Stefan Verstappen is a survivalist, a bit libertarian - probably in the Ron Paul tradition. Like Ron Paul, he is emphatic, but I wonder how libertarianism fits in with this?
In this video Stefan Verstappen looks into the myth of overpopulation. I thought I would put out something that's a bit more positive for once.
I thought the Stefan Verstappen videos Part 4 and 5 are unacceptable for this site. The Myth of Terrorism goes deep into conspiracy theory, and Why We Are Poor is a rant about tax, although if half of US taxes are going on the military then Stefan has a point.
In the comment section under, 'Why We Are Poor', I wrote to Stefan Verstappen telling him about MMT and the way that fiat money works is counter-intuitive. I then put out the link for Bill Mitchell's, Why Tax Doesn't Pay for Anything. When I commented on his first video, which was Part 1, I soon got a reply, so I might get one about MMT sometime soon as well. I doubt if he will agree, but as he very emphatic then maybe he, or even Ron Paul, could eventually see another way. At least there could be room for compromise.
For those of you that missed part 1, here it is, it is excellent:
Paradise Stolen - Episode 1 - DON'T SHOW YOUR CHILDREN!
Anti-War video showing another side to the cost of war - the life you could have had. WARNING: graphic images and loud music halfway through.
Origin of the rat race = government subsidies for private credit creation and usury.
ReplyDeleteAnd those who support those are many more than just a 100 or so psychopaths wearing masks.
Oh well, each generation is a new hope...
"telling him about MMT and the way that fiat money works is counter-intuitive."
ReplyDeleteIts only counter-intuitive for a libertarian...
Libertarians "get" fiat and hate it - not realizing that inexpensive fiat is the ONLY ethical form for government money.
ReplyDeleteThe problem, of course, is government subsidies for banks since these tilt the playing field even more in favor of the rich and reduce the ability of the monetary sovereign to spend without price inflation.
Where do you get that fiat is the only 'ethical' form of "money" ?
ReplyDeleteChapter and verse please...
Matthew 22:16-22 and the supposition that government should serve the general welfare and not special interests such as gold owners.
ReplyDeleteAlso, please quote me accurately; I said "inexpensive fiat is the ONLY ethical form for government money"; private monies (for private use only) are a possibility too, don't you know
?
http://biblehub.com/greek/1485.htm
ReplyDelete"ethos: custom, a usage (prescribed by habit or law)"
You are using the wrong word there it doesn't imply whether the custom or usage is good or bad... it's just the custom...
And then this "inexpensive fiat"
ReplyDelete?????
Inexpensive in what terms? This is an oxymoron you are using here...
'fiat ' means "be it done".... there is no relative value at all...
This is your yin and yang back and forth between OT and NT coming in here again...
OT: "inexpensive"
NT: "fiat"
So you string them together and get "inexpensive fiat!"....
Fiat can certainly be needlessly expensive as in the requirement to redeem central bank notes or account balances with gold.
ReplyDeleteEthical:
ReplyDelete2. being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice, especially the standards of a profession. from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ethical
Inexpensive in what terms? Franko
ReplyDeleteIn real terms; gold is rare and expensive to mine, e.g. in terms of energy used and environmental damage caused.
So the use of gold as fiat makes fiat creation much more difficult in real terms and thus rewards lazy hoarding of it - contrary to the message of Matthew 25:14-30, the Parable of the Talents.
Fiat should be no more expensive to create than is necessary to prevent, for example, the counterfeiting of it.
Well even in a 'fiat' system (which I would term a numismatic system) people still have to run the accounting system... and that takes a lot of real work.... its not ditch digging but its still real work...
ReplyDeleteThe differentiation between the two systems is not how much work it takes to operate/administer them... they both take a lot of real work by people to operate...
Our implementation of the numismatic type system over a metal based one gives us more options/degrees of freedom in how we can regulate our economy...
We dont have control of a metals based system...
The key difference is not how much work it takes to administer either, the key difference is the control/regulatory aspects of each....
Local administrators: "Hey! we just had a big flood in Louisiana a bunch of households and firms got wiped out we need to make available more USD balances for increased transaction settlements to rebuild down there pronto!"
ReplyDeletepos libertarian moron assholes: "uhhhh.... sorry... we have to go out west and dig up some more gold first... hold on for a while if you can we will get back to you when and if we get some more gold!"
people still have to run the accounting system... and that takes a lot of real work.... Franko
ReplyDeleteNo, it doesn't. Simply keeping account balances and handling transactions between accounts could be completely automated.
Besides, the costs would be spread over an entire population of citizens.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSimply keeping account balances and handling transactions between accounts could be completely automated. aa
ReplyDeleteWell, not yet completely automated since there would still be a need to interpret hand written checks.
You're dismissive of all the white collar work and expertise that is required to administer a numismatic system....
ReplyDeleteTo you, if you are not mindlessly digging ditches then you are not really working...
This is your OT bias here again... "justified through works"...
You're dismissive of all the white collar work and expertise that is required to administer a numismatic system.... Franko
ReplyDeleteA triffle when compared to a gold standard - especially since the costs are spread over an entire population.
Besides, what better choice is there?
The problems arise when people insist that the monetary sovereign or its central bank lend since that activity is very labor intensive. Otoh, simply keeping accounts and processing transactions is very routine and soon could be completely automated.
ReplyDeletePeople are justified by a faith that works.
ReplyDeleteSo ATM networks just evolved from the apes?
ReplyDeleteThe wiring just grows like grapevines evolved from the algae?
New developments are built and the ATM/teller branches just evolve up from the rocks in the ground?
Proverbs 27:3
ReplyDeleteA stone is heavy and the sand weighty, But the provocation of a fool is heavier than both of them.
But don't despair, Franko, since reading and heeding Scripture can cure even a fool.
You're the moron saying if we just give everyone an account directly at the cb with no intermediary then everything will be perfect....
ReplyDeletethen everything will be perfect.... Franko
ReplyDeleteI've never said that but certainly de-privileging depository institutions and, by extension, the most so-called "credit worthy", the rich, is a necessary step toward social justice.
I have a good article that you will like tomorrow, Andrew. About how crooked banks are.
DeleteAbout how crooked banks are. Kaivey
ReplyDeleteHow can they not be with largely virtual liabilities wrt the population? The temptation to create deposits/liabilities is large and should be balanced by making sure those liabilities are real and not a sham.