We have been played.
Economics
The opposite of government intervention is the free-market, where everything is voluntary, and thus the importance of earning a reputation relative to many competitors will drive all to maximize innovation and efficiency in order to give customers a better product for a lower cost. The absence of government barriers when starting new companies or inventing new products will maximize employment, innovation, and independence.
The potential for profit means that if people want something enough to pay for it, then a free-market is the system most likely to give it to them, and the fact that they can pay for it, means they did some honest labor that other people wanted enough that they would voluntarily pay for it.
The free-market is the system that rewards those who are the most genuinely helpful. In the eternal war of makers vs. takers, the free-market rewards the makers; whereas, government rewards the takers.
If everything were voluntary, then that raises an obvious question:
In a free market, who would save a dying child?
The answer is:
In a free market, the child wouldn't be dying.
A free-market creates greater wealth and innovation, and thus the child is more likely to be healthier, and if the child still needed help, then more people would be able to help him, and better technologies would be available to help him. Poverty and primitive technology are the biggest killers, and government is the cause of both.
Regulation is one of the ways government creates poverty and retards innovation. For a product or industry where there are many competitors, the real purpose of regulation is to reduce the number of competitors so that only those competitors who are most favored by politicians remain. Once there are only about 1 - 3 competitors remaining, the real purpose of regulation is to create barriers to entry, which protects existing businesses by making it harder for new businesses to start up or grow.
Another purpose of regulation is that it makes people feel good, as if their votes and political activism fixed a problem. Perhaps more importantly, it makes people think the systems works. Like I said, we have been played.
It may be the case that government does not deserve any of the credit we give it. You may even conclude that government does more harm than good.
Money
The problem with money is where it comes from, which is answered more fully if we look at how banks make money:
- The Federal Reserve prints money out of thin air and loans it to the banks who own the Fed, and thus receives interest on money it created out of thin air.
- The banks who own the fed can loan it out to us at a higher rate because we can't borrow from the Fed.
- For each dollar you deposit into a bank (even a bank that doesn't own the Fed), the bank is allowed to create about ten dollars out of thin air and loan it out to us.
- If the borrower of those dollars does not pay them back, then the bank can claim that as a loss, and thus pays less taxes. However the bank lost nothing because the money was printed out of thin air, and thus the tax deduction is profit for nothing.
- The Federal reserve is never audited, so it can create unlimited amounts of money for itself and we would never know.
- The Federal reserve is never audited, so the banks who own the Fed might never pay back what they received from the Fed, and we would never know.
- No one is allowed to compete with the Federal Reserve.
That last part “No one is allowed to compete with the Federal Reserve.” is the key. It makes all the others possible. Otherwise, we would use whatever money we wanted and Federal Reserve money would be worthless. This is an example of cronyism, and cronyism is at the heart of what is wrong with the government – and the country.
Why don’t we just use whatever money we want and ignore the Fed? As long as both parties in any trade agree, it’s no one else’s business. Right? After all, in a free country, money is a product, and it is a free country … isn’t it? ….
Like I said, we have been played.
As another example related to money, FDR forced all Americans to turn in their gold to the US government, who only paid them $20 per once when gold was worth $35 per once. Of course, FDR is also the one who put all Japanese Americans into a concentration camp …
Force
Government is a monopoly on the right to initiate force or fraud within a border.
The primary purpose of government is to redistribute the fruits of our labor, which cannot be done without force. The reason government redistributes the fruits of our labor is because it can. Government claims the right to all of the fruits of our labor and does not have to give us anything in return.
Everything government does is backed with lethal force. Try not paying taxes and see what happens. The reason government bonds are considered a safe investment is because taxes are backed with lethal force. Even disobeying the smallest, stupidest, or most illegal of orders from a cop can get you killed with little or no repercussions for the cop. People killed 59 cops in 2014; whereas, cops killed 1100 people. Any ordinary person is far more likely to be killed or harmed by their own government than by a foreign threat. In the 20th century, over 100 million ordinary people were killed by their own governments.
In addition to government claiming the right to all of the fruits of our labor, it claims the right to spy on everyone, and President Obama claims the right to assassinate, torture, and indefinitely detain anyone, and he has already exercised all of these powers.
You can't opt out, and just claiming that you have opted out … simultaneously terrifies cops and empowers them to shoot you on site with impunity because you were a “sovereign citizen”. You can't opt out as a group either because that's secession, and although America was founded by secession, the US government (under Lincoln) stopped secession by acting on its willingness to kill every person in a seceding state and its willingness to sacrifice three times as many of its own people to do so. Over 600,000 died.
The US government even targets anyone who aspires to be more independent (e.g. self sufficient), such as family farmers, preppers, and gun owners. Of course, it is whistleblowers who government targets most aggressively.
The US military now trains to fight civilian populations, and even trains to fight its own people. It even trains foreign troops to help it fight the American people. Also, the President has signed a treaty that would require him to disarm the American people, but the Senate has not ratified it yet.
Legitimacy
The US government claims it is legitimate because it was created by the Constitution, but I didn't sign the Constitution. Did you? Nor would I sign the Constitution because it either authorizes the government we have or has been unable to prevent it.
The US government does not obey the Constitution anyway. The Constitution says the US government has no power at all except for a few specific powers granted by the Constitution, but for a long time, the US government has interpreted the Constitution as granting it unlimited power except where the Constitution explicitly states a limit. Of course, since 9/11, even explicit Constitutional limits on government power are violated regulary.
It may seem progressive to see government as limited to only implementing good ideas, but a government limited to implementing only good ideas, is not limited at all.
Is it legitimate for a government to implement a good idea that was supported by a majority – assuming the majority was not under duress? No.
Democracy is not legitimate. Only freedom is legitimate. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. Freedom is a well-armed sheep.
Democracy is not only illegitimate, but it is not as good as it seems. Democracy's supposed success is mostly being in the right place at the right time in history, but even the people in the Soviet Union had a Constitution and could vote for anyone they wanted. Now, of course, democracy and rule of law are failing around the world. The legitimate alternative is Rule of Market.
We do not even have a democracy. If we did, Congress would not have only an 11% approval rating, and the federal debt wouldn’t be $57,000 per American. Do you have that in your account? What about the debt owed by your state, county, city, and school district? Is that what you voted for? I didn’t think so, but you got it anyway. That’s not democracy.
Fortunately, for you, the Federal Debt is also illegitimate because:
- It is taxation without representation for young people.
- We don’t really have democracy.
- It was spent on unconstitutional programs.
- Most purchasers were governments and hence illegitimate.
If your teacher in a government school disagrees with you about the nature of government, just point out that she is a government employee and thus has a conflict of interest. Furthermore, in the absence of school choice, the school itself is not legitimate.
RIGHTS
Freedom of speech is a concept that is an absolute, so if you don’t believe in free speech for everyone, then you don’t believe in free speech at all. Laws and regulations are all backed with lethal force, but good guys don’t fight words with violence – ever.
If people have a right to health care, then how would that work? Would you force the doctor to perform services, or would you force taxpayers to pay the doctor enough so that he would voluntarily perform services? A right to health care is thus tantamount to a right to the fruits of other men’s labor, but isn’t that the reason slavery is wrong … because no man has a right to the fruits of another man’s labor?
One cannot survive, let alone thrive, without performing labor and using his full intellect, and thus confiscation of the fruits of ones labor or limiting the use of his intellect constitutes a lethal threat.
You own yourself, and thus you own the fruits of your labor. It is thus your right to trade the fruits of your labor in any manor you choose.
Conspiracy
Any well informed person knows that things are really messed up and that so many things just don’t add up. Somehow government solutions either don’t help, or actually make things worse, and the solution is always to double down on the failed, flawed, fatal policies of the past. The solution to government is always more government. Even when the people get exactly what they thought they wanted, it turns out to have been a trick. Either it is all coincidence and accident, or some of it is conspiracy.
It is fairly well accepted that for centuries, and possibly millennia, those who create money out of thin air (e.g. the owners of the Federal Reserve) and loan it to governments are also the ones who create problems – usually wars – that cause governments to borrow money from them.
In addition to the wars caused by bankers, we know that all of human history is full of conspiracies. We know that some recent conspiracies and their continuing cover ups include the creation of the Federal Reserve, the attack on the USS Liberty, the JFK assassination, COINTELPRO, the Franklin Scandal, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the LIBOR scandal. We know the Gulf of Tonkin was a false flag. We know the NSA spies on everyone. We know the CIA puts up its own cell towers to capture everything our phones send and receive. We know the IRS targets pro-freedom individuals and organizations. The military knows that the government is often telling the people one story and then giving them orders that directly contradict that story.
Even with known conspiracies, have you noticed how Hollywood and the mainstream media are on the same page with government cover ups? Is there any topic on which the government and the media are not on the same page? Isn’t the only exception when the media attack some element of government who is not pro-government enough? How can journalists be even more pro-government than government? Journalists are supposed to be government watchdogs – not government lapdogs.
Are pro-freedom words ever matched with deeds? How is it that the party that says it wants to empower the little guy is the party that wants to disarm the little guy? How is it that the party of choice is so rabidly opposed to school choice? How is it that so many billionaires, CEOs, and conservative leaders promote socialism? How is it that they also want to disarm the people?
There is one conspiracy and ongoing cover up that is so big we now know that any conspiracy is possible. The 9/11 conspiracy is chock full of smoking guns, but the best smoking gun is that four planes were hijacked, three hit their building, and the fourth plane never reached its building, World Trade Center 7, but the fourth building collapsed anyway – in a controlled demolition. Watch it here. That WTC 7 was a controlled demolition is self evident, and yet some organization has the power to cause the entire establishment media to ignore it.
If you care about freedom or the future, then you should try to find out why conspiracies always try to discourage freedom and encourage more government, a police state, and global government. Also, why do these conspiracies span many decades and even centuries? Even George Washington was certain about what appears to be the same ongoing conspiracy. How many generations do they span? How far back does this go? Who is at the top? Certainly the owners of the Fed must be near the top.
Some people call the overall conspiracy The New World Order because that is what its proponents often call it publicly. It was explained very well in a short book by Gary Allen entitled: None Dare Call it Conspiracy. That was 45 years ago …
Regardless of the hidden elements, the evidence is in plain sight that any conflict being covered in the media is always used as a justification for more of a police state, and now that we know the level of conspiracy at play, we know that any conflict which leads to more government is no accident. For example, Ferguson was inevitable.
The Federal government trains police around the country to fear the people and shoot without hesitation. Then they give them armored vehicles, assault rifles, bullet proof vests and military training. An event like Ferguson was inevitable – sooner or later – somewhere. Then George Soros and the media spent a lot of money to agitate the residents of Ferguson. There were even agent provocateurs among the protesters. We thus see it is not necessary for the conspirators to directly control anyone or give explicit orders to further their agenda.
Like I said, we have been played.
In the eternal war of makers vs. takers, the conspirators are the takers, but the free-market rewards the makers, and it is government that rewards the takers. Government is thus the necessary medium in which the conspirators thrive. If we stop asking government to do stuff for us, then the conspiracy withers.
Stakes
There is more at stake than just freedom or prosperity.
If we look at the bigger picture, at a level of consciousness that even the conspirators may not understand, the eternal war of makers vs. takers is part of the larger and more eternal war where the Soul of Animals is trying desperately to exterminate the Soul of Humanity.
The Soul of Animals was slowly losing ground for millennia. Then we really had it back on its heels in 1776. However, it began to rapidly regain lost ground around 1913, which is when the Federal Reserve was created.
Since then, hundreds of millions who carry the Soul of Humanity have been killed or neutralized by their own governments. Once the American people have been disarmed, there will be little to stop it from wiping the Soul of Humanity from the gene pool.
Very good. Marred by the 9-11 Truth stuff alas but still 99% on the money.
ReplyDeleteIf anyone's putting up bogus cell phone towers it's likely to be the FBI not the CIA.
The Supreme Court has worked to destroy freedom since the New Deal. The three females on it now are the apotheosis of mediocrity. The scheme of the Constitution is blindingly obvious but the court sells us down the river in service to every crappy, sophomoric, idiotic, servile idea dreamed up by metrosexuals, traitors, grifters, and foreigners. Has the court ever erred on the side of liberty? No. Correct me if I'm wrong but one of its 2nd Amendment decisions grudgingly, grudgingly, I say, and oh so generously said it definitely includes the right to own a gun in your own home. God forbid it should signal that government messes at its peril with an armed citizenry any God damned place citizens feel like carrying.
It's easy. The court could always ask which result will maximize freedom? Boom. We decide it that way. Case closed. But it doesn't. We get platinum-plated bullshit that chips away yet more at liberty. Like the night follows day. QED. 2 + 2. Mai's oui. Auf wiedersehen.
The only things that energizes the court that way are when killing unborn babies and rectal intercourse are to be made into sacraments.
Don't be distracted by issues like gay sex. Liberal fascism is one of the ways the NWO divides and distracts us. We are being played.
DeleteIt sounds like you haven't actually read my two 9/11 articles: "The 9/11 Smoking Gun - WTC7" and "9/11 Conspiracy". They are short. Be sure to watch the video links in them to get critical evidence. I don't think any one of the videos will require more than 5 minutes of your time.
It was all over the news in March that the CIA was putting up what were for all practical purposes fake cell towers that let them capture all calls in the area. They did this in conjunction with local police.
DeleteThanks. You're right, I've not read your articles. I've read some of the stuff others have written and it just beggars the imagination. However, given the high quality of your thinking I will read what you have to say. My prediction is that Occam's Razor disposes of the whole shooting match.
ReplyDeleteBtaim, your idea that the downed plane was for Bldg. 7 is flawed. If it was demolished there was no need to crash a plane into it. More to the point, it makes no sense to say that obscure target of no economic or symbolic value whatsoever was a better target than the U.S. Capitol.
No sarcasm intended but I don't put any credence in what the "news" might determine about CIA activities. The Agency is limited in what it can do domestically, cell phone interception isn't one of its authorized missions, and FBI and NSA are more logical culprits among the list if possible government agencies.
Not that Obama is fastidious about legal limits, I know. Still, there are still many patriots in its ranks.
You're not thinking this through. The benefits of a plane for WTC 7 would be to 1. explain why the tower fell, 2. misdirect the investigation, 3. justifying more of a police state, e.g. TSA.
DeleteThe official story is that WTC 7 was not demolished, and yet it clearly was - as was admitted by its owner and by John Kerry, but more importantly because we can see it with out own eyes. Therefore, the official story cannot be true. That is one proof of conspiracy. Now given all that, consider that somehow not one person in the mainstream media is curious about WTC 7. That is a second proof of conspiracy. Given these two proofs, we now know that just about anything is possible.
It is just speculation to say that the motives of the perpetrators would make the US capitol a better target - especially given that the offical story cannot be true.