What Is Money?

Page 4 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Real Bills (loans) are harmful

Post  Shelby on Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:41 am

And analogously saving at interest rates, insurance, and all other forms of futures contracts (promises and surety) are harmful.

Someone recently attempted to distill Real Bills, but missed the key essence of the problem with Real Bills:


I will apply my ability to boil complex issues down to their bare, succinct, lucid essence.

Real Bills are short-term credit, wherein the producer of a good has insufficient capital and creates a promise to pay (the "Bill") from proceeds of the good thats will be produced. From this Bill, the producer gets the loan to go produce with. When the goods are ready and sold, then the Bill is paid back with interest.

There are some other details. The Bill is actually sold by the producer to the person who wants to loan the money. The Bill holder will receive all the proceeds of the sale of the goods, thus the producer got his profit up front before the goods were even produced.

Dr. Fekete tries to make a distinction between debt and "value-added", but the distinction is a syntactical strawman, because he also misses key semantic essence of the problem with futures contracts which are always a form of debt (promise to do something):


The problem (nasty effects) with Real Bills is the same as with any futures contract or insurance:


The problem is that futures contracts create personal failure, macro-economic waste, misallocation (aka overproduction), and ultimately cause socialism to spread. Let me better explain the math. My prior attempts to explain this math were not as lucid as they could be.

The problem with any form of debt is that it allows people to risk other people's capital. The lender is supposed to be compensated for this risk by the interest rate, which is supposed to match the lender's opportunity cost.

However, there are two orthogonal mathematical problems:

1. A higher interest rate to compensate the lender for NPLs due to personal failure of individual producers, does not rescind the RISK-FREE (!) losses in the macro-economy.

2. No interest rate (whether fixed or adjustable) can anticipate and thus compensate for force majeure. Not even adjusting the aggregate interest rate to compensate for the historical rate of force majeure losses can compensate, not even when diversified, as some cases of force majeure impact all sectors.

If even a small percentage of producers fail, regardless whether it be the "normal" failure rate or even some calamity such as periodic bad harvest, the mathematical problems above manifest and spread like a cancer that does not stop until the entire macro-economy becomes intertwined in RISK-FREE socialism. And socialism is not risk-free in the end-- rather it is guaranteed failure in the end, because it enables people to waste their capital and charge it to the aggregate opportunity cost, i.e. interest rate or insurance premiums. Thus, I hope you also realize now that insurance is mathematically analogous to loaning money, in that it causes risk-free waste (misappropriation) of capital, and thus leads to socialism and guaranteed failure.

Dr. Fekete argues that the risk of default for the providers of (probably fractional reserve) capital (i.e. the lenders) is so low, so as to be near enough to zero. This entirely misses the point that the risk-free losses accumulate, regardless how small they are initially and incrementally, until eventually the society itself is on a fractional reserve of savings and the human capital has been wasted over a generation(s). Every society in history rebuilds from a prior destructive socialism wipeout, repeats this same insidious mathematical cancer that leads it back to socialism wipeout again over many generations.

The #1 problem causes RISK-FREE overproduction, because producers are not risking their own capital, but rather risking the capital of all of humanity collectively in the form of higher interest rates. Thus the system does not anneal towards optimum production types and levels, but diverges towards increasing usury as personal RISK-FREE failure begets more personal RISK-FREE failure, because the failed person still has no savings and needs to try again and can try again RISK-FREE (credit ratings don't stop people, because people can try again via proxy, and even with a 666 system of credit, there would be the math problems with a centralized decision, i.e. rating, system).

The #2 problem aggregates losses to society, thus if the losses eventually become too great for the lenders, the problem becomes the government's problem, as what we see now in the western world.

The short-term nature of the Real Bills does not limit such negative effects. Any risk-free failure, whether it happens in the short-term or the long-term, is accumulative in terms of waste of finite capital.

Many people don't understand that money is not capital. Moving money around in risk-free paradigms causes a destruction (waste) of capital. Capital is the human life, and it is finite. In the macro perspective, if each of us waste it, the society gets into a demographic quagmire, i.e. complete failure of the macro-economy. When people are in their child bearing age, and are motivated to delay or not have children, because there is nearly unlimited risk-free opportunity, then the entire society pays the price when that population retires-- having wasted their production years (aka capital) with insufficient youth available to sustain the economy. Look at much of the western world with declining populations, sans immigration. We even have females who think they are men, because they undertook hormone transfiguration (aka birth control pills and IUDs), some even starting as teenagers.

In short, futures contracts, debt, savings at interest, and insurance, are all forms of subsidies, where society steals its own capital from itself.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

People are asymmetrically stupid (math is just way over their heads)

Post  Shelby on Wed Nov 03, 2010 8:15 pm

They can be reasonable intelligient in terms of comprehension or writing or every day skills, but be legally classified as retarded when it comes to slightest bit of math.


Shelby wrote:Sonny wrote:
"simply demanding fair, equal, and balanced foreign trade"

Sure if you are willing to pay 7 - 10 times more for manufactured goods, then go ahead and demand that.

And then you will be at 3rd world level any way, because your wages certainly can't increase 10 times more and then be 100 times higher than the 3rd world.

Bottom line is that the only trade that nature will allow is the one that lets capital run downhill to the lowest point that needs to be filled. Any attempt to subvert the free market with "balanced" anything, will cause massive poverty.

People do not understand math at all. I suspect most people don't even understand this article I wrote today:



Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Thomas Paine on paper money

Post  Shelby on Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:12 am

If I am being compared to Thomas Paine, I appreciate that very much, but I am not worthy, because he actually fought for the freedoms we have today. I think about how easy our lives are today, these guys got around on horses, etc. Even our so called "below the poverty line" live higher quality lives than the Kings from the middle ages, if measured by modern conveniences and material consumption.

I wish to critique Thomas Paine's essay, because perhaps we may correct some over-simplifications I will alledge that Paine made which may have given the banksters the wiggle room to deceive people in the intervening time. I am interested to learn about the bankers' intrinsic power and limitations. I guess it was you Jason who first made me aware of the fundamental power, which is that use of debt and usury mathematically forces a fractional reserve (because compounded interest obligations grow to be greater than the quantity of gold+silver on earth).


if paper can be metamorphosed into gold and silver, or made to answer the same purpose in all cases.

Can anyone point out I am mistaken to say that the bankers have proven that using mass media and the mass desire for debt and usury (aka fractional reserve finance), they can indeed make paper perform the same purposes for century or more? This of course fails, but the failure does not come at the cost of the bankers but at the cost of debt slaves so created by the success of the bankers.

The value of gold and silver is ascertained by the quantity which nature has made in the earth. We cannot make that quantity more or less than it is, and therefore the value being dependent upon the quantity, depends not on man. Man has no share in making gold or silver; all that his labors and ingenuity can accomplish is, to collect it from the mine, refine it for use and give it an impression, or stamp it into coin.

Actually this is not true absolutely (although it is true over a long enough period of time, the ill effects of it not being true always are accumulative towards a Revelation result), the bankers can manipulate the quantity of metal over long enough periods of time so as to destroy entire economies that are using metallic money standard, as they did to China. Would a bimetallic standard solve this weakness?

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_05/moore031407.html (March 2007)

It has, therefore, all the requisite qualities that money can have, and is a fit material to make money of — and nothing which has not all those properties can be fit for the purpose of money.

Paper, considered as a material whereof to make money, has none of the requisite qualities in it. It is too plentiful, and too easily come at. It can be had anywhere, and for a trifle.

At least up this point in the essay, Paine did not mention that gold+silver are unique from all other commodities in that they have very high above ground investment inventories relative to new mine supply, which make them stable stores of value (notwithstanding the banksters short-term ability to dump supply or buy up supply using their fractional reserve press and political control).

And he apparently fails to articulate what an excellent medium-of-exchange paper is (or digital money if you hate the filthy paper), and how easy it is to make it ubiquitous and thus nearly perfectly fungible.

The only proper use for paper, in the room of money, is to write promissory notes and obligations of payment in specie upon. A piece of paper, thus written and signed, is worth the sum it is given for, if the person who gives it is able to pay it, because in this case, the law will oblige him. But if he is worth nothing, the paper note is worth nothing. The value, therefore, of such a note, is not in the note itself, for that is but paper and promise, but in the man who is obliged to redeem it with gold or silver.

Unfortunately Paine made a critical error, he allowed for the usury and futures contracts which guarantee a fractional reserve money system will ensue. I think Jason had written that we can not outlaw usury. I would like to revisit his logic if I can find that article.

Paper notes given and taken between individuals as a promise of payment is one thing, but paper issued by an assembly as money is another thing. It is like putting an apparition in the place of a man; it vanishes with looking at it, and nothing remains but the air.

I wonder if did not understand that once you allow promissory notes, they will become a medium-of-exchange by natural forces?

One of the evils of paper money is that it turns the whole country into stock jobbers. The precariousness of its value and the uncertainty of its fate continually operate, night and day, to produce this destructive effect. Having no real value in itself it depends for support upon accident, caprice, and party; and as it is the interest of some to depreciate and of others to raise its value, there is a continual invention going on that destroys the morals of the country.

Bravo! Paine apparently agrees with what I wrote recently about the stock market being a casino and when gold was money, stocks were worth nothing more than their dividend yield. The P/E appreciation of stocks (in general, there will be individual exceptions) has been entirely offset by the inflation and the relative return on Treasuries. Read Howard Katz on this issue and see my example with Coca-Cola:


and the bond of society dissolved

Rather I would say that (debt forces) paper money (which) forces socialism, so the bond becomes one where everyone depends on stealing from each other (themselves). Whereas, gold and silver disallow any such "binding promises". Hommel has refined the knowledge by illuminating the wisdom of the Bible's advice against being surety for others and ganging up together. Specifically that we have to avoid debt otherwise society ends up enslaved to itself, with the banksters leading the way on the harlot horse.

The pretense for paper money has been that there was not a sufficiency of gold and silver. This, so far from being a reason for paper emissions, is a reason against them.

Here is where I think we can add important new knowledge. I think we have (Hommel has) shown mathematically that it is impossible to have compounding interest obligations with growing debt, and not outstrip the supply of gold and silver. This forces a fractional reserve (eventually bank runs and realized losses for depositors). So the point is, that gold and silver can never be SUSTAINED AS money for as long as society wants to employ usury.

Of all the various sorts of base coin, paper money is the basest. It has the least intrinsic value of anything that can be put in the place of gold and silver. A hobnail or a piece of wampum far exceeds it. And there would be more propriety in making those articles a legal tender than to make paper so.

He again I think fails to articulate the slippery slope that anything that has 10 times lower stocks-to-flows ratio than gold+silver, can be manipulated and lead to further debasement, as happened in reality in Rome and in this modern removal of silver from coin, then gradually less and less base metal and finally to digital money. I am thinking that it must be gold+silver and no usury, everything else leads to Revelation result.

and the punishment of a member who should move for such a law ought to be death.

Paine's solution is to propose to kill anyone who tries to fulfill the demand for debt, because there is a mathematical requirement for a fractional reserve system in order for debt to be allowed to grow compounded. Obviously that is a non-solution, because supply always fulfills demand at some price. That is Economics 101. So for as long as the soceity wants usury, then any such proposed law will never be enforceable over time.

The only solution is education (enlightenment). This is why we are preaching the good word here. This is why I am analyzing Paine's essay.



shelbymoore3 ... "Real Bills are short-term credit, wherein the producer of a good has insufficient capital and creates a promise to pay (the "Bill") from proceeds of the good thats will be produced. From this Bill, the producer gets the loan to go produce with. When the goods are ready and sold, then the Bill is paid back with interest." (sic)

Sir, in respect ... that's a completely erroneous description of a Real Bill’s operation.

A simple example would be a cobbler who orders leather from a tanner. The tanner 'writes' his Bill for the total charge due in 91 days. The cobbler endorses it as 'accepted'. On receipt, the tanner delivers the leather to the cobbler. Within the 91 days, once the cobbler's goods are sold, he extinguishes the Bill by sending the amount due. No interest is charged.

If, in the interim, the tanner has bought a large load of new raw hides and needs to raise a wage fund for additional workers to process them, he can discount the cobbler's acceptance to a private saver or a banker at the going discount rate in order to raise that fund.

You see, no interest is involved anywhere in the process of conveying the credit ... the Bill is discounted from its face value prorated to the remaining term of maturity. For the saver or banker who prematurely liquidate Bills, their gain is on the discount and by 'rolling' matured funds into an ongoing series of Bills, they compound their returns.

The ‘evil’ of the interest bearing Loan model that ancient Peoples observed, but hadn’t had an economic vernacular to adequately describe, was that interest absorbs circulating money out the community. Their having no similar facility for conveying credit as ‘Real Bills’, they condemned interest for its tendency to impoverish the community by depriving it of its media. That’s why love of money too, was despised, yet great wealth was revered.

So, now you REALLY KNOW what Franklin meant when he said "Neither a lender nor a borrower be, if you should wish to keep youeself free."

Pat Fields, in all due respect, what you have described is mathematically the same as the way I described Real Bills.

Don't make yourself a semantic fool with word games. The "discount" is the interest rate. The is no functional difference from a mathematical analysis.

You have argued that the discount for Real Bills is different in effect from loans at interest, because you say it does not place demands on the real money in economy. We know that gold + silver money systems can NOT support compounded interest rates, because eventually the global aggregate interest payments due every period exceed the quantity of (circulating) gold and silver on earth. You are apparently claiming that Real Bills eliminate this quagmire and thus do not force fractional reserve money.

Just because the Real Bills retire after 91 days, does not mean that the interest (discount) demands do not grow compounded. The Real Bills must be repeated over and over again and must increase in quantity for the economy to grow. What you have is an economy dependent on debt to function, and as the economy grows, the amount of debt needed grows. Eventually the quantity of Real Bills has to exceed the quantity of circulating gold and silver, and then you have fractional reserve economy. Else the economy can not grow further unless there the price of everything is decreased relative to the value of gold (aka deflation). But there is no mechanism in Real Bills to cause deflation, whereas the mechanism is precisely the opposite, it is debasement and fractional reserve directed growth paradigm, as is all debt whether short-term or not.

Your other mistake is that some fraction of each 91 day Real Bills is not retired. There is an aggregate accumulation of risk-free losses in the economy, because some people are spending other people's money. These defaults cascade. Re-read my article again.

Also I critiqued today what Thomas Paine had written about the evils of paper money and he apparently also allowed for Real Bills and debt/usury (which is why we are in the mess we are in today):


There is only one way to avoid fractional reserve theft systems, and that is to avoid all usury. Period! And that means no Real Bills!

Sorry Pat.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

What is gold's intrinsic value?

Post  Shelby on Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:27 am

Worst article ever from Gary North. North brain-farted on this one.


Shelby wrote:
twisted words

"gold is not a store-of-value"
"gold is valuable thing to store"

Gold stores more value than fiat, when the interest paid on fiat bonds is less than the inflation rate, which over any sufficient period of time, is ALWAYS. Period.

The intrinsic value of gold is that it is not a liability. This means another entity's bankruptcy or prolific debasing can't diminish or eliminate its value. Other commodities (other than silver) are liabilities because they decay and/or their above-ground inventories are too minuscule for liquidity compared to ongoing industrial consumption, thus swings in the business cycle can drastically affect their value.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Hugo Salinas Price nonsense - instead loan silver

Post  Shelby on Sun Jun 12, 2011 8:27 am

Utter nonsense the section "There is only one way to achieve this":


Silver is not coming back as money because it is not natural to carry around metal in your pocket, when you can more easily carry your money digitally in your iPhone.

Instead I had already explained in prior comments how to bring silver back as money. Loan it at net 0% interest when the silver price peaks in this secular cycle!

For example, if I offered silver loans (re-payable in silver) to 1000s of programmers to start their own programming work in the Copute language, then as the silver price is declining, the market value interest rate they must pay (by IRS guidelines on avoiding the gift tax) is offset by the falling price of silver, so although they pay me back more silver than I loaned (the interest rate), their cost in fiat terms is a net 0% interest rate (because the price of silver has declined, which they buy to repay me).

This will create a demand for silver as store-of-value money. Just forget about creating demand for silver as pocket money (technology eliminated that possibility,sorry Hommel is wrong on that).


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

The manipulation is market-based

Post  Shelby on Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:49 pm

The card counter who gets banned from Vegas because he is too good, doesn't win 100% of the time, he maybe wins 55% of the time and he loses 45% of the time. But that is enough to wipe out the casino over time, if he manages his risk (size) per bet mathematically too.

The charts show the repeating patterns of the manipulation, and thus to the mathematical mind they can add that 5% probability advantage that results in winning more often than losing.

You can't reason about indeterminism with binary logic (if-else). It takes a "fuzzy math" (which is actually a serious math course).

btw, I am not saying I am good enough to win 55% of the time in the silver market.

That is not my strength. I never got banned from a Casino.

I am saying that I see a repeating pattern every few years of letting silver run up about 50% over its 200 DMA. It seems to correct every time it reaches that level.

So those big parabolas are fairly easy to call. But we don't know which one will be the one that never stops going up, and goes to infinity, like all those trees that grew to touch the moon and all those ZERO examples in history of the world of something that went up forever and never came down. And don't say that gold went to infinity in Zimbabwe, because the 100 trillion was not even convertible to anything, instead you had to price your gold in other things like how many virgins it bought.

> I'm not saying you are just your average mind, and I'm all for natural
> cycles.
> But where was the natural cycle when they let silver rise to 50 for
> interminable weeks, when the true natural cycle would have corrected
> long ago. They let it unnaturally and malevolently rise and rise
> almost forever before the slam finally came. Everybody knew it was
> coming sometime, but nobody knew when. If ever there was an abnormal,
> unnatural chart, it is that one. So don't try to argue that it is
> fitting in with anything.
> Nothing was interacting, it was a pure, raw power play. Some assholes
> decided that 50 was their limit. That's it. So you cannot make it
> appear that cycle theory or any other normal/natural ebb and flow has
> something to do with the current silver market.
> Therfore, you can throw your charts out of the window as long the
> manipulation persists, in my opinion.

You don't seem to understand that the manipulation is market-based, in fact, it is demanded by the market. There is no way the quadrillion in derivatives could continue, and inflated lifestyles of a billion
westerners without the futures markets in PMs. And futures markets in money is an oxymoron.

The ebb and flow in the markets is as natural as the other phenomenon in nature, such as the tides. The damn moon is manipulating the oceans, but it can't stop the earth from manipulating the moon, which thus causes the tide cycles.

They are all interacting. That is known as a market. it is given by the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

The sun does not manipulate the earth by forcing it to rotate around it due to gravitational forces. This is just the reality of the situation.

> I didn't say it started recently, and of course we are benefitting from it. Anything that is anomalous can be benefitted from one way or another. The point was that it's ridiculous to put much value on charts and technicals when clearly it is the manipulation that
> controls silver, like no other commodity in the world.
> At 11:44 PM 8/1/2011, you wrote:
>>Without futures markets in PMs, then the fiat could not be liquid and would not exist since about 1980 or so when they had to start the futures market to give the apparency of liquidity from paper to real money.
>>Thus the developing world would already be wealthy, silver mining would not have been destroyed by decades of low prices, and the big opportunity for us in silver and the big opportunity for us to live in a poor country where we feel rich, would not exist.
>>So it is not easy to compare it, you can't just say the silver
>>manipulation started recently and think it is all bad for you. You and I are benefitting from the silver the manipulation.
>> > Where would silver be without manipulation?
>> >
>> >
>> > At 05:04 AM 7/30/2011, you wrote:
>> >>Jason Hommel did write that article that I called on him to write yesterday about the debt ceiling, and wow it was powerful, and I have
>> a
>> >>lot to add (either link, but 2nd one requires a password):
>> >>
>> >>http://goldwetrust.up-with.com/t9p540-inflation-or-deflation#4484
>> >>
>> >>http://jasonhommelforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=62814#post62814
>> >>
>> >>I show quantitatively the negative marginal-utility-of-debt and
>> explain
>> >>the implications. One of the main points is that if the government
>> would
>> >>reduce spending, the real GDP would actually increase, which the
>> opposite
>> >>of what the mass media is telling us. I show it with charts.
>> >
>> >
>> >


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

What is Money, by Peter Ritter

Post  Shelby on Sun Aug 07, 2011 4:04 pm

There are very few people that are not getting screwed by the paper money racketeers or parasites. And it’s always for the same reason. People don't know what money is. And because of that they continue to allow the paper money racketeers to screw them, year in, year out, by letting the racketeers exchange printed paper coupons, called money, for real things. Of course, that way the racketeers will sooner or later own everything.

The sole reason this can happen is because people do not know anymore what money is. It's not worthless paper tickets issued by the government. There is nothing that limits issuance of paper tickets. Forget about honest administrators. In no time that system would be totally corrupted again.

Oxygen and money cannot be compared. Oxygen may be free, as yet, even though the bastards are trying to impose a tax on breathing. But money is not free and should not be free, meaning without intrinsic value.

To understand what money is, we have to go back about 10’000 years. When we were nomads we carried all our possessions with us. No need for money.

When we settled down and started farming, we did something we never had done before. We produced surpluses. Our production was stored, and what was not used for own consumption, the surplus, was bartered for the surpluses of others. Those surpluses were the first primitive money. It was very specific kind of money, because it could only be used for "buying" things from those who were interested in our kind of surplus.

The next step was the introduction of various commodities as money, from salt to shells to tobacco leaves, etc. Many commodities were tried in the history of mankind. Most of them had some deficiencies and were replaced. Finally, the world settled on gold and silver, because that was the best our planet had to offer. Gold and silver are not perfect, but they are the most suitable as money among all commodities. Maybe one day we'll hit on something better. Until then, gold and silver are it.

The introduction of universally acceptable money greatly improved the earlier specific, limited barter. Money created the market, widened it, allowed the division of labor, specialization and progress, right up to where we are today.

The character of money has never changed. It always was and still is surplus production, that which you produce minus your own consumption. Whether you barter that surplus, or change it into a universally acceptable medium of exchange, i.e. sell it for gold or silver, does not alter the character of money. Money is always surplus production, never paper that governments or banks print. Knowing that, governments or banks have absolutely no business being involved with the production or printing of paper coupons called money. Anybody who does that is a parasite living off the labor of others. And only suckers allow themselves to be exploited that way.

The ancients would never have exchanged their hard earned surpluses for pieces of printed paper. They were not stupid. But today we are. We have precisely allowed a certain class of parasite to print paper coupons, call them money and exchange them for real things like land, buildings, shares, commodities, gold, anything. They can print as many coupons as they want. No wonder these parasites own almost everything today. Anybody with an exclusive monopoly to print paper money could do that. They regard themselves as good business people. They are not, they are just racketeers, counterfeiters, criminals of the highest order, protected by governments. If they had to produce something that the market wants, i.e. sell their surplus production, whatever they make, they wouldn’t have all those paper coupons to throw around and own the world.

Trouble is the parasites have printed so many coupons that the world is full of them. Almost all of them are debt, and the debt has grown so huge that it is impossible to ever be repaid on par. If all debt was repaid today, there would be no more money in circulation or in accounts, yet the remaining debt would still be huge. The only way our financial system can continue to exist is by printing massive amounts of new paper coupons to roll over old debt. All that accomplishes is to make the total debt larger and not solve the problem. They call it kicking the can down the road. But, we cannot cure the problem of too much debt with more debt. It would be the same as pouring more alcohol down the throat of a drunk.

The debt has grown to such gigantic proportions that not even interest on old loans can be paid back anymore, let alone the principal. The crash of the financial system is unavoidable and will happen, for the simple reason that there are too many worthless paper tickets masquerading as money. All of them owe some interest. There is no easy cure for this debt problem, and the politicians keep kicking the can down the road, delaying the disaster until it finally and inevitably blows.

The financial crash will render worthless everything that is denominated in paper. Only real things will retain value, and the royalty of real things are gold and silver, for the simple reason that they are the most liquid, i.e. universally accepted. Even central bankers acknowledge that. Sadly, it will take this financial crash for people to relearn what money is and what is not, and how to value it. It will take this painful lesson for people to never again allow a sleazy gang of parasites to print paper coupons, call them money and use them as if they WERE money. They are not.

Quite simple, actually, this money thing, when one looks at it this way.

Peter J. Ritter


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Please learn the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics

Post  Shelby on Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:49 am

(5) A new sound, well designed and managed fiat system once put into place, together with the transparency afforded by current technology and the internet, could most likely never again be ruined by the type of corruption we have seen in recent years.

Nonsense. The government needs to get out of monopoly money business and let private parties decide what money is to them. In the 1800s, we had numerous depressions as private banks failed due to their fraud of fractional reserve lending, but the corrections were frequent and thus mild. In short a self-correcting system.

Now with this centralized legal tender, we don't get a depression for 80 years, then we end up as slaves and horrible crisis.

Centralized things don't scale and they don't anneal.

Decentralized things do.

Meaning many small things competing are what stops corruption and failure from becoming a monopoly.

Go to http://Copute.com and read the section:

| Higher-Level
| | Degrees-of-Freedom
| | | Physics of Work

So that you can learn the way nature works.

If a government can't handle as simple an arrangement as that, I'm not sure what it could be capable of handling.

Wow it is so difficult for people to understand a simple law of physics.

They can't, because centralized things are always the hotspot for corruption, because you have conflicting interests of a large population (a lack of degrees-of-freedom because there is only one decision at the center), all of which have a least common denominator, SPEND MORE.

Again I urge you to learn why the law of physics makes this unavoidable.

I suggest you read the section "Physics of Work" on my site. Then you will understand why a centralized government is always evil and going towards failure. It is due to the laws of physics. Maybe you can understand if you read that section very carefully.


| Higher-Level
| | Degrees-of-Freedom
| | | Physics of Work
| | | | Fitness
| | | | Efficiency of Work
| | | | Knowledge


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Future of Money

Post  Shelby on Wed Aug 17, 2011 10:15 pm

...I've illustrated this by adding it to my dialogue in the above post, which I've now posted as a YouTube video: Decentralized Barter a Tower of Babel? (It has a surprise ending).

Oh yes I agree. I have written many times that gold and silver will not be coming back as currency, only as stores-of-value. Both are different aspects of money.

Instead we will end up with a digital currency in our smartphone, and this currency will be set by a world organization. It will probably have some initial token amount of hard-asset backing, but this will fall over time, just as it did for the dollar.

And no the USA won't be printing its own currency, because no one will ever trust the USA again. The world organization will be printing the currency (or some system of semi-autonomous regional blocs), and actually borrowing it into existence from the world bankers.

I wish it wasn't so, but it is the reality of the political outcome of unemployment in a dying industrial age.

P.S. Copute is among other goals, an attempt to make knowledge a currency in its captive market of computer programs. :wink: Realize that computer programs are heading towards 100% of the economy, as manufacturing and food production is heading towards robots and thus 0% profit margins. You see, the old (industrial age) system is dying, and the nation-state along with it. The individual is rising, as a knowledge node in a network. The great thing about knowledge as a currency, is we hold it in our brains, it can't be stolen, because each person is unique and can't be emulated by an automatic generative algorithm.

P.S.S. I have stated it would be better (more adaptive, with more freedom and degrees-of-freedom) for us to have competing money systems from private parties, than to have one managed by the government. You have made the point in your video that private parties can fail, and that government only fails when the entire society does. This is indeed the attraction of socialism, and that is why money (and physical order/world) is dying. As the Bible says, we will throw our money into the streets and it won't save you from the death of the physical (industrial) world. You see the creative soul is the only immortal thing, because it doesn't have mass. This is why the Bible tells us to go forth and multiply, because each new soul is unique and independent, and thus is in harmony with increasing entropy.

It would be better to have decentralized money, but we can't get there with physical money. And digital money carries some risk, and people hate risk. But knowledge carries no risk of theft. Even if you use my knowledge without compensating me, I can use your knowledge without compensating you, but we both need each other's continuing knowledge to fix bugs and add improvements. Thus we have no incentive to not compensate each other for our knowledge exchange. Thus copyright and patent enforcement falls away as an unnecessary parasite.


shm says:
August 17, 2011 at 5:26 pm

@11bsoldier, there is a gun under every blade of grass in the USA, no enemy could dare set foot on our soil without being annihilated.

It doesn’t help for us to be the global police, when we prop up communist regimes (i.e. China) that use a mercantile policy to bleed the world of productivity (including bleeding their own people, as China has for example 50 sq.ft. of office space for every living Chinese, including babies and elderly, i.e. wasted resources on a massive scale).

As for the ICBM nuclear threat, we have sufficient ICBMs to annihilate any country stupid enough to hurl one over the ocean at us.

There is simply no logic whatsoever in your posts. You have the IQ of a snail.

shm says:
August 17, 2011 at 5:38 pm

I do not disagree with the ideas of Ron Paul’s message.

What I have tried in vain to teach the readers of infowars, is that by throwing your support to a centralized method of achieving those ideas, you are actually unwittingly giving your support to the NWO. I know it difficult for people to understand this, and they think their only hope is to fight at center (the national government) and thus they think their only hope is Ron Paul. This is what TPTB want you to do. I explained this in great detail in many comments on the following prior article:

Or just Google it, “Ron Paul Wins Historic Vote Total In Ames Straw Poll”

I urge all here to go read those comments.

shm says:
August 17, 2011 at 5:56 pm

On the page I linked in my above comment, I provided the real solution in 3 steps. Basically it involves organizing at the community level, and realizing that you county Sheriff is elected by you. And he has the authority under our Constitution to tell the Feds that they have no jurisdiction in your county. And he has the authority to deputize all your gun owners as posse and he can call you up to arrest the Feds and put them in county jail, if they harrass people in the county. For example, if the TSA touches your body without your persmission, or the DOT comes on to private farmland to require driver's licences, etc.. But the key is you need to move to counties that are low enough in population that you can organize, such as was explained recently by Sheriff Mack.

Also you need to understand what is actually happening to the future. The industrial age is dying. China is operating on negative profit margins. No one will ever again make a profit on factories. What makes a profit is the knowledge added, i.e. the design, the software. So this is creating a global unemployment problem of massive proportions, because the people have tried to huddle together in socialism to guarantee their future.

The only way to win this, is to come out of that dying system, and become independent and nimble and intelligent. Every second that you waste on trying to fix what is dying, is destroying your capital, which is your ingenuity, youth, mental energy, etc.. Specifically you need to apply that energy to productive endeavors that the government can't tax and can't regulate. This is why it is so important for you to organize on a community level and cut out the national government from your pie.

If you instead waste your effort trying to perfect the national pie, there are at least 100 million people who will forever be too stupid to get it, and they will weigh you down and make you fail.

If you don't get this, then you are part of the 100+ million who will stay stuck in the morass and fail with it.

It your choice. Don't be stupid.

lkcarp says:
August 17, 2011 at 6:10 pm

Your opinion holds a lot of weight with me. I have lost countless nights of sleep trying to figure a way to organize and fix this gigantic MESS! There is no way to do it on a large scale because 100+ million will keep down and we will not get anywhere! You are very right! Thanks! I will try and sleep some tonight!!

shm says:
August 17, 2011 at 6:21 pm

The future is knowledge will be money. The physical world is becoming less important (e.g. you still need to eat, but you will never make a profit there, just grow a garden for health reasons not for profit). That is why I am working on a radical new computer language, which makes it easier to trade knowledge (the future economy, because software runs everything from toasters to marketing). But I am not here to sell my work. I am here to encourage you to realize that your strength is in this order of priority:

1. Yourself with God, as Jesus said in Matthew 6:5, don’t go church, pray in your private room.

2. With your family and your local community. That means face-to-face. It means living in the real world, not in your virtual TV world, expresso coffee addiction, and all other forms of addictive behavior that avoid reality.

TPTB want you to focus on centralized efforts, where they can divide-and-conquer you. They want to break the bond between you and God (nature). They wrote down their plans in the late 1800s, you can Google it:

“The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”

Focus on your knowledge and your community knowledge. And organize where you have the strength and can give the middle finger to the Feds and to all those idiots who don’t get it. Let them crash and burn, it is their destiny.

@ lkcarp, I don't have time to keep coming here at infowars and teaching this. Hopefully sufficient number of your infowarriors can read my past comments, and start to teach that truth. You need me to be focused on my decentralizing technology work. You don't want to waste me, by having me here posting comments. So please, I want to see some of you step up and learn how to teach this truth. I care about you. I even care about those who are going to destroy themselves by staying focused on the center (national government). And the best we can do to help them all, is to lead by example. They can then learn to follow, when they are jealous of our success.

@integrated, yes!

@11bsoldier, Jesus's point is that when we go in the building of an organized religion, we typically do it for social reasons, and thus the only reward we will receive is the social benefit. When we pray in lonesome, then we are very clear to ourself, that we are doing it because of a love of God (or love of natural, if you prefer). Organized religions have given Christianity a bad reputation, e.g. the Inquisition and burning people on the stake. They are the realm of Satan. In the Bible, the "church" is the all the people who believe, but no where does it say the Christians should organize into houses of a social nature. Satan wants people to get confused and mix "synagogue" (building of organized religion) with Christianity, but the former is Satan's realm and the latter is the oneness with God (nature if you prefer).

P.S. one of the requirements of loving nature, is to accept that we can never promise the future and thus we can't protect against every possible outcome. Humans want to bond together (from our pack mentality) because of our fear of what can happen to us. We should love the unknown, not run from it towards Satan who promises the surety of guaranteed failure. I could explain mathematically why insurance is guaranteed failure.

What happens to many liberals is they say they want to love nature, but they actually hate nature. Satan is always playing these mind games in our heads. For example, I have explained that those who are so fanatical about Ron Paul, are actually loving the NWO direction.

That is why it takes prayer alone in your room (or out in the isolated place), so that one can concentrate and get all these false dichotomies out of one's head.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Government's money power will die (Revelation). Knowledge will win

Post  Shelby on Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:31 am

Martin Armstrong explains that money is a trusted metric, and has nothing to do with a tangible asset:


So I fail to understand this TANGIBLE nonsense when you cannot point to any period in history where such utopia existed where MONEY never rises or falls in VALUE regardless of what it is regarded to be.

ALL MONEY IS REALLY A SIMPLE DERIVATIVE of the core system that remains BARTER at all times underlying everything. The BARTER system is imply you want a haircut and you grow potatoes. As long as the barber accepts the potatoes all is good. What happens when he doesn’t want the potato and needs a carrot? You have to find a guy with a carrot who wants a potato. This is where MONEY comes in and becomes a universal virtual object that allows commerce (BARTER) to take place because the barber KNOWS if he accepts the object he can exchange it for the carrot with a third party. The idea that MONEY must be TANGIBLE is antiquated nonsense. That does NOT reduce the VALUE of gold.

Read my prior post, and understand that money is a trusted metric by which an exchange economy functions. Prices contain the information about supply and demand in the economy.

The hard asset and fungible nature of gold are an important leverage against dishonest money systems, but not all people will agree to make gold money, because then mathematically the society can't loan at usury rates (greater than the growth of production).

So money will forever be what can expand at usury rates, because society demands guaranteed ROI, i.e. interest bearing bonds.

What I want to emphasize is that the government will possibly get competition as knowledge being a form of fungible money, if Copute succeeds. And unlike gold, which can't trade digitally, because you have to hold it, to own it, digital knowledge is not something the government can suppress.

So we are entering a new era in the history of money, if I am correct. The government's money power will die (Revelation). Knowledge will win.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

re: Government's money power will die (Revelation). Knowledge will win

Post  Shelby on Tue Aug 23, 2011 5:06 pm

> Of course, you can trade gold digitally. Like you can print gold
> certificates, as long as they are strictly backed by the required
> amount of gold.

That is not Armstrong's point.

His point is that a strictly gold backed currency is not the nirvana you think it is. If you read his paper he explains how the gold backed currency suffers from many of the same problems as the non gold backed ones.

A gold backed currency enslaves new innovation and labor to past labor and innovation, i.e. capital. That will never be allowed by humanity.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Money is becoming knowledge, whether you like it or not

Post  Shelby on Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:09 am

Tangentially, note there is a more complete (adds images and important links) and easier-to-read version of the essay Understand Everything Fundamentally.

Shelby wrote:
A gold backed currency enslaves new innovation and labor to past labor and innovation, i.e. capital.

So take away the incentive to hold idle capital:

(1) No interest income on cash, and no government bonds (or its interest income).

(2) Cash (when it becomes digital) should be taxed* at, say, 1% per year.

Can you imagine the new innovation and labor this would unleash?

(2) Disagree. You have gone too far the other direction. When you steal capital and give it to the collective, then you are disincentivizing new innovation and labor to produce (fungible wealth).

(1) Second Law of Thermodynamics says your proposal for #1 is impossible. Below I will explain from a scientific proof,the assertion of Jason Hommel's 2008 article, Why Banning Usury Won't Work. Unfortunately due to the bell curve of nature, there are always people who don't know how (or are too lazy) to invest their capital to take 10% of the increase, as the Bible's wisdom suggests, and they can always find people willing to borrow that capital at interest, especially the people collectively (i.e. the government). This is human nature and it can't be outlawed, and the last time humanity tried, it was stuck in a Dark Ages. What happens is these usurists then expect the government to insure their guaranteed return (for the lender) and bailout the debtor when he/she can't pay. This of course leads to socialism and a police state, where all of them destroy each other. Thus the lender is also slave to the borrower, and they bind themselves together in a futures contract of guaranteed interest, instead of sharing the risk of a percentage of productive increase. A contract does not guarantee increased production, and a government can't guarantee it either. But these usurists are necessary, because this is the way they lose their capital (i.e. the lender's past labor, and the debtors future labor) into the system, where the productive members can use it indirectly. Let them destroy themselves, that is their destiny. I suggest you read my writings about the bell curve and knowledge, and why the center of the bell curve will not become a uniform distribution (note even the poor get richer, as all boats are lifted via technology, as poor today have a more affluent lifestyle and quality-of-life than the Kings of yore).

Shelby wrote:
I suggest you read the section "Physics of Work" on my site. Then you will understand why a centralized government is always evil and going towards failure. It is due to the laws of physics. Maybe you can understand if you read that section very carefully.


| Higher-Level
| | Degrees-of-Freedom
| | | Physics of Work
| | | | Fitness
| | | | Efficiency of Work
| | | | Knowledge

See also:

Shelby summarizing Armstrong:
gold backed currency suffers from many of the same problems as the non gold backed ones.

(1) All centrally based currencies, whether or not backed by metal, involve trust, and...

My proposed knowledge based currency doesn't require any trust, because the knowledge is in the open for any one to view, and it can't be stolen because the knowledge of how to improve and maintain the modules is in the mind of the module creator(s).

You see the physical world (industry, government, etc) is dying, and software (knowledge) is taking over (make sure you watch the video as it impacts your investment future entirely!!!). This is why the Bible says we will throw our gold and silver into the streets and merchants won't be able to profit on their physical inventory, because the government and socialism (from those with capital that don't know how to compete in knowledge) will steal everything physical (i.e. what they can steal) as they go down in flames, because physical is heading towards irrelevant and zero profit margins now. The center of the bell curve is dying.

So it doesn't really matter what the new legal tender currency of the world government is. Those who produce knowledge will be immune to its parasitic effects. Those who stay in gold and silver too long and who can't transition to the knowledge economy, will see their capital dissipate in real terms.

(2) There is less auditing in verifying a digital currency that is not based on metals. You only need to verify that taxes equal spending; the "inventory" to keep track of is the summation of the electronic cash...

(3) So, metals backing to currency adds NOTHING to what a balanced budget amendment to the constitution could do, and they would sooner pass a balanced budget amendment.

(4) Whether backed by metal or not, a fixed money supply once digital can never become too large or too small; you need only quote the 3 or 4 significant digits. Once spending is matched to taxes, the size of the money supply never has to be adjusted going forward.

(5) Once government borrowing is eliminated, there are no more psychological games of "needing to spend more", since the effects of wealth reallocation caused by government spending will be felt immediately; a much needed feedback loop will exist.

*A net worth tax should be applied to the type of assets that are already commonly registered, including digital cash (as well as other financial assets, real estate and motor vehicles). It should not be applied to tangibles such as metals and collectibles. I propose a 10 percent transaction tax on tangibles (that are sold in exchange for electronic money) which is equal to 10 years of paying a 1% annual net worth tax.

You do not seems to understand the very important concept that a centralized allocation mechansism is never as productive as a decentralized one. Please refer the links I provided above and learn about degrees-of-freedom, entropy, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Tax is a pure parasite because it sends capital to the collective, where decision processes are never as fine-tuned as with individuals competing in a free market.

You are thinking about centralized solutions, and the center is dying. That is why it is huddling together in a world government, because it is sucking itself together as a survival mechanism, as it eats itself in its own abject and guaranteed complete failure.

Go with knowledge as money, and you will prosper. Come out of that Great Harlot system of centralized capital destruction via usury and taxes.

Continued discussion

Tax is a pure parasite

A properly designed tax need not reallocate wealth. It is government spending that reallocates wealth. Without that spending there is no government-- is that where we're headed, because of the laws of entropy?

The only tax that doesn't reallocate wealth, is a 0% tax and 0 government spending, as you have noted.

For as long as the physical (thermodynamic) world exists, then the bell curve will exist, but yes government will become less relevant to those who come out of the physical wealth world into the knowledge and truth world (although this won't be a perfect separation as we are still physical beings in this life). That old system will heading towards its inability to survive. I can't predict what happens then, since we've always needed a bell curve. Refer to Revelation and I will be thinking more about that. Any way, along the way, it will be a huge shift from mostly in the physical world, to mostly in the knowledge world.

we will end up with a digital currency in our smartphone, and this currency will be set by a world organization... Go with knowledge as money

How will the digital currency transition into knowledge currency? After there is no more government, will the digital currency will be located in human brains in the form of knowledge, or will that knowledge be represented in a separate digital currency? And how can the value of knowledge be established without a central system of standards? How specifically can this knowledge currency be applied to, say, buying an apple at a grocery store?

Go read the link I provided about how I plan to make programming code fungible, and thus by proxy make knowledge fungible. The use of that knowledge in the physical and knowledge worlds, will cause an exchange of physical or knowledge units. It doesn't matter if those physical units from the physical world are debased and corrupt, because the value of the knowledge units will float and maintain their relative value. The exchange market for the digital knowledge units (e.g. programming code) may be centralized, but the knowledge to maintain and improve the units is always in the minds of the creators of the units (software and knowledge is never static so it is worthless if it can't be maintained and improved, which is why stealing it is futile).

Hey if you need my software, you will give me your apples.

a centralized allocation mechansism is never as productive as a decentralized one... You are thinking about centralized solutions, and the center is dying. That is why it is huddling together in a world government, because it is sucking itself together as a survival mechanism, as it eats itself in its own abject and guaranteed complete failure.

Never? How about the relationship of a human being to his cells? Is a human organism guaranteed complete failure, with entropy bringing about more degrees of freedom with cells acting on their own after the brain eats itself and dies? Can the relationship of the planet to its people be compared to the relationship of a person to his cells?

Indeed the physical body is becoming less and less relevant in the knowledge world. The ultimate end is heaven, where truth reigns and there are no physical boundaries. That would be maximum entropy, so the Second Law of Thermodynamics says we are trending to there, but never reach it. Revelation says we reach it. Take your pick, but for me the important thing is we are headed much further in that direction, at an exponential rate of progress.

Email Discussion

>>That is not Armstrong's point.
>>His point is that a strictly gold backed currency is not the nirvana you
>>think it is.
> Im' not thinking it's nirvana. Just better than what we have now, and
> to be improved to remove the known deficiencies.

Please read the email I sent today, explaining why physical world is dying.

The most honest system is where money is knowledge and we carry that knowledge (capital) in our brains.

It is quite easy to see that the physical world is becoming worthless with zero profit margins. There is too much automation to employ 7 billion. The old world will try to kill off the 7 billion, in order to maintain an artificial scarcity of the physical world. This is why they are promulgating all these lies about peak oil, global warming, carbon tax, etc..

They will succeed in destroying those who don't come out of that old world and into the knowledge is money world.

>>If you read his paper he explains how the gold backed
>>currency suffers from many of the same problems as the non gold backed
> Only because the SOB's control too much of it and can manipulate the
> money supply. And until somebody comes up with something better, it's
> the best we have.

No. It is because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, as I explained.

Further Email Discussion

>>Please read the email I sent today, explaining why physical world is
>> dying.
>>The most honest system is where money is knowledge and we carry that
>>knowledge (capital) in our brains.
> Thatmay be far in the future, but not here and not now. Right now
> that is pure utopia. Money is something valuable, ehatever it may be.
> You cannot replace that with something intangible, else you have the
> same mess we have now.

No you are wrong, it is happening right now and it is accelerating much faster than gold & silver:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903480904576512250915629460.html (make sure you watch the video!)

That is the creator of the browser (Mosaic and Netscape, then Mozilla, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc). He invested $25,000 and it is worth $250 million.

The world is being taken over by software and those in physical will end up expendable.

Like most small sapling phenomena, you don't notice it while is growing at exponential rates, until it simple overtakes everything in a waterfall crash of the old rotten former order.


The events leading out of feudalism appear to be attempts to free humanity from the slavery of unmotivated passive capital, whose power was sustained by the marriage of state and religion (which outlawed the "sin" of usury), by using debt to bypass and compete against hoarded private capital. I wrote previously that gold can't be the only money, otherwise passive capital enslaves all the future innovation, because all profits are captured as a deflation relative to gold. Appears mankind has been oscillating between debasement blowback (Roman empire and now) and no debasement motivating capital hoarding (feudalism).

The fundamental problem is that in a material world, the transactional cost in The Theory of the Firm (thanks Winter), enables the corporate capital to accumulate faster than for those who produce the knowledge. However, I think we are entering a radical paradigm shift, where knowledge (the mind) becomes much more valuable than material production. Because industry can be automated (see the $1200 3D printer) but the knowledge isn't static and can't be automated. I refuted Kurzweil's Singularity and debated Chomsky on Hume's mitigated skepticism (the upshot is I argue that abstract math and infinity exist and are equivalent to the never ending universal trend to maximum entropy).

Last edited by Shelby on Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:59 pm; edited 1 time in total


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Passive capital

Post  Shelby on Fri Sep 09, 2011 9:23 am

UPDATE: a new post on Entropic Efficiency summarizes perhaps better than this post does.

I want to share with you about ****passive capital****, and you may not be aware of this article about the current Rothschild heir apparent:


I connect the dots more here, and understand that these industrialists need to have control over the governments where they operate in order to gain leverage over their competition, and remember what original Rothschild said, "Give me control over the creation of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes her laws":


Also if you don't already fully understand my CRITICAL, PROFOUND, BROADLY APPLICABLE point about ****passive capital****, I urge you to read the following posts in context of the surrounding comments:


People are ignorant of entropy (Thermodynamics)


Shelby wrote:
Pineapple gave me some temporary energy.

Shelby’s assumption that more efficiency leads to more sustainability is wrong

Andy you are conflating so many things, that it is becoming arduous for me to unravel all of them.

What "efficiency" are you referring to? I am assuming that I guess you mean efficiency of materials cost for suburbia?

This demonstrates that you are not even close to understanding my point, so of course something you don't understand won't make any sense to you.

I have been writing about the entropic efficiency of the relative knowledge in a system. How many times have I stated that the problem of collectivism is it attempts to create uniform distributions, which by the standard mathematical equation for entropy, are low-entropy system. Low entropy systems are not as robust as high entropy ones in terms of long-term adaption outcomes. Caveat: At any given static slice of time, high-entropy systems can be composed of low-entropy semi-closed constituents, but these low-entropy parts don't outlive the universal trend to maximum entropy as stated in 1856 in the law of thermodynamics which governs the matter of our universe from large to small, and from energy to mass.

And it’s the third time that you get it wrong. You take a couple of facts, add a couple of falsehoods, and end up with an error.

You simply do not understand the point. You building straw-man tangents.

That’s true iff debt includes equity, which is an odd definition.

How does one invest in debt, except by buying a bond. You thought I mean the insurance company will borrow money? Why would you think that?

The rest of your comments make no point at all.

Here follows an email discussion about what is passive capital:


>>I think I have the technology that will render passive capital useless,
>>and thus their control over passive capital will not help them.
> Passive capital is just the portion of their
> wealth that they don't actively use to control
> commerce. The rest is active and people have no
> way to get around it. The passive portion can be
> mobilized anytime if there is danger to their monopoly.
> So I don't see how software can do anything to
> weaken their grip on commerce. You have to buy
> gas from their gas stations. You have to buy food
> and clothes from their stores, etc. How will software make a dent on that?

Good question. Thanks for letting me see where I need to explain more.

First of all realize that "active" means that you are producing value with your own activities, i.e. an engineer creates a new design or an investor researches the technology before he invests and constantly evaluates the technology's progress. Passive capitalists don't do this. They want huge economies-of-scale, where they just count beans in an accounting calculation. They don't want to be bothered with actually creating the knowledge, they think the knowledge workers are just their slaves.

The profit margins on commodities, and even now on manufacturing, are close to 0 and actually I have read that most of China is operating with razor thin to negative profit margins in some cases. China values employment quantity more than profit margins. And now even most of that is being automated and costs reduced further, which will further shrink profit margins.

I am not referring to the knowledge that goes into engineering new designs, but realize this is spread out over billions of consumers now, so that cost is insignificant when it comes to these commodities and basic highly replicated things that everyone uses.

So thus the profit that comes from commodities and industry, is dying. It is being automated away to 0.

Thus the bigger slice of the current economy is really the knowledge businesses, which are the various engineering disciplines. But these all rely on software to encode and develop their knowledge base and work output, and most of them are actually software (e.g. biotech, nanotech, etc).

This is why the elite capitalists have been becoming so aggressive at this juncture in history. Their businesses are becoming unprofitable (they own all the industries because they capitalize them via their fiat debt system which they control, so they are the owners of that system and are responsible for its aggregate profitability), and the only way they can maintain their profit margins is to use methods of control which eliminate competition so that they can charge prices that are much higher than the cost of production. They can get away with this for as long as the people have no way to earn an income by working out of their own home individually (producing their own contribution to the total knowledge of the economy).

People can't do that now, because the "transactional cost" (go read that Theory of the Firm to understand the meaning of the term) of producing knowledge forces people to work for a corporation. Examples of transactional cost, are people leave a project, then the project dies, so there needs to be a corporation which can keep things organized in such a way that individual actions don't stop progress.

But with my technological innovation, the individual's contribution becomes referentially transparent. Which means basically that everyone can contribute individually without adversely affecting the progress of the whole system. In fact, under my innovation, then in theory the system's progress will accelerate by Reed's Law factor, due to the networking effects of these individual contributions leveraging each other. This economic model wasn't possible without referential transparency, because the conflicts of interest among individuals would cause gridlock in the overall system, because the individual contributions could be a like a spagehetti or domino cascade into all the other contributions.

This is basically what I was driving at a year ago with my research into the Dunbar number of limit of humans and the effects of transactional cost.

This innovation reforms the large from the small level, i.e. it is naturally grass roots revolution, because it doesn't require anyone to organize anyone else. Each person works to maximize his/her income individually and it causes the decentralized system to become most of the value in the world economy.

TPTB won't be able to do anything. Their capital and control will be useless, because you can't buy the minds of individuals, once they have a way to maximize their income producing knowledge without the need of the corporation.

Last edited by Shelby on Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:38 pm; edited 6 times in total


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

I am vindicated!

Post  Shelby on Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:05 pm

Someone has proven my Theory of the Universe (Gravity), which validates what I have been writing about the entropic efficiency of the organization of things in our lives:



Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Martin Armstrong explains everything about silver manipulation

Post  Shelby on Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:17 am

Wow! Read from page 7 forward:


He alleges that Buffett was involved in a 1993 attempt to drive silver price up then crash it down in USA (New York), but this failed because regulation was too strong, so in 1998 he shifted it to London, where it was successful. Perhaps the whole point (if I am correct, apparently Armstrong doesn't realize) was to cause silver to have a higher average price, so that mining would be stimulated, while keeping the people from sensing that the govt was debasing the currency (the CPI hedonics accelerating around 1992 - 1996). Perhaps the whole point was to keep the public locked into the debt bubble longer, where these "capitalists" could gyrate the economy and front run the market for speculative profits.

There is another account from Armstrong in this Schoon article:


Remember I have often said that the manipulation is the fact that most people (esp westerners) want to have their debt+insurance+bonds, which means they implicitly demanded that paper manipulation of gold & silver in order to maintain the western world's sucking the resources out of the developing world, with the passive capitalists managing the centralized allocation of resources:



Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Debunking Saville's latest article

Post  Shelby on Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:14 am

I will email him this. This was a very sloppy article, not up to his usual insightful quality.


He should have noticed that copper (and other commodities) have been getting cheaper throughout history. This is because mankind makes machines and computers and becomes more efficient and thus commodity production becomes a smaller and smaller part of the total economy. Duh! And he is supposed to be an economist!


Compare to gold. Gold's price doesn't have anything to do with the cost or efficiency of mining, as Gold is the world's money supply (and so its price should increase relative to commodities):


Note, the above charts are ShadowStats.com inflation-adjusted, which proves the govt's CPI is a lie, as they show copper remaining a constant portion of the economy over time (which doesn't make sense, as we knowing for example that farming is a much smaller % of the economy in developed nations where most of the global GDP is produced):



Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

End of Finance?

Post  Shelby on Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:47 am


Shelby replied:
Andrew asked:
Assuming you are correct, or partially correct, what would the economic devastation be? A crash like in the USA?

Also, what would be a way to “short sell” china and prepare for the crash?

First, this is not an investment blog.

I will offer my opinion. It is very risky to bet short over any near-term timeline that gives great leverage, because it appears to me (speculation from limited data) that China is increasing subsidies to the export sector (more loans so they can operate longer at thin or negative profit margins), allowing the real estate bubble to reignite to some perhaps limited extent, and injecting massive short-term liquidity via record setting $40+ billion reverse repos. And some (even a quote of the incoming Chinese Premier) think the data out of China is not accurate. So if the market participants are all fooled by this (and even China's state investment arm and state companies are buying their own shares), then short bets on the market can expire before any crash is realized.

No matter what China and the market do over the next year or two, the Professor has reasoned that ultimately the difficult adjustment process will come. The only question is does it come by proactively beginning the adjustment process and a (hopefully more) muted level of suffering over a longer period of time, or will it be an implosion. Professor Pettis has warned and I agree history has shown that if imbalances exacerbate, eventually it can lead to an avalanche rebalancing.

Also I think China's Yuan peg sustained the western debt bubble and vice versa, thus there is likely to be a global contagion implosion. The USA remains some what stronger *diversified* economy, because even with its huge real estate bubble, still has 70% consumer share of the GDP (which is the mirror imbalance to China and hints at the complicity), and thus the USA could rebalance by eliminating non-essential consumption and/or removing the friction of the welfare state. This would probably implode China, and thus Germany, etc.

Thus I think there is only one investment option to surely protect a store-of-value, that is not gambling. It is physical gold (and silver) held in your own possession. Whether the politics chooses to exacerbate the imbalances (and thus the negative real interest rates), or choose debt deleveraging crash, gold maintains its purchasing power in both scenarios , and it is the only asset that is not simultaneously someone else's liability (i.e. there is no counter-party promise involved as with all other assets, even non-allodial titled real estate). Some incorrect logic out there argues that gold is something else, such as a protection against inflation. Gold is a protection against negative real interest rates, and a protection against debt deleveraging deflation (the crash of gold in 2008 was because gold is still price-fixed by futures markets until that bankrupt dollar financial system fails...this requires a very long explanation). See prior comments regarding the monetary nature of gold:


Unfortunately, gold is also an enslavement mechanism, because its supply can only grow at 2-3% per annum. Thus it overly rewards "burying capital in a hole", which is the antithesis of prosperity (since 2% is a natural population growth rate, unless we destroy future demographics...again antithesis of prosperity). It gives all the power to "he who holds the gold, makes the rules". So society will always eventually debase any gold standard, and convert it to a fiat, e.g. the futures market in gold now. But during the period of gold discipline, the power will rest with those who control most of the 150,000 tonnes above ground. And certainly that is not the masses. Do I need to define slavery any other way?

I just want to make it clear that I don't view a gold standard as a panacea, but in the short-term, unless you have an active growth investment, then the safest passive store-of-value is gold (until this global storm is over).

If this global contagion is real, imagine the potential chaos. In my opinion, all forms of financial investments will thus be vulnerable to failure. We've already twice had the $billions failure (theft!) of futures brokerage accounts, and in a worsening global crisis, capital controls are possible.

Gold is not the way to prosperity. It represents the old industrial and agricultural world economy where huge levels of capital were predominant over the value of the knowledge creation. This is changing now. Apple has (had) a larger mcap than Exxon-Mobile. A couple of guys in their garage with a couple of computers, can launch a $millions mcap startup software company. Knowledge capital is now outpacing hard resources capital in terms of value creation.

So my thesis is that the trap of the gold standard and the debt deleveraging new world order, will only catch those who don't shift out of the old world economy. With this in mind, I have stopped all speculation in the financial markets, and have refocused myself back on creating another startup software company (as I had done in the past).

I would urge everyone to look for investments that are knowledge based. There are 7 billion people we need to employ. Manufacturing will move towards automation. The industrial revolution is over. The 3D printer is here:


This is probably my last post. I have stopped speculating about when China (and the world) will run out the rope of increasing debt. I have wasted far too much time on it, but it at least it has affirmed what I realized 25 years ago, that it was much more efficient and freedom-oriented for me to be able to create software with a computer, than become an (electrical or otherwise) engineer whose productive output has to be capitalized.

My dream is for this to be the end of finance, and for knowledge based production to exceed the paper value creation of wallstreet. I dream to see a world valued based on intelligence and art, not on gambling, passive investment (i.e. physical savings), theft, deception, leverage, and the "Iron Law of Political Economics":


Of course, there is no way all 7 billion people can make that shift, thus its only a dream overall although I dream (very far-fetched) there could be two (mostly) orthogonal economies.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

The Chicago Plan, Hitler tried that, China is trying it too

Post  Shelby on Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:52 am


I must thank you. I learned something new about Hitler's regime:


Also the comments at the wakeupfromyourslumber.com link on that article are very interesting and in line with my view of how the energy has been suppressed by the cartels.

What we really have going on is always a mix of people trying to fight for freedom and the banksters exploiting human nature to their ends.

Hitler's experimentation into state-socialism failed. We can claim that Germany was more prosperous for a few years by printing its own money, just as we can claim China is more prosperous now by printing its own Yuan and directing it top-down to infrastucture.

But we see how it always ends, because such activity is not economic. The bankers bided their time while Hitler created a social liability, then when the time was right, they used their leverage over oil to force Hitler into aggression, because Hitler had to keep the socialism apparatus funded with cheap energy. Yeah okay we can say that Stalin had threatened Poland, but in reality these states were competing for resources, because they had promised socialism.

It is always the result that socialism, e.g. universal healthcare, results in war and failure.

We can say that Hitler was fighting the bankers, but he could only win the hearts of the people, by promising them more than the bankers were. So he increased the socialism and misallocation of capital. Remember my recent unpublished article, wherein I explained the math that top-down systems always fail. The center of the bell curve will never understand it, so society is destined to repeat the same outcomes over and over.

Of course in the early stages, misallocation via top-down control appears to be prosperous. It is only in the latter stages (e.g. what China is approaching now) where the failure sets in, as I had explained in my unpublished article.

Perhaps Hitler's hand was forced sooner than it would have been otherwise, if Germany hadn't been so dependent on external oil. But even if he had oil internally, the socialism would have eventually imploded on him any way.

So I still stick with that universal health care created the mindset that the weak are to blame for not being able to give away for free, that which is not free. And thus the purging of the weak in Germany, which morphed to purging the Jews.

Excellent article! I learned a lot. Hitler was definitely a megalomaniac, but he thought he had a better way. Of course, socialism is always failure, no matter what the intentions.

I know you are really searching for a complete solution-- i.e. if we can just kill all the bankers, then humans won't want socialism. Sorry it will never be that way, because of that bell curve of ignorance that persists.

We had better accept this bell curve we live in. It is nature.

Time for me to move back to producing, you know that activity I used to do before I got off on this nonsense about trying to fix the world. The world can't be fixed.

We produce, we live, we die. Accept it.

Thanks for helping complete my education on this.


> I believe you are misjudging it. In my view most money they spent was
spent productively.

Never is top-down spent money the most productive, but it often takes a long time for this to become clear.

In 5 years or less, we can talk about what happened to China after it is proven because they have collapsed.

The vital infrastructure typically is the least wasteful, e.g. the autobonne. But it is more wasteful than what a free market would have done with the same human capital. The politics and type of economy we see today in Germany was molded and shifted course somewhat by those infrastructure in Weimer era. And Germany is a failed state right now (depend on China and PIIGS imports).

This will all be more proven in a few more years.

It is silly for us to argue about it. We will know the outcome in a few years at most. Let's just wait to see.

> It was not the healthcare that killed them but
> the war effort.

Agreed, but the healthcare socialism (and its economic failure)
contributed to the development of the mindset for purging the weak.

When we promise healthcare to all, we socially get concerned about the cost of the weak.

It fits into the German psychology that men can improve and perfect the world. The German philosophers all exhibited this trait, and I can even see it in the Germans I meet here, they think they are better than everyone else. And Germans are known to write down an inventory of every item they buy for their household. I remember there was a time in the 1980s (when my WordUp software was published in Germany) when Germans did not want to adopt color computer screens for publishing, because they felt the B&W was more purely focused on the content and the essence of the layout.

Hitler was an artist. He was dreaming of a perfect world where the superior race can do art and be prosperous. His dream was not all that far from my dream with an Inverse Commons where we can focus on knowledge creation and art. (software is an art).

The difference I hope is that I am not a megalomania in extremis. If ever I find I am top-down controlling my creation, I am likely to be repulsed and conflicted. I abandoned CoolPage in 2002 when sales were still $10,000 per month, for large reason that I couldn't technologically find a way to make it more open and less proprietary (it doesn't import HTML due to the easy layout paradigm).

> War is always unproductive, even destructive and it
> was that that did them in financially in the later years.

Oh I agree. But they would have ended up a failed state any way, because Hilter fundamentally did not understand nature and economics. Top-down planning always ends up economically failed. Always. And you can try to rationalize that there has never been a test-case without the bankers meddling, but mathematically I am sure that is a strawman or red-herring.

I have explained it in my last two papers:



I don't expect you to agree with me, because you really want to believe that if we could wipe out the bankers, that we could reach some nirvana.

For some reasons, the Germanic cultures think that nirvana is possible with man.

It violates entropy. It is mathematically false. I would have to try to explain this mathematically better than I have. But for now, I have no time to do that.

Erik Verlinde is proving that everything in nature is emergent from entropy:

I find Erik's explanation in the following video makes it easier to understand.


> Of course the Jews will deny that forever, because Hitler's financial
model cannot be allowed to make school, then and now.

Bill Still of the Money Masters via fame, along with Karl Denninger, are promoting this "if the state can print its own money" school of thought.

The USA did during the Civil War apparently (the notes ended up worthless, but that is besides the point).

Any way, it will fail economically, because it is more top-down management of the economy.

There is no solution about money. And the reason is because money
represents passive capital and not active knowledge.

And thus I work on making knowledge a tradeable fungible unit in the Inverse Commons.

> Where would the
> money printers end up if each country started to print its own money?

They would wait for the economic failure of top-down money printing, and then they would be right back in business.

> Everything Hitler did must be demonized.

The bankers were probably helping him too, because they are smart enough to know that his model was doomed.

It is not as B&W as one might want to think.

> Of course, in the end his model was wrong too, because a government
doesn't have any business printing money.


Happy we could agree on that!

I was worried you were going to idolize centralized solutions.

> Money is produced by the
> people in the form of products and services. If counterfeit money is
printed, whether by Rothschild assholes or governments, it's still counterfeiting and theft.

Wow. We agree on a lot then.

Karl Denninger and I got in a very nasty argument in email (he was so nasty), because he believes government printing its own money is a solution.


>> > I believe you are misjudging it. In my view most money they spent was spent productively.
>>Never is top-down spent money the most productive, but it often takes a long time for this to become clear.
> That is pure theory. You have evidence for that?

Yes. Find one top-down managed economy that ever did not implode.

And don't use the persistent presence of bankers as an excuse.

You can see in Hitler's case that a top-down economy is not resilient against other forces.

Until you understand this concept, you will go in circles the rest of your life like a dog chasing his tail.

> I say in this case
> the private economy with honest money could not have done what Hitler did because the private economy did not have the overall view and political power.

Correct. A free market of autonomous actors would not have created that catastrophic failure that resulted.

But we don't have a free market ever, because of socialism, which always exists.

The only way to rise about it, is make knowledge a more higher value component of your individual life. Then you care much less about what the rest of this socialist world is doing. You become a more autonomous actor.

> The fact is that he turned a broke nation of unemployed into a boom economy within two years by buiding infrastructure, car plants, etc.

No he turned it into a disaster zone where everthing was flattened to the ground by 1944.

Not a resilient system.

There is unarguable. You can claim this and that (blame it on others, etc), but the fact is the result is the result.

Hard facts. Result is the result.

> There was work done for every mark that was issued.

I can employ 10 men with spoons to dig trenches.

> You have too many preconceptions that you take for granted.

I have a solid foundation in science, math, and physical historical evidence.

You will not be able to find one counter-example in all of recorded history.

Not one. Zero. None.

>>In 5 years or less, we can talk about what happened to China after it is proven because they have collapsed.
>>The vital infrastructure typically is the least wasteful, e.g. the autobonne. But it is more wasteful than what a free market would have
>> done
>>with the same human capital. The politics and type of economy we see
>> today
>>in Germany was molded and shifted course somewhat by those infrastructure in Weimer era. And Germany is a failed state right now (depend on China and PIIGS imports).
>>This will all be more proven in a few more years.
>>It is silly for us to argue about it. We will know the outcome in a few years at most. Let's just wait to see.
> Yes it is silly but you can't just throw whoppers around and expect to get away with it.

China will not be an exception. The same thing has always happened throughout recorded history.


I am going to try to stop talking about this stuff so I don't waste time that I could use for programming or being outdoors to prevent the insomnia that i get from being on computer too much.

So please lets not make a long debate.

You could argue that if the bankers hadn't been there, Hitler could have succeeded. You have no long-term proof and no instance in history to back that theory.

I can argue that top-down eventually fails and I have every instance in history as my proof.

The reason top-down fails is because it attempts to flatten the bell curve. It attempts to give to the center of the bell curve that which they could not get on their own.

So we push on building the autobonn and we are feeling like the economy is prosperous , because there is a lot of activity. But what we have done is violate nature, in that we've said that we can command all the people to be productive. But the fact of nature is a bell curve and the center is orders-of-magnitude less productive than the outer ends of the curve. So yes, we can temporarily command work for the center, but this is just wasting capital w.r.t. the maximum efficiency that could be obtained by giving most of the capital to outer ends.

It is a sad fact of nature, that nature does not want a equal distribution of anything.

So when ever you see widespread equality of prosperity, you will know there is massive socialism, and the economy is doomed to fail.

Sorry but this is fact of entropy. It isn't even a theory, since it is really observed fact throughout recorded history.

Disagree if you want. Any way, we've both got more important things to do than argue.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Gold standard is not an improvement

Post  Shelby on Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:21 am

Okay here is the succinct argument I promised on why a gold standard is not sustainable and not an improvement.

Can you refute this?


JustSaying (Shelby) wrote:
@JAD there is an article on your blog claiming the US Treasury might not possess any unencumbered gold.

Ah the baiting of the soul with the "gold will save us" emotional trap.

History has shown that the stored value medium for money is always debased, regardless whether it is gold, paper, Tally sticks, electronic digits, etc..

An insoluble fact is that debasement is always assured with politics, because the costs of the voters' desires is obfuscated in the debasement of all citizens, instead of applied individually w.r.t. individual performance.

Don't confuse the desire to work and get paid, or to start a business and earn a profit, with the political promises made to voters. Don't confuse "economic value" with "I saw jobs, prosperity being created". Economic value is a network of feedback loops from investment followed by profit or bankruptcy. The more individually directed these investments are, the more chances of finding the profitable ones that fit the economic demand. The collective politics has an incentive (to earn votes) to invest in everything voters want, economic or not.

This insoluble power vacuum (that sucks in a leader who can make the political promises) can not be wished away just because it is repulses a person's emotions. There is no possible mechanism to remove it.

For example, some claim that Hitler and Lincoln or recently Iceland and China, took the power from the banking establishment and gave it to the citizens, by handing the control over the creation of paper money to the national treasury. Hitler and Confederate notes both debased their society by spending on uneconomic projects. China is doing the same now. Hitler initially made the people happy with lavish public works spending (e.g. the road network and health care), promising the people more than the economic value of the projects could sustain. When he could not get enough oil to sustain it, he was forced to expropriate via war in order to fulfill the collective social promises. That summary probably misses some complexities, but the essential point remains valid.

Since the masses don't hold most of the wealth, if the society enforces a strict gold standard, then the masses don't get what they want. This is why gold standards are always subverted by politics.

A strict gold standard would over time concentrate relative wealth from the consuming middle class to the wealthy, who save say 99% and consume 1% of their income. Politics demands debasement, because the rich concentrate wealth (with or) without debasement.

Some refer to the Byzantine era as an example of a sustainable gold standard. I have not studied the period intensely. Apparently gold was being imported into the economy by their trade surplus, so perhaps political promises were less attractive to citizens who were finding sufficient opportunities to be busy and prosperous. Unlike China's current situation, their trade surplus was not due to a mercantile policy of debasement of their currency, rather apparently due to some situational and technological advantages, e.g. their cannon spraying flaming oil on pirates. Further insight on this would be appreciated.

I posit the taxonomy of male social order types from PUA type theory applies to this power vacuum. I asserted that the alphas get their power from public politics and/or Theory of the Firm (corporate politics), with the lower order male types (betas, gammas, omegas) employing politics to fight back. They can band together with politics to fight the rich with political promises including Doublethink such as equality and social justice, which actually end up as debasement and plunder. The sigmas don't play the class warfare delusion, instead create technology to empower individuals.

Stored wealth is ephemeral and depleting. It should be this way, otherwise people become unmotivated to continue producing. The rate of growth of relative wealth of the rich decelerates as they grow richer and less in tune with the markets invested in, i.e. smaller things grow faster because of the fitness. I don't hate the bankers+politicians because I don't want to hate most people (i.e. the symbiotic borrowers+voters). Why hate what can't be changed? Why be bitter and perceive the glass as half-empty? The inspiring fact is that despite the booms and busts (and occasional resultant atrocities and wars) caused by the political promises, everyone gets wealthier over time. The cost of commodities is inexorably declining as a relative share of the global GDP. In 323 B.C. iron was a precious metal. Technology, innovation, and art (i.e. knowledge) is the savior of mankind.

Atrocities repulse all of us. Religion is not the only cause. To entirely prevent them, we would have to somehow eliminate political promises and the Doublethink they create. Unfortunately I don't see how such a goal is possible or congruent with evolution.


Posts : 3107
Join date : 2008-10-21

View user profile http://GoldWeTrust.com

Back to top Go down

Re: What Is Money?

Post  Sponsored content

Sponsored content

Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum