Comments on: About

By: Eric

Eric — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 23:01:58 +0000

In a nutshell, the bankers have convinced everyone that free credit is communism and wealth-redistribution is capitalism. Duh. They have convinced everyone that currency is the same as money, and you can convert your earnings to currency and safely store that currency in their banks and it will always maintain its purchasing power, and if it doesn’t there is a good reason for that, just don’t ask, let alone analyze, what it is. They have convinced that the fact that the only reason currency has any value is not because someone is trying to capture it to pay a debt of currency. Thus we accept inflation without question or come up with “rational” but illogical explanations for it. They offer a “solution” called a gold standard. The only thing gold is good for besides its direct use as trade (it is the essence of the definition of money) is storing in a bank that would manage the checkbook and debit card trading of said metal. A bank that can be easily audited at any given time. A service providing non-parasitic bank. Using a currency that is not an IOU and is based on a commodity that can be limited to a finite amount or can be discovered to have a relatively infinite amount or can be horded is absurd. Money value is set by supply and demand of a metal. It floats in value just as the value of someone’s skill. Currency value does not “float” by nature and is only limited by the potential of a man to produce something to capture the currency that was spent by that man. Currency is an IOU, it is not money. Money is an “I just gave you what I owed you and now no one owes you anything”. Currency should be issued by the public to the public. Nobody is going to horde currency because it can easily be transformed to an “IOU less” than I did before. Nobody is going to pay usury for something that they can have issued for temporary use usury free. The word “interest” should never be confused with a charge for a loan of currency. Interest is something that is earned on a company stock that was purchased. I loan my labor in exchange for your debt that I can now trade. Even, fair trade. Why should we be paying a “broker” commission for the notes we used in that transaction. At most we should only be paying for the printing and issuing administration costs of currency. I purchase something for an amount of currency and agree to do something to recapture that currency regardless of the market value of my product or service at any given time. Currency is an IOU something, or at least someone owes you something. Currency is what enables us to work together to improve our standard of living. Currency is something that can be traded for money. It really hurt my brain to come up with this so copy it and send it to your friends. It’s not the kill, it’s the thrill of the chase.

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 17:32:55 +0000

In a capitalist society:
The same government agency collecting taxes would issue currency interest free to those in the community committed to producing a good or service and committing a percentage of what they produce to those who administrate governance and the budget allocated to infrastructure. Currency for the duration of the producers participation in the market. Why should a debtor pay interest for giving others jobs and the opportunity to trade their debt? That only makes sense to greedy, greedy, communist rats. The percentage the producer pays in taxes would be the same for everyone with the only exception being disabled exemptions. Wealth-redistribution only makes sense to greedy, greedy, communist rats. Let’s see who ultimately is behind all the “progressive” indoctrination. Let’s see the communist banksters try to argue that wealth-redistribution doesn’t mean communism but free debt does. Can’t you see it? If there is such thing as a “silver bullet”, this is it. Make it your own. The definition of communism is a place where people are divided over wealth-redistribution. It’s a law of nature since the beginning of time. The bankers have you fooled.

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:08:32 +0000

So the communists control you by hiring politicians to be in “opposition”. Some of the politicians want to “help” you by pressuring for more wealth-redistribution. Some of the politicians want to “help” you by pressuring for less wealth-redistribution. You’re thinking that somehow the right amount of wealth-redistribution will equalize its way out through this dichotomy. The politicians constantly do things to make themselves look stupid. They do things to themselves in order to frame their “opponent”. They keep a balance of support between themselves. You’re convinced you have a choice when both are working for communists. They are a two sided thing. Communism. You call the controllers capitalists, globalists, corporatists, or anything other than communists and they laugh all the way to the bank they own. The communists write the definitions. They hire poor people to call themselves communists to distract you. A commune is a place where the people are divide over wealth-redistribution. That’s what they want. They are communists. They are the “dictator”. They won. I would be in admiration of these people but I don’t think they even know how what they are doing works. They are compelled to do it. Oh, plausible deniability. Wait, feasible self-denial? You can question their definition of communism. Honestly, the king has no clothes.

By: Eric

Eric — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 16:41:59 +0000

The “thought police” prize goes to a guy with a blog about bicycles. It’s really cool. Apparently he thinks it’s just my “point of view”. It’s just your point of view that it’s wrong for private banksters to print money and charge usury on it. It’s just your point of view that it’s even happening at all. The next time I edit that definition I’ll add that the “thought police” will turn logical statements into matters of opinion. I think his point of view is from behind a pair of beautifully rosy colored glasses. If I knew where to buy them I would. Sometimes I’m asked if it is me that is brainwashed to which I answer “I ask myself that every day. Do you?”. Until recently I would watch 911 footage and say to myself “there goes those buildings in the wind”. I never really questioned how buildings could turn to dust. It didn’t cross my mind. Sick.

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:29:48 +0000

I just posted this on Wikipedia under “crimestop”. Tee hee.—-”The quintessential example of crimestop can be observed in the reaction a person has to the suggestion that a system with wealth-redistribution is communism and a system without wealth-redistribution is capitalism. logically it is absolutely true but because of conditioning people react emotionally to that statement as nonsense and even offensive if not simply “dangerous thought”.– Let’s see how long it takes the thought police to remove it. It didn’t take long when I edited the definitions of capitalism and communism.