Showing posts with label balanced fiat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label balanced fiat. Show all posts

Sunday, August 16, 2015

"Balanced Fiat?" Translation: People With The MOST Financial Savings Want YOUR Financial Savings "Payed Back" First.

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)

It finally occurred to me what the heck "balanced fiat" actually means.

It's just another divide & conquer technique.

As many have noted, for centuries, there is no such thing as aggregate debt to self.
Individuals can always pay personal debt to self, with more PERSONAL INITIATIVE.

Similarly, aggregates can always pay aggregate debt to aggregate self, with more PUBLIC INITIATIVE, which we call fiat.
In fact, you can say that we denominate Public Initiative with fiat currency.

In purely accounting terms, we have fiat transaction units which we as a nation create and distribute for use in any and all transaction chains, no matter how innovative. In purely accounting jargon that currency creation requires a matching, negative number on some double-entry accounting ledger - which accountants call a deficit. Accountants also call the growing currency supply needed by a growing population - you guessed it - yearly accounting "deficits," and the accumulating public "deficits" a "public debt."

Oooh! Tempests in teapots, you say. Any fool can grasp, when asked, that private financial savings (currency in circulation) has to be equal to public currency creation, minus any currency clawed-back and destroyed via various forms of taxes or penalties by the currency issuer.

And yes, it's pure semantics to insist that nominal accounting terms are something real, and are real yearly deficits and are real, accumulating debt to pay back. They're not.

The only way to pay the nominal (imaginary, purely semantic) national debt is to liquidate all private financial savings.




























So does anyone in their right mind actually want that? Of course not. Yet some people want you to THINK that they do. Why? Simply so that YOU will agree to start liquidating YOUR personal financial savings.

The trick in any game strategy is to get people to START doing something you want them to do, since it will impact them, while never letting it progress to the point of impacting you as well, or at least not as much as it will impact them.

Ever notice that frauds continuously campaign to pay back our nominal debt to ourselves, by "balancing fiat," but we've never quite done it? (Except in 1929 & 1999, triggering serious depressions, for obvious reasons.)

Halting growth of currency supply for even one year - zero public "deficit" - is disastrous. No country I've heard of has ever liquidated all the currency they ever created. Countries disappear from history before they ever get that far. Even banksters don't want to kill our entire nation, since they'd go down with it. They just want to see everyone else suffer, so they can take advantage of the average person. It's truly sick behavior, and downright traitorous.

It's amazing that this many people have been bamboozled for this long!

Ask who campaigns the most for "balanced fiat?" Rich people, that's who. And, of course, their mesmerized lackeys, or hired liars.

Why? So that they - just coincidentally, of course - have added buying power for the transaction units they retain, no matter how briefly, and can therefore trigger forced liquidation of real property at deflated prices.

That's the classic strategy of controlling the money supply, and using that control to cause periodic shortages of "currency."

Why would a rich person want to deplete ALL private savings? They don't, obviously. They only want everyone else to START depleting their private savings. Rich people actually have no intention of ever letting it go so far as depleting their own financial savings. They just want to bankrupt you and your fellow serfs, so that you'll have to give them everything you've got, for pennies on the dollar, just to buy a loaf of bread for your starving baby.

If the root cause of the fear of running out of public fiat is that simple ... how do they get away with it? Divide and conquer is obviously one class of methods. Yet there are obviously 1001 ways or more, and an active war is ongoing, between sociopathic throwbacks, and our emerging aggregate.

However it's executed though, the root desire to hoard fiat while depleting the savings of others is so simple that, like the jitterbug, it plumb abates some sociopaths.

The manufactured Fear of Fiat Deficit takes advantage of an indirect form of personal hoarding behavior, a remnant personal behavior retained from archaic times. That old form of hoarding reflex is slowly being replaced by aggregate selection pressure, resulting in an ongoing transition in hoarding patterns, where we re-purpose personal hoarding instincts, from hoarding of commodity goods (e.g., snails), to hoarding of coordination skills (e.g., army ants).

The result is what we call the evolution of Social Species.

And, of course, the pinnacle of that evolutionary spectrum of social species is Homo Sapiens, the most cooperative species known. Excepting, of course, throwbacks like the Koch Brothers, who will champion any cause whatsoever, if it can later be perverted to their selective advantage. Such people suffer from a type of tic, a Cultural Tourettes Syndrome.

In the case of Koch Industries, they plead guilty to environmental crime in Texas, and then started campaigning for milder sentencing laws. When Koch Industries was caught wilfully poisoning an area with benzene, they
"... admitted that its employees engaged in an orchestrated scheme to conceal the benzene violations from state regulators and the Corpus Christi community.”

“Their advocacy for less draconian drug laws could prove to be a stalking horse for their long-standing efforts to protect corporate criminals and roll back environmental, health and safety laws.”
...

In a plea agreement, the charges were dropped against the four employees.
In Charles Koch’s opinion, the federal case was unjust.
“We had four innocent employees indicted,” he said. “Okay, the company can handle it. Okay, we pay a fine and so on. What’s so upsetting is seeing what it did to them personally and their families.”
You might well ask why nothing was done to Charles Koch & his family. If the guilty employees were "innocent," then he's implying that they were just doing what they were encouraged, or told, to do?

Notice how carefully & casually Koch deflects guilt away from himself and the Control Frauds running upper management, who obviously set the expectations for the behavior of those four employees. Maybe Koch personally ordered the actions taken? That wasn't even examined in the lawsuit.

In this case the same person, Charles Koch has been for excessive prison terms for others, but against them if it might ever get to his own Control Frauds, or himself.

That kind of mind is exactly the kind of mind that can campaign for "balanced fiat."

Calls for "balanced fiat" come from unbalanced minds.

Rational minds won't indict you for realizing that.

We could be doing far more with the capabilities we have. Why waste so much time fooling one another? Our only real goal is operational agility.


Sunday, October 5, 2014

The Great Library At Alexandria Was Destroyed By Budget Cuts, Not Fire

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)

Or, consituting a look at:
Dumb-Ass Neo-Liberals throughout the ages
Google "Emir Amrou Ibn el-Ass" - just one in a long trail of multi-ethnic, multi-religious dumb-asses, doing what they were told. The damage had already been done, long before, by those re-cooking the books.

Seems our current textbooks are worse than useless, yet again. :(

If we don't do something, we'll be left with an electorate that only cnows how to thinc. Without that missing real ability, it won't matter HOW much "STEM" data they memorize.

Now, aren't you happy that we've cut Public Initiative enough to balance our fiat? Oops! Pardon my illicit use of contraband. Oh what a feeling. Right. Was it worth it.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Balanced Fiat Is A Euphemism For Class Warfare.

In response to the mini-essay on PK's "Moment of Dumb Questioness" one new reader wrote in an email:

"You may want to always provide a explanation which is as simple - but as correct - as possible for why there is essentially no such thing as "deficit" with our fiat economy for the broad population. Then, use that concept to point out why the fiat economy is essential to national well-being. For me such commentaries are strongest when they point out whatever is not perfect. In this case, what (far less important) downside effects occur, and when they occur, as a result of our fiat economy 'printing' it's own currency on-demand."

This is progress. One more down. Minimum of another 15 million US citizens to go! (~10% of adult population)

This reader makes a good point. I will try to always add an opening cue for new audiences. Here's a stab. It may already be thinking too far ahead. If so, please offer your own version of a system primer:

"See Jane. See Dick. See Jane provision the country, using decimal notation for tracking all transaction chains, no matter how complex. See Dick try to run off with all the decimal notation, i.e., the 'fiat.' "

The simple issue is that most of this whole, embarrassing debate results from twisted semantics. A "deficit" formally means less of something than was previously present. Can one have a virtual deficit in a dimensionless, virtual concept - regardless of whether or not you write virtual symbols for those dimensionless concepts in double-entry accounting logs? Of course. It all depends on the semantics chosen for the context being discussed. What happens of people try to mix metaphors across non-overlapping contexts? Then you have sophism. Note that sophism isn't a problem unless a conversation occurs between any combination of the unscrupulous and/or slow witted.

Sophism 300BC: "Is that YOUR dog?" [Yes.] "Is THAT dog a mother?" [Yes.] "Therefore THAT dog is YOUR mother. Ha. Ha." [??]

Sophism 2013 AD: "Does our growing population and economy need more virtual units to track the increasing number of transactions uses this year, vs last  year?" [Yes.]  "So we have a deficit in calculating units to be used this year, vs last year?" [Yes.] "Those charged with making up that 'deficit' therefore have a 'debt'." [Well ... Ok.] "You're a citizen. Therefore, YOU have a debt to pay. Pay up!" [Huh? .. well ... ok. Here. ... Hey! Whaddya mean, I no longer have a job, or pension, or civil rights?]

Endless numbers of anthropologists & historians have explained this ... in countless ways. Even Wallace & Darwin. Here's the gist of the story.

In reality, all adaptive systems are always on a fiat currency system, i.e., no limit to self-bookkeeping. Just use the noise thrown off by the system components currently in operation. Our only internal system restraint is avoiding the confusion of either inflation or deflation. An electorate may pretend otherwise, but it was always just a pretension. Fiat = guaranteed denomination of any & all public initiative. It's just system bookkeeping. Can you imagine any cell-biology system that wasn't resource restrained, voluntarily running out of ATP? That's like a nation which isn't resource constrained running out of hammers - or a blonde running out of signals to breathe in and breathe out. No reason for it to occur ... other than internal disorganization.

Hence, a balanced fiat currency budget means balanced public fiat, which means balanced public initiative? So, what the heck does that mean? It means no NET public initiative this year that exceeds what's clawed back from last year's public initiative? What sense does that make? None whatsoever. Just sophism.

Stop coordinating so we can focus on infighting? The only avenue for local advancement which that policy leaves is class warfare!

Class warfare is just jostling within the ranks - which just brings us back to another definition of inflation vs deflation. Cultural inflation = too little internal adaptive pressure. Cultural deflation = too much internal adaptive pressure. Either can weaken the resiliency of a culture, and voluntarily limit it's adaptive rate.

Once infighting breaks out, guess which "class" of people always promotes balanced fiat? You guessed it. Whomever gets a leg up in any family/clan/class struggle naturally seeks to stick it to their former adversary - and keep 'em down - by under-funding and over-taxing everyone in their erstwhile competitor class. Minimal jostling for position keeps distributed adaptive rate at rates dictated by context. The knack is to know how to not go too far. A culture under-provisioning an entire class of it's own citizens is exactly like a person shooting their own foot, or brain. If you have an asset, it's better to maximally employ it rather than waste it. In any complex system, the highest return - by far - is the return-on-coordination. The alternatives are all different degrees of playing with failure.

USUALLY, these internal-competition cycles are broken only when some worse crisis forces the infighters to instead team up, coordinate, and optimally provision the entire country. Any lack of outside adaptive pressure, however, allows the knuckledraggers to again lobby for Ludditism and "balanced fiat." If that gets out of hand, the whole system usually falls behind some other culture maintaining a higher adaptive rate.

ps: "Balanced Fiat" has become a CFC euphemism for class warfare. Where CFC means "control-fraud correct" .. i.e., endless semantic Sophism