In my previous post, I mentioned that you should save your money in a credit union, rather than a bank. This is because of several factors, but mostly, because savings and loan banks were actually designed to transfer value from the middle class to the rich, in order to deplete the capability of the middle class to reform societies from imperialism into profitable capitalism.
Thus, a double-speak was created which prevents those banks from acting with the sensitivity which one would find in a credit union. Credit unions are co-operatives which work with their members for mutual benefit.
Continue reading “The Venture Bank”
When you take out a “loan” from a commercial bank, that money is created on demand. It is not “recycled from savings”, as it would be at a credit union or if you were taking out a loan from a friend.
If all goes well, and you repay the loan, then full sum of the interest, and any fees associated with both loan and any current accounts held at the bank, then the bank has made a profit on paper, but society has made a loss. The banks destroys all of that money, rather than recycling it.
Not only did you lose the excess of interest and fees, but that money is now no longer within the money supply.
In fact, the money supply of the current world economic system, based on “imbalanced fractional reserve banking”, has two main flaws:
- The creation of money is only done by loans
- There is no difference in treatment, between created money and earned money
As a result, the banks generate a type of “basic income”, or usury, from this process.
Continue reading “The Basic Income of Commercial Banks”
In general, systems which are created for one purpose cannot be used for another purpose, unless they are first generalized and reformed.
The general way to convert the “sword” of liabilities into the “plowshears” of revenue, is via sales. However, most people can only sell their own time, as employees, for a relatively low fee. So the system has been rigged against employees.
Continue reading “Loans into Capital via Sales”
This was an essay which I wrote after reading yet another rant about how the world is overpopulated. It is a bit hard to read, since I wrote it in one, emotional, sitting.
The world, itself, can support many more humans. However the systems of industry which are currently in effect may have to be modified, regardless of how much the world population varies.
The requires creating better systems: more complex, more harmonious with nature, rather than focusing on only one variable, such as carbon emissions or human bodies in animation. Humans and nature can live in mutual benefit, and mass support systems can be made in a sustainable manner, if that is what is intended.
However, if dehumanization (of all members of society), and distracting intellectuals with false dogmas is the intention, then keep on with the oversimplification.
The problems with the biosphere on Earth, and environmental issues which affect large populations, are not due to the number of humans present on the planet, but rather, the type of factories which we use. Depopulation will not “save the Earth”, nor will “over population” threaten the Earth. Inappropriate use of human-made devices, driven by a very few, but affecting very many, is the actual core problem.
Continue reading “Factory based anti-humanity”