mike montagne's mathematically perfected economy™ BLOG | » Blog Archive » Response to Jim Quinn’s Nolan Chart Article, “Ron Paul, the only one telling the Truth”

YOU ARE VIEWING ARTICLES IN THE FOLLOWING CATEGORY (SELECT CATEGORIES FROM THE DIRECTORY, RIGHT):

mike montagne’s mathematically perfected economy blog » Blog Archive » Response to Jim Quinn’s Nolan Chart Article, “Ron Paul, the only one telling the Truth”

Response to Jim Quinn’s Nolan Chart Article, “Ron Paul, the only one telling the Truth”

RELATED EXTERNAL ARTICLES

THIS BLOG TOPIC REFERS TO Jim Quinn’s NOLAN CHART ARTICLE, “Government Deception — Ron Paul, the only one telling the Truth”

Jim,

I provided the Reagan Administration computer models which, by calculating multiplication of debt by practiced patterns of interest and growth, projected full blown failure under a terminal sum of debt at approximately 2010 AD from 1983. We’re arguably in economic failure now, and we will never reach 2040 before that failure is full blown.

To your (or Paul’s) credit, your federal debt figures are conservative by many alternate ways of determining them; and, by others’ reckonings as well, escalation of unfunded further liabilities (owing to borrowing from Peter [social securty and so forth] to pay Paul [any other program]) amounted to as much as 100 trillion two years ago.

Given the possible accuracy of these reckonings, and further “undiscovered” facts such as false leveraging or anticipated asset appreciation which will fail with further deterioration/collapse, the actual per capita condition of the prospective failure can be far worse than you give.

While I commend Mr. Paul for standing up against these atrocities, I believe he has squandered the best opportunity we have had in the last 100 years to right our country, because he has constantly raised false assertions of cause and solution which far too many of us see through.

If for instance inflation and deflation are defined respectively as increases/decreases in circulation per related wealth, then obviously, by the most elementary math, we know that we can only solve inflation and deflation by maintaining a circulation which is perpetually equal to the related wealth.

We can only do that by introducing so much circulation as the market determines the value of the respective wealth, and by paying off a related monetary obligation equal only to that, at the rate of consumption or depreciation.

Mr. Paul does not advocate this solution.

Likewise, contrary to his assertion of devaluation of the dollar by a purported fact of “inflation” he has never proven, the prospective collapse is engendered by inherent multiplication of debt in proportion to the circulation, as we are compelled to maintain a circulation to service debt, and to maintain a circulation, we are compelled to re-borrow principal and interest paid out of the general circulation, with the necessity to replenish the circulation thus perpetually increasing the sum of debt so much as periodic interest.

Paul, Vieira, Griffin, and other Austrians of course do not even recognize this process (see my invalidation of Griffin).

But we solve this process of multiplication of debt by interest, only by eradicating interest — which the Austrians on the contrary advocate. So, without any better attempt at invalidating the process than Griffin’s preposterous effort, the Austrians (who likely will assert communism, socialism, collectivism, or lack of free markets or an adversity to math as they always do) only commit us to the failure ahead. Of course, they don’t advocate an alternate solution, because there is one and one only solution to inflation/deflation, systemic manipulation of the cost/value of money or property, and inherent multiplication of debt by interest (which they don’t even recognize).

So finally, mathematically perfected economy solves systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, by its *combination* of the elementary solutions of inflation/deflation and systemic multiplication of debt by interest — which are the only powers a monetary system has to manipulate the cost or value of money or property.

Ron Paul not only does not advocate that singular integral solution, he continues to evade debating it, and continues (perpetually) to assert a false cause for instance for price inflation. He attributes price inflation to circulatory inflation, despite no formal proof or theorem of same, and despite the fact that I proved long ago that the only systemic cause of price inflation is inherent multiplication of debt by interest.

Worse, Mr. Paul and his Austrian friends who always take the opportunity to sling insults in return to these facts, can hardly prove the circulatory inflation he claims when the circulation is far less than the value of all wealth.

So he advocates returning to a gold standard, when monetary reserves can hardly sustain a circulation sufficient to sustain industry far exceeding that circulation — even claiming while works Franklin produced when he was just 23 disprove his assertion, that gold will endow the money with a consistent, perpetual value, which only mathematically perfected economy maintains by always preserving a circulation free in its entirety to be redeemed only in that wealth, free and capable in its entirety to resolve the remaining monetary obligations, and free from servicing interest or multiplying debt by interest.

Mr. Paul, you may recall, yet uses my term, “insoluble debt” — a term I introduced in 1979 in my original formal proof of inherent multiplication of debt (later stolen by authors of “The Debt Virus” and so forth), and of singular solution to all these irregularities in mathematically perfected economy.

If Mr. Paul does not recognize the process of multiplication of deb ty interest; and if Austrians are to continue advocating interest even if this proposition is true, then how is Mr. Paul even truly advocating the problem, his authority/authorship of solution, or the facts by which we can determine either as truth?

So you see, Mr. Paul is certainly not the only one trying to tell the truth; and if “the revolution” which existed long before he even claims to have taken an interest in “economics” is to prevail, we’re going to have to determine *which* is the truth,, and who is really advocating it.

Furthermore nonetheless, in regard to Ron’s position on the cited bill, I’ll stand with him in certain important respects:

You quote Mr. Paul as saying,

“The solution is for government to stop micromanaging the economy and let the market adjust, as painful as that will be for some. We should not force taxpayers, including renters and more frugal homeowners, to switch places with the speculators and take on those same risks that bankrupted them. It is a terrible idea to spread the financial crisis any wider or deeper than it already is, and to prolong the agony years into the future. Socializing the losses now will only create more unintended consequences that will give new excuses for further government interventions in the future. This is how government grows - by claiming to correct the mistakes it earlier created, all the while constantly shaking down the taxpayer. The market needs a chance to correct itself, and Congress needs to avoid making the situation worse by pretending to ride to the rescue.”

He’s absolutely right that we should not allow speculators to take freely from the pool of wealth on the one hand, and relieve them of responsibility of *their* consequences by putting the costs of their mis-doings on the taxpayer, renter, etc.

But the solution is not to call the market free, when it is subject further to the involuntary servitude of multiplication of debt by interest, and to promotion of cost by usurers, who for profit maximize debt. That “market” is no more free than any other slave.

The solution is to refinance all this debt under mathematically perfected economy. Thus a $100,000 home with a 100-year lifespan would cost us $1,000/year or $83/month.

Then and then alone will *A FREE MARKET* be paying for the production of others *WITH* whatever that free market determined was the value of that wealth.

One Response to “Response to Jim Quinn’s Nolan Chart Article, “Ron Paul, the only one telling the Truth””

Response to Jim Quinn’s Nolan Chart Article, “Ron Paul, the only one telling the Truth” Says:
June 29th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
[…] The Tory Anarchist wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt RELATED EXTERNAL ARTICLES THIS BLOG TOPIC REFERS TO Jim Quinn’s NOLAN CHART ARTICLE, “Government Deception — Ron Paul, the only one telling the Truth” Jim, I provided the Reagan Administration computer models which, by calculating multiplication of debt by practiced patterns of interest and growth, projected full blown failure under a terminal sum of debt at approximately 2010 AD from 1983. We’re arguably in economic failure now, and we will never reach 2040 before that failure is ful […]

COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

"To find the players in all the corruption of the world, 'Follow the money.' To find the captains of world corruption, follow the money all the way."

mike montagne — PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™