Exposing Faux Capitalism

27 Comments »

27 Responses

1. on January 25, 2011 at 11:52 am | Reply Eric

   Is there a conspiracy to control the way we use words? Read this and ask if it makes sense logically:
   As the producer produces something for trade, debt is being created. The product is credit to him. What he wants to trade for is debit to him. For convenience, we use book entries to facilitate transactions among the producers of many different products. There are credit book entries, and debit book entries. The accountant keeping the books is the “debtor”. Debit and credit are created simultaneously, but are in two different names at the same time. Debit and credit are extinguished simultaneously when the debt is fulfilled. One thing that appears to be two, depending on what side of it you are on.
   Sometimes the community(creditor) gives an individual(debitor) extended debt to exchange the credit while he keeps the debit, for product, in exchange for a rental fee. The debitor is given extra debits while the creditor is given the credits, but the debt is always fulfillable within the producers. This is done through a broker we call a “bank”. The individual then produces, exchanges the product for credit, then provides those in the community who invested in that individual the credit to turn around and purchase product from the individual. This process fulfills the debt. Thus, product is exchanged fluently. This process usually provides adequate debt in the form of dollars, in the community for fluent transactions. Basically, trading someone else’s debt brings the economy to full velocity.
   Unfortunately, the current debtor is a parasite. Using a book keeping trick, he is keeping credits for himself, and giving the extra debits to the producing community when he gives out book debt. He is in effect renting the debt for a percentage, while not producing anything – besides keeping the books. Thus the debt is not fulfillable from within the producing community. He can in turn purchase product from the producer, or choose not to, and cause a depression – a “currency crisis”, and buy stock for pennies on the dollar. This is obscured by the fact that the community is renting debt to each other, and giving the parasite the choice of who he gives debt to.
   This is happening in China too. They are the same system as the US, but a different level on the “spectrum”. Hint – it’s not capitalism. One thing, that appears to be two, depending on what side of the “magic ingredient” you’re on – wealth-redistribution.
   The solution is to hire an accountant that is not a parasite – another producer. This accountant would give a producer a small amount of debt as that producer enters the job market. The credit the new producers spend into the economy would provide adequate credit for investors to provide “extended debitors” with credits, to buy a house for example, through a broker for a fee, not percentage. The debtors would then know who they are investing in. The new producers would prove their debitor worthiness by working and paying their taxes – flat rate, and apply for extended debt from a broker. As they work, they extinguish their debt, they accumulate stock, then retire debt free, and sell stock for living expenses. All credit stays within the producing community and debt is fulfillable, unless people decide to take cash to their grave or horde it.
   Most will admit this world makes no sense, but refuse to admit anyone knows exactly why.
   Why isn’t the word “debitor” in the dictionary? Hmmm…

   
   
2. on January 20, 2011 at 3:59 pm | Reply Buckaroo 'Ric

   Ten cowboy’s go into a saloon to play cards. The game is dance for cards. The barnktender rents each cowboy 5 cards for 1 card rent fee. They put up their gun belts for collateral. The ‘tender now has ten cards to pay for dancin’ cowboys, because he took the rent right off the top. The cowboy didn’t see the ‘tender keep the rent card, so he thinks he was renting 4 cards and owes the tender five cards, because he’s brainwashed. There is never enough cards in the game for all the cowboys to fulfill their debts, unless the ‘tender spends all his cards. The cowboys dance for each other in exchange for cards. Sometimes the ‘tender has a cowboy dance for him. If a cowboy accumulates 5 cards and decides to leave the game, he can, with his gun belt. Sometimes a cowboy can’t dance long and fancy enough, defaults on his loan, and has to leave without his gun. It doesn’t matter, there’s always another cowboy who likes to dance coming in the saloon. This leaves extra cards in the game. The ‘tender then can sell the gun to the fanciest dancin’ cowboy, for cards that he can turn around and rent out. The barnktender just gets cowboys to dance all day for him without doing anything because he got all the cards for free in the first place. Sometimes the ‘tender doesn’t pay for much dancin’ , and more cowboys have to leave without their guns, very depressed. If the cowboys knew they could bring their own cards to the game, they wouldn’t have a parasitic barnktender. The cards are just an exchange of dancin’. No one needs to rent them from anybody. Just give ‘em a hand, not a hand out, when they enter the game. Take it back when they leave, nothin’ more.

   
   
3. on January 20, 2011 at 12:13 am | Reply Eric

   The solution is to make sure
   1.a 2.a 3.a 4.a 5.a debt – owned by the IRCS(producer owned)
   1.b 2.b 3.b 4.b 5.b debit – a share given to each producer
   1.c 2.c 3.c 4.c 5.c – credit – as they enter the job market
   is always loaned to the producer, so there would be no parasites controlling the economy, and everyone can fulfill their debts of cash. Stop calling the broker of debt and stock, who is taking a percentage, as opposed to a fee, a “bank”.
   And go to a flat tax which would stop the class warfare that is distracting everyone from the parasites.
   This would be “capitalism”.
   I finally figured out how to use the Prison Planet forum, and got myself banned after three days. I thought they could handle it. My name was “philo”.
   This is a must hear: http://archives2011.gcnlive.com/Archives2011/jan11/CalltoDecision/011911.mp3 43:40

   
   
4. on January 19, 2011 at 9:20 am | Reply Eric

   a b c represent book entries.
   1.a 2.a 3.a 4.a 5.a debt Fed owns this.
   1.b 2.b 3.b 4.b 5.b debit Fed gives you this,
   1.c 2.c 3.c 4.c 5.c credit and this.
   With “bank discount”, they actually give you this:
   1.a 2.a 3.a 4.a 5.a
   1.b 2.b 3.b 4.b 5.b
   1.c 2.c 3.c 4.c
   They keep the extra “c” for themselves. You now have more “b” than “c”. You have to capture an extra “c” by selling something to the parasitic “banker” to fulfill your debt. If they don’t buy, you now have a “currency crisis”.
   Q: How much cash is in circulation per producer in the US now? How much cash was in circulation in ’07?