instead pay interest for any of the money the machine printed. Only if you were very stupid again.  Or fundamentally corrupt.

Why We Should Keep Our Bank Cheque Books

Cheques are a powerful tool.  They enable 'people', non-banking enteritis or non-states, to 'create' money - just on the power the note/cheque promises to fulfil.  If someone you trust enough offers you a 'post-dated' cheque you prospectively will accept it; if that is in your interest.  This could be done with a simple letter - effectively a promissory note - but with a cheque the simple mechanism is in place to easily realise the money - pay in into your bank and draw cash - whenever the date and payee name is valid.

In theory people could use trusted 'open' cheques (with no payee named and maybe undated) to trade and barter without paying the cheque into a bank, just so long as the cheque's issuer is trusted by each party who in turn accept it (effectively a demand promissory note). This indeed once happened with counter-signed Banker's Drafts, they would often change hands until banks started to refuse to accept the counter signing as valid (on grounds of fraud prevention) and now do not issue drafts at all.

If the next step of government is to remove 'cash' from society and use various auditable and identifiable means of electronic payment devices in its place, that is all fine-and-dandy apart from for the black economy - transactions that are done 'for cash'.

With the advent of 'digital cash' what will replace paper-money/cash in the black economy?  Gold?  Bags of dope?  Signed cheques from enteritis who have an established creditworthiness (trust) in the public mind?

Call me suspicious because I do suspect there is an underside to this motion: to end the use of cheques. And I suspect my synopsis above is not so far from that truth; that it is all about making people find tax-avoidance progressively harder to carry-out. (and bank cashless-transaction charges no doubt).

See: Promissory note - From Wikipedia

See: Bills of Exchange Act 1882

An example of a 'trusted open note/cheque' would be shopping vouchers for say Tesco or Waitrose, postage stamps, etc. I would accept a few of those right now.

But we can only replace cheques if we still are 'allowed' - by the state - to have cash! 
See: Is a cashless society on the cards?

On the other hand; the people will do much better to revert to our own form of currency.  Since our money already is not actually issued by government at all; it is all raised through the banking system and is 'taxed' therefore by interest charges and inflation (a 'tax' that goes directly to the issuing bank).

Gold is one option for underpinning state-free currency.  Any number of trusted gold investment companies can sell paper notes (cash) which can be simply exchanged for real-gold - just like the old days - you can pay me with those!

But the gold market is still vulnerable to manipulation since the self-same bankers who create the money today also keep their wealth in gold and control the gold market.

Paper promise notes could replace this that simply represent one hour of work.  A Doctor may charge ten units for one hour of medical advice, a night watchman may charge half a unit per hour for sitting keeping an eye open.

An employer will pay staff with notes issued by a trusted issuer of notes that most people and companies will accept.

That is really what we all have for sale and by what everything is represented; human effort.  Be it making something and getting it to the store or digging minerals from your land.  All boils down to human effort.