mathematically perfected economy™ (MPE™)    1  :   the singular integral solution of  1) inflation and deflation,  2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and  3) inherent, artificial multiplication of debt into terminal systemic failure;    2  :  every prospective debtor's right to issue legitimate promises to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of those promises, or the natural opportunity to make good on them;    3  :  our right to certify, to enforce, and to monetize industry and commerce by this one sustaining and truly economic process.

MORPHALLAXIS, January 14, 1979.

mike montagne's mathematically perfected economy™ BLOG

mike montagne at iMac.


To browse all articles, select the mathematically perfected economy™ category from the directory (right). Top and bottom links to 'earlier' and 'more recent' blogs will then include all content.

Sunday, August 10th, 2008


Mario Sikorski (mms) sends the following news from Poland:

Greenspanning ‘The Economy’ — CNBC — updated 4:49 p.m. ET July 31, 2008

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Thursday that [1] the U.S. housing market is “nowhere near the bottom” and that [2] the U.S. economy is “right on the brink” of slipping into a recession.

But he told CNBC [3] the latest economic data don’t yet indicate that a recession is inevitable.

Calling the current crisis in the financial markets [4] a “once-in-a-century phenomenon,” [once in a stealthily cooked economic meal, mms said] [5] Greenspan said the Treasury had no choice in its recent moves to backstop the two government-sponsored mortgage finance giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But he said [6] the government will probably have to nationalize the two companies, [7] calling them a “major accident waiting to happen.” [8] And he said that the ongoing slide in home prices has wiped out the home equity of “about 12 million home owners who are basically net in the red.”

Once again, Greenspan proves he’s just the shill of a conspiracy to retain usury upon a once free republic:

  1. “the U.S. housing market is ‘nowhere near the bottom’”

    What is the bottom of the U.S. “housing market” (arena of predation)?

    Unless we adopt mathematically perfected economy™, negative value is even possible, because if a “home” comes with a debt which can only multiply indebtedness so that we are forced to pay lifetime after lifetime to a few who produce nothing, for homes produced by but a few months of *our* work, that “home” is certainly a great liability — particularly “if” servicing the sum of debt can only impose terminal failure under which even our brief imposed failure to continually service the perpetually multiplying liabilities causes us to lose all presumed “equity” in the designed liability scheme.

    Americans and all the rest of the providers of involuntary servitude in the world nonetheless are clinging to these terminal liabilities as if Greenspan and the globalist conspiracy he advocates are going to pull some rabbit out of a hat in the people’s favor. As we see instead, they do only what is necessary to retain the system by which they steal so much from you.

  2. “the U.S. economy is ‘right on the brink’ of slipping into a recession”

    By alternate accounts, real unemployment topped 15 percent long ago. There are counties and towns in relatively “prosperous” states of this country where real unemployment is several times that. Government and “economist’s” figures purport that data which reports unearned takings from us (such as profit from commodities “trading” in oil) is actually in our favor — asserting this is to the profit of “the economy.” Housing prices (costs) “appreciating” are reported to be in our favor; this is regularly said to be evidence of prosperity when it is in fact evidence of the very ever multiplying costliness and damage which has put so many mortgages not only at the admitted “risk,” but in jeopardy of complete loss.

    But under a system which can only multiply debt at further escalating rates as we are compelled to maintain a circulation subject to interest by re-borrowing principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt, perpetually increased so much as periodic interest… how are we merely “on the edge” of a purportedly “possible” “recession”?

    On the contrary, even if we were only on the edge of a purportedly possible recession, the fact the imposed, unassented system can only multiply debt further beyond our possible means to service it indicates we can only plunge into recession and worse if we do not rectify the very process which artificially multiplies our debt for nought.

    Mr. Greenspan’s own proscribed course therefore ensures that depression, because he and all the traitors in power or who seek power profess instead their singular intention to retain upon us the system by which they multiply debt for the explicit purpose of taking so much from us.

    Inadvertently therefore, Mr. Greenspan confesses the very intention to stay the course of a second Great Depression.

  3. “the latest economic data don’t yet indicate that a recession is inevitable”

    A bald faced lie.

    No one but no one but no one can even demonstrate any practical way the present accumulations of debt will not, given further multiplication, be terminal. There is no way even to pay down the sum of debt in a system which instead can only multiply it.

    What real data anywhere then cannot indicate on the contrary that a second Great Depression is inevitable?

    Can Greenspan even show us how to arrest multiplication of debt?

    Absolutely not. He doesn’t even dare try, because that try would expose the whole lie!

  4. “a ‘once-in-a-century phenomenon’”

    False again.

    It’s a once-in-a-lifespan of usury phenomenon; and in fact, the broad and diverse edge of failure under inherent multiplication of debt comes at the end of the lifespan of usury, however potentially extended temporarily by the present exercises of artificial sustention.

  5. “Greenspan said the Treasury had no choice in its recent moves to backstop the two government-sponsored mortgage finance giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

    This is the lie of eternity. We can readily arrest multiplication of debt by eradicating the process of unearned profit which multiplies debt to terminal debt. We could instantly solve our problems by adopting mathematically perfected economy™. But Greenspan won’t discuss that, because the arguments of mathematically perfected economy™ will prevail; and that won’t allow the folks he represents to retain usury upon you even to your utter destruction.

  6. “the government will probably have to nationalize the two companies”

    So here, what we have is what the Austrian “economists” who oppose mathematically perfected economy™ call “free markets,” which under the “interest” which “Austrian economists” advocate without qualification, and which they can defend only by ad hominem and exclusion of veritable mathematical analysis… what we have is British Banker Capitalists practicing what the “Austrian economists” advocate; we have that failing; and we have the failure compelling the practitioners therefore advocating ownership of the means of usury by the state — which of course is akin to socialism, while in the hypocrisy of “Austrian economics,” on the contrary, “Austrian economists” assert that freeing the people of usury is socialism.

    Of course, all this is preposterous in a republic. If *the people* were the state, whatever benefits they would receive from their costs in “interest” would be returned to them; so “interest” would cancel out.

    So what we have in fact is a takeover of the state by usurers, because these unearned profits in fact will not be returned to the real owners of the republic — the people.

  7. “calling them a ‘major accident waiting to happen.’”

    It’s no accident whatever that interest inherently and irreversibly multiplies debt for the sake of illimitable unearned profit.

  8. “And he said that the ongoing slide in home prices has wiped out the home equity of ‘about 12 million home owners who are basically net in the red.’”

    Quite an understatement, when further multiplication of debt can only engender near term failure under which not only will this 12 million lose all equity, but the rest of us with them.

It’s time to wake up, people of the world. If “your” political representatives aren’t advocating mathematically perfected economy™, they are advocating purposed monetary failure.

Which of course is your dispossession.


“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 — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

Saturday, August 9th, 2008

Disarm the enemy. Outlaw INTEREST!

Steve Groves


Today’s Washington Post article, “Credit Crisis Triggers Unprecedented U.S. Response” (David Cho and Neil Irwin), asserts an “unprecedented” coincidental peril and response to a crisis in debt. How little then we study history.

The first paragraph of the article introduces its proposition thus:

Since the credit crisis erupted a year ago, the Bush administration has presided over one of the broadest expansions of the government into private lending in U.S. history, risking public money to prop up financial firms both large and small.

Of course, the so called credit crisis did not “erupt” a year ago.

On the contrary, the present circumstances are the product of a long-term process which can only multiply debt into terminal sums of insoluble debt; and the only reason the mainstream media has not constantly warned you of these inevitable consequences of this process all the while is they have actively cooperated in preventing you from understanding it.

Nor is “the government” really expanding into private lending, because the private Federal Reserve corporation issues the money; and the debts are owed the Federal Reserve Corporations.

All this therefore is an intentional deception.

All the government is really doing is pretending to take a role from which the tax payers might be convinced they have some incumbent responsibility to “rescue it,” should “the government” say so.

But what the taxpayer is really rescuing is not “the government”; on the contrary, what you are claimed to be obliged to rescue is the middlemen for the private Federal Reserve corporations who have been asked to collect the so called Federal Reserve’s ultimately impossible magnitude of dispossession from you.

What you are really being asked to rescue then is artificial debt — and your own artificial sum of debt which you already cannot rescue at that !

You are being asked to rescue the fact the unassented profit making process of the privatized circulation can only multiply debt in proportion to the circulation.

You are being asked to rescue a thing which is impossible to rescue, because it can only multiply debt into terminal debt, and because the whole present reason for concern is you already cannot service the present sum of debt.

You therefore are the party in need of rescue.

What the article is purposely mis-informing you of then is that rather than actually fix the causes and intended injustices of the imposed system, a government bent instead on endless abuse of power intends to forever protect the predatory system from you — it intends forever to retain upon you a system which can only plunder you to death again and again and again.

So while the mainstream media has been making a question of the certain fact you’re already in a recession, what you are seeing everywhere around you is the very purposed multiplication of artificial sums of debt which caused the first Great Depression:

You are simply the victims of a purposely irresponsive government which for its pitiful share of illimitable profit preserves a system which can only multiply debt upon us as we are forced perpetually to attempt to replenish a vital circulation by re-borrowing the interest and principal we are forced to pay out of the general circulation. This of course perpetually increases the sum of debt by ever greater increments of ever more periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt… and so inevitably, the ever increasing sum of debt is multiplied beyond our finite capacity to service it.

To understand how absurd the very idea of rescuing the middlemen for the central bank is, contemplate how it is impossible for the central bank [but to artificially] fail, because it is virtually impossible for it not to be profitable; it has negligible real costs; therefore it can only fail by artificial emptying of it.

The only reason the middle-men fail is they are forced to pay the central bank even for society’s impossible obligation to service debt by perpetually greater borrowing. The only reason there is a problem now (as we see), is that the irreversible process of multiplying debt has now exceeded the very possibility a credit-worthiness can remain, sufficient to justify further borrowing.

No moreso than the victims of the first Great Depression (you) could be made to rescue the “banks” which caused your failure however… will you now be able to rescue the “banks” which will cause your present failure.

You’re soon instead to be made street people.

The administration has transformed federal agencies into dominant players in such diverse realms as student lending and mortgage finance while exposing itself to trillions of dollars in loans.

No, the federal government is not exposing itself to any such risk; it is exposing the unassenting taxpayer, because it intends to compel the taxpayer to pay.

This is all a lie.

The real problem here is only that for providing us absolutely nothing we cannot provide ourselves entirely without such cost, the imposed monetary system can only multiply debt. Now that it has multiplied debt into a terminal sum of debt, on top of the fatal injury the usurpers intend for you to pay further consequences which are impossible to pay.

But that will never happen, if only because it will be impossible for you to pay those consequences as well.

What you are to do is recognize the enemy by their declared intent. The whole idea smells from its beginning to its near end.

The scope of these commitments demonstrates the unprecedented nature of the challenge facing the nation. Not since the Great Depression have so many debt markets been in turmoil at the same time, financial historians say. During the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s, for example, the financial upheaval was largely contained to banks and thrifts, though the real estate market also felt the impact.

The present circumstances are hardly “unprecedented,” because they concur with the first Great Depression.

Now, the contagion has rapidly spread from mortgages to bonds and exotic securities, student and corporate lending, credit cards and home equity loans, and residential and commercial real estate. The disruption has buffeted investment and commercial banks, mortgage finance agencies, and insurance firms of different stripes.

That’s almost funny. I called it a “contagion” clear back in 1979. Unless the process just started yesterday, that hardly makes the “spread” “rapid.”

But what do the authors mean by “spread”?

Nothing has suddenly “spread.” Multiplication of indebtedness is spread from the very beginning of a monetary system which can only multiply all debt in proportion to the circulation. What the authors are really testifying to is the negligence for which they failed to recognize that debt was reaching terminal limits in all these areas. The like forces multiplying debt everywhere hardly make the near simultaneous reaching of the bounds of indebtedness “sudden.”

“We have a banking crisis and an agency crisis and a mortgage crisis and a coming credit card crisis. We’ve never seen anything like that before. And it all seems to be coming home to roost at the same time. That’s never happened either,” said Charles Geisst, professor of finance at Manhattan College. He said the Great Depression was the last time financial markets were hammered by such a variety of factors. “But we did not even have credit cards in the 1930s; there were no such thing as student loans,” he added.

More utter bull. Unbelievable numbers of Americans have barely serviced their interest on short term debt for decades.

“We’ve never seen anything like that before?”

No way. They’ve seen it everywhere before; and if they get their way they will see it everywhere again only to tell you they’ve never seen it before, because after this lifespan ends they intend still to retain the very cause, which is the system by which they take illimitable profit from you via “interest.”

Two sentences later in fact they tell you they have seen “markets” (arenas of their predation) “hammered by such a variety of factors.”

Sure they have. They caused those factors in the first Depression. They have caused them all this while to now. They will continue to cause them now; and they will continue to cause them in the future, not because the false government they parade before you represents you, but because the government they raise before you is to preserve them.

It doesn’t matter that there weren’t credit cards then. The process of maintaining a circulation subject to interest affects everything subject to interest. Credit cards are not “new,” but in terms of a way to subject you and acclimatize you to dispossession via interest. Like the money they impose upon you, credit cards are mere vehicles to serve the greater cause of usury.

The breadth and speed of events have sent federal officials scrambling to plug leaks in the financial system.

An utter lie.

They aren’t plugging leaks in the financial system ! If they were fixing the financial system, the fixed system would eradicate what multiplies debt to wholly unnecessary artificial sums of debt.

The fixed system therefore would have no power to impose a wholly artificial failure !

What they are doing is pretending that they’re fixing a system which can only multiply debt into a terminal sum of debt (a fix that is impossible without mathematically perfected economy™).

But all the while, when the system they know can only fail does fail, they’re hoping the facade prevents you from understanding who imposed that failure upon you to dispossess you.

In the process, the government has bound taxpayers to the fate of a wide variety of banks and borrowers and could ultimately be responsible for losses in the tens of billions of dollars or more, according to estimates by congressional reports and interviews with regulators.

That’s right. The truth is they’re planning on screwing you every which way you can be screwed.

But “tens of billions” “of dollars” my hind quarter. Didn’t they just tell us “the government” was putting itself to risk for *TRILLIONS*?

They have already told you they intend to screw you a thousand times “tens of billions” of “dollars”. They screw you out of more than that already every year.

The very article already guarantees your losses to be trillions — and that’s just what the sorry mainstream media is finally confessing to… because regardless of their earlier efforts to suppress what were not “probable” dire consequences, but certain, terminal ramifications… the magnitude of inevitable risks should have been anticipated by any and every citizen, right through the steady stream of lies.

From the very beginning the inherent risks of usury were inevitable and obvious.

So “tens of billions” “of dollars” is an obvious intended lie. It’s not even a sufficient sum to be concerned about.

In fact each of *many* imperiled “financial institutions” (middlemen for the central bank) is “at risk” (of certain death) far more than that.

So it’s all the most extensive, most concerted lie.

No, we have seen this before; and it’s all only the inevitable consequences of a process which can only inherently and irreversibly multiply debt in proportion to a circulation.

After all, it was just a lifetime ago that usury could only have caused the first Great Depression.

These are the few simple facts of usury; and from them we are to understand that usury indeed will cause a very avoidable second Great Depression.

Absolutely, we’ve seen all this before. There’s nothing unprecedented whatever, but that we know how to solve inherent multiplication of debt and (evidently) are less than a people who would do so.

We the republic which would not stand for itself, grant a government which only refuses to represent us free license to let the thieves get off scot free… because they are the thieves !

In the midst of the first Great Depression, testifying before the House of Representatives on June 10, 1932, Congressman Louis T. McFadden informed you what a government which serves the unassented central bank again intends to do:


A few days ago, the President of the United States [Hoover], with a white face and shaking hands, went before the Senate on behalf of the moneyed interests, and asked the Senate to levy a tax on the people so that foreigners might know the United States would pay its debts, to them.

Most Americans thought that it was the other way around. What does the United States owe to foreigners? When and by whom was that debt incurred?

It was incurred by the Federal Reserve Banks, when they peddled the signature of this government for a price. That debt is what the people of the United States have to pay to redeem the obligations of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks.

Are you going to let those thieves get off scot-free? Is there one law for the looter who drives up to the door of the United States Treasury in his limousine, and another for the United States veterans who are sleeping on the floor of a dilapidated house on the outskirts of Washington?

The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad is here asking for a large loan from the people and the wage-earners and taxpayers of the United States.

It is begging for a handout from the government. It is standing, cap in hand, at the door of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, where all the other jackals have gathered to the feast. It is asking for money that was raised from the people by taxation ? and it wants this money of the poor to benefit Kuhn, Loeb and Company, the German International Bankers.

So, no America, there’s nothing “unprecedented” about all this at all; and if you don’t start screaming for mathematically perfected economy™ now, you’re about to get a government which will ensure the singular fate of usury.


“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 — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

Saturday, August 9th, 2008

When you’re taking flak, you must be over the target.

Jim Robinson


Wikipedia has recently deleted the new mathematically perfected economy™ topic from its online user-revised encyclopedia.

While the topic article only explained how mathematically perfected economy™ is the singular solution for 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent multiplication of debt by interest, and while the topic was written according to Wikipedia rules requiring a link to at least one source (which is PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™) Wikipedia cited only “blatant advertising” as the reason for the deletion.

In response, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™ has asked Wikipedia how they could consider the topic “blatant” advertising when the only link to PFMPE™ was the [even unarticulated] source reference their rules required. We have also asked Wikipedia whether the encyclopedia’s administrators therefore can refute mathematically perfected economy™; whether they can demonstrate how it is possible to sustain a circulation subject to interest without multiplication of debt into terminal debt; or why they should obstruct a prescription for solution to world-wide “economic” failure.

Wikipedia has not answered.


“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 — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

Tuesday, August 5th, 2008


CLICK HERE for CURRENT Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Series: BOGNONBR, Non-Borrowed Reserves of Depository Institutions data.

Time for a bank run?

Only the most irresponsible — or those who are selling the rest of us short — can possibly maintain any further confidence in “the system.”

The greatest lie of eternity yet continues as if there is no alternative. There is not just one alternative — a privatized currency which can only multiply illimitable debt for the unearned profit of bankers. The desirable and natural alternative, is certification of private promises to pay, issued by the public, without interest, or perpetual multiplication of debt for the predatory, illimitable unearned taking of “bankers.”

If you aren’t ready to digest and stand for mathematically perfected economy™, you don’t have a chance but to prove yourself an enemy of humanity.


“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 — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

Monday, August 4th, 2008

They can’t be that dumb. They are just selling the market short, as well as their countrymen.

Steve Groves, regarding all the sudden “economists” decrying symptoms, symptoms, symptoms… but always falling short of recognizing the fundamental process of multiplication of debt by interest.


The present conditions are the long term culmination of a process which is intrinsic to a privatized currency subject to interest — an imposed system, to which none of us have ever assented.

Even just a year or so ago, although the present conditions were sufficiently obvious at the turn of the century and long before, you couldn’t convince an “economist” we had anything to be concerned about. Not even rising debt. Not even our vanished industry. Not even our rapid descent in education, health care, or infrastructures.

I’ve been formally warning of the consequences of this irreversible process since 1979; and less formally for 10 years before that.

Today, 40 years of obstructed and actually deteriorating prosperity later, governors are holding emergency meetings and proposing to sell off state highways to meet budget deficits. If they don’t fix the real problem, what will they do when all the highways are gone, or no one can afford to use any further infrastructures the states might betray us further by offering up to even higher costs, forever? We have paid for those highways. We created them. Now, what right does any state have to sell them from us, only to pay budget deficits engendered by their own ineptitude or allegiance to a system which can only multiply such debt and costliness upon us?

Now suddenly, it is fashionable for pretend “economists” to feign reaching for fundamental causes; and, like true shills of the central banking systems imposed upon the world, they’re purposely not reaching deep enough. They complain of symptoms as if they are on your side; but their work is presented both in volume and in context to deny you understanding of the causes at hand, that by your purposed obstruction of understanding, usury can be perpetuated upon you, hopefully forever.

Humanity inevitably will rise above this self-imposed scourge. We will repulse usury, because no good thing we can intend to do can survive in its presence. I can save your state’s highways and your homes if you will hear me out.

You reach for fundamental causes. But not deep enough.

The fundamental cause of all this is inherent multiplication of debt by interest; that we have tolerated a system which from its inception was purposed to take from us by multiplication of debt; and that this process of unearned taking from us can only drive up costs to us moreso than it is mathematically possible for our wages to keep pace.

All the things before you are to be expected; I’ll tell you why:

Any purported economy subject to interest can only multiply debt in proportion to the respective circulation, because such a form of circulation obligates us to maintain a circulation merely so that we can service debt; and because to maintain a circulation, we are compelled perpetually to re-borrow periodic principal and interest obligations paid out of the general circulation, as subsequent sums of debt perpetually increased so much as periodic interest on the ever escalating sum of debt.

To maintain margins of solubility, industry therefore is perpetually compelled to raise its prices to cover the rising costs of its obligations to directly or even to indirectly service the perpetually escalating sum of debt.

This is the real, fundamental cause of price inflation.

Why does industry leave?

When industry can no longer afford to raise its prices because the indebted market cannot bear the necessary increases, it is forced to leave.

And so “our” industry goes to countries where pretty young Chinese girls will work for 40 cents an hour, condemned to work on the streets if they ever violate the rules of the slave market, and lose their “license” to work.

Why can’t our wages keep pace with the rising costs of servicing the ever escalating sum of debt?

Our wages cannot keep pace with the rising costs of servicing the ever escalating sum of debt, because the nature of the process is to multiply debt in proportion to the related circulation.

What does is significant about a process which multiplies debt in proportion to the related circulation?

If maintaining a vital circulation inherently multiplies the sum of debt in proportion to the circulation, then ever more of the circulation is dedicated to servicing debt, leaving ever less to sustain the industry (wages, etc.) which are compelled to service the debt.

That’s really pretty simple, if you think about it.

So what else might happen if you perpetually and irreversibly multiply debt in proportion to the circulation?

Ultimately and inevitably you generate a sum of debt which the system can no longer afford to service.

And that day is here.

It’s time to wake up folks; it’s time to do something about it; and mathematically perfected economy™ is what you have to do.

As Larry Ward said, all the economic “solution” that any of the present lot of pretender candidates can promise you is a deck chair on the Titanic.

While these charlatans have proposed to be responsible for near perpetual “growth,” their falsely claimed growth has even banished practically *all* our industry. That’s quite a lie to pass off as an emperor’s robe.

If I were president (and of course I realize I would probably never be), I believe I could restore real prosperity in as little as a day by suspending all payments against debts to banking institutions. If I were president, I’d try Congress for treason if it wasted an hour in establishing mathematically perfected economy™. If I were president (that’s right, I don’t capitalize the title here), I would guide you through a painless, brief transition period, where, having your debts to financial institutions suspended, you would immediately have far more to spend than you can now; I would restore to you the savings you have been deprived by usury, that you can live the rest of your lives without social programs; I would refinance all your debt without interest; I would pay off your public debts with a like, irredeemable promise to pay; I would re-schedule your payment of debt to the rate of consumption of the related asset, that for instance a $100,000 home with a 100-year lifespan would be paid off at the overall rate of $1,000 per year, or $83.33 per month.

There is no reason why the candidates before you cannot do this, but that they serve your usurers. It’s getting late, folks. If you don’t want to lose your country forever, it’s time to assert your right to mathematically perfected economy™.

“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 — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

Monday, August 4th, 2008


It has been asserted that John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s Executive Order 11110, issued June 4, 1963, effectively abolishes the so called Federal Reserve:

PFMPE™ used to maintain material regarding EO 11110. EO 11110 does not in fact try to abolish the Federal Reserve (which of course may be a weakness).

Much like Ron Paul and Edwin Vieira’s efforts to return to the gold standard, EO 11110 attempts to restore issuance of silver certificates by government — in effect circumventing the Federal Reserve only so much as silver monetary reserves might exist.

Like the proposition of returning to the gold standard, there is no power in EO 11110 whatever to resolve the insoluble sum of public and private debt; relieve us of interest on that debt; relieve us of further multiplication of that debt into terminal debt; solve price or circulatory inflation, or deflation; or restore damages inflicted by the usurious central banking systems which have been imposed upon us without public assent.

*Because* EO 11110 was only a first step toward such further rectifications, obviously the expectation of further rectification may explain the assassination and the subsequent refrain by all further presidents (shills of usury) from addressing the problem.

EO 11110 therefore is not enough. Nor is a return to the gold standard, or mere dissolution of the so called Federal Reserve.

If we are ever to achieve solution, the populace must understand solution.


The understanding of true solution alone proves we are denied representation; and therefore only a real, broad understanding of the perfection of economy comprises the immovable force against which no usurpation of representation can stand.


“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 — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

Saturday, August 2nd, 2008


Among many good questions, Patrick Hedemark of New York is concerned with how (or whether) to determine the value of money “exactly.” I explain that no such method really exists (not even in a precious metal monetary standard), and that it’s not critical that we lack such a method:

  1. The first thing to remember is that until a perfect system of determining the value of productive efforts is ascertained, it cannot be a just object of a monetary system or a government to impose an imperfect method of evaluation.

    Even if you make the value of a unit of money ostensibly equal to a fixed quantity of a finite substance such as gold, the truth is that the costs and derived value of every produced unit of gold are not equal.

    Some period of conditions may justify producing gold as necessary. Others may not. Why not let a truly free market determine the relative value of gold?

    In some cases, the market might justify producing more expensive gold for instance, after the less expensive gold is occupied by existent consumption. Yet if some day we intended to justly determine that it generally requires at least so much cost or effort to produce an ounce of gold, and if we make that the “value” of “money,” then that money thus cannot be a market-determined token of value of all things; nor can it be a market-determined value of gold.

    But if we have fixed the value of gold below a later, higher cost of production, we will have made it un-cost-worthy to render the production the market may yet later need. Thus, even by fixing a value which once was just, later, more expensive conditions of production may preclude prospective producers from mining gold for a future market, simply because the fixed price is insufficient to cover the costs of production.

    Can the whole valuation system change so that the fixed price can be accommodated by the market for gold?

    It is pretentious to assert any system has such a capacity unless all values and monetary commitments are perpetually adjusted to all such developments. In fact, no system but mathematically perfected economy™ provides such a mechanism, because only mathematically perfected economy™ provides truly free markets, and because only mathematically perfected economy™ makes it possible for each market both to determine and to fetch just prices, without affecting the value bases of all other markets.

  2. Nor is any reasonable method of evaluation critical to mathematically perfected economy™.

    If the cost of productive effort is justified to both the consumer and producer, MPE™ alone sustains (without inflation/deflation or multiplication of debt) not only the transaction, but the work necessary to repay the monetary obligation.

  3. Thirdly then, because the development of expedient and comprehensive methods of evaluation is useful to all of us in every prospective endeavor or transaction, we can and should develop and debate ideas, and we can refine an agreeable concept by solving for our differences.

    But even then, unless our ultimate method of determining value is perfect, have we a right, or is it even necessarily useful, that we impose it?

Just about anyone on the planet has spent most of their adult years again and again conjuring how to conceive of the relative value of what we do, in respect to the value of whatever each of the rest of us does. This thinking is all that justifies any endeavor or transaction. Some of us take the thinking seriously. Sometimes casual consideration suffices.

We may have heard ridiculously uncomprehensive concepts which are purported to account for value. In a certain case, a claimed 400 or some odd “scientists” for instance have endorsed making “energy” the currency of trade, without the first explanation of how we would justly do so; and so, as the following arguments invalidate the proposition of making time the unit of currency, so to do they invalidate mere energy as a singular basis of value. In the least, we are to understand that both are inappropriate because they do not account for all the vital factors which comprise value or justify production.

You want to consider making *time* the unit of the currency. Why won’t that work?

Let’s say you have X number of children, and you need them to weed the back yard. Being a fair man, you do your best to divide the yard, despite its different numbers and kinds of weeds and terrain, into an equal task for each.

How would you do this so that the ostensible value of their labors is equal? How would you take into account the exact difficulty of the makeup of the soil and the mixture of weeds so that indeed you gave them each an equal job?

Suppose you gave me an answer to your quest for a method of “exactly” determining value. The first thing I would ask you then is how you measured each of these things exactly? Did you count the weeds? Did you divide the yard into areas where the borders of the areas explicitly included the intended weeds? Did you test the difficulty *and time* required to pull each *different* weed out, complete with the roots of each?

You would probably answer, No, of course not. Why?

Practically without exception, we don’t even ascertain or measure the criteria exactly as would be vital to determining value “exactly”; and so in fact, no matter what you had answered, the principle of an ostensibly “exact” method of determining the alloted tasks isn’t even applied to the units of area, varied matter or conditions, or even the number of weeds. Likewise, do we count the studs in a home we are about to buy?

There is a good enough reason we don’t even try to account for all things exactly: First of all, we regularly can’t; but if you did, the job of accounting exactly for exactly all factors might be far greater than actually pulling all the weeds yourself.

So, because you can’t divide the yard into X areas that result in *an equal effort* for each of your children, which in turn results, with ostensibly equal work, in your children all *finishing in the same time*, neither can you say that you have figured the job so that *time* spent on the different parts of the job is of equal value. After all, your X children, starting at the same time, will not finish at the same time, because you haven’t even determined a way to make their time spent at the job of equal value/volume. But neither too, unless the production of each is the same periodically, would they finish at the same time, even if you had divided “the job” “exactly,” because neither is the effort they spend across time of exactly equal value.

Using time as a standard therefore does not determine equal work. Only in the most exceptional case in fact does it determine equal work, because people rarely work at exactly the same rate, or render production of exactly the same quality.

A perfect system of evaluation must take all these things into consideration, and account for them “exactly.”

After all, if one welder puts 4 10-inch Schedule 40 joints together in a day’s work, and if a second welder puts together 20, and if 1 of the first welder’s daily welds generally fails an X-ray at the refinery in which every weld must prove worthy, the re-doing of the first welder’s one failure a day may be more costly than the sum of the rest of their work (3 welds). If no one else is working to that standard, to the contractor who has bid on the job, that welder’s work is worth nothing, or it may even be rightly considered to have a negative value.

If on the other hand everyone else but the second welder works to that standard however, then generally, as it may generally be necessary to do the work of 8 welds (2 days’ production) to get 4 good welds (1 days’ attempted production), that’s the price of the labor/production the contracting outfit may be forced, by the trials and tribulations of welding, to contend with.

But that means the second welder — who comprises the lone exception — is doing 40/4 days of the general volume of production of “work” every day (per time). For the productive volume of their efforts then, are we not to pay them 10 times the wages of the other welders, which is indeed the comparative value of what they are producing for the contractor?

Well, in certain even potentially prevalent cases, this might not happen because the *hour* might be a selective simplification which serves the employer to cheat labor from justified pay. By bidding jobs on the low end of labor costs, and not rewarding productive labor, contractors can take substantial unearned profit.

The quality of the second welder’s work might be 10x as great as the usual welder’s as well. Shall we pay them 100 times as much as the usual welder then?

If the quality of the work exceeds the requirements of the job spec, then the contractor is not justified in doing so. But the contractor *is* justified in at least rewarding the more productive second welder relative to how much work they perform daily — especially as this reduces the risks of weld failure, and potential later, consequent costs to the contractor. The second welder is valuable. Their time is worth far more to their employer.

The welders are also exposed to dangerous gases, and to asbestos. Do we simply give them the same wage per hour that we award a student who hands pre-packaged hamburgers thru a drive-up window?

Anyone therefore who tells you they account for all factors exactly, which determine the value of productive effort exactly, is yanking your leg. In fact, in any system such as this, where the relative value of one thing can only be known by the relative value of all other things, until we have a comprehensive system for determining the “exact” value of everything, we do not have a comprehensive system for determining the “exact” value of anything.

In fact, we find that given values often are rightly even in flux if we account for the difficulties of production, which comprise periodic differences in the job of production. Therefore a purportedly “exact” method of determining value must account for these differences in the job of production.

Personally, I figure I’ve given as much quality effort to determining the value of production as anyone; and what I’m about to tell you is I see little sense, or benefit in trying to determine value with purported exactitude, particularly because even determining all the vital factors of each instance becomes such an intensive job itself — making the necessary determination of the relative value of all things ever more elusive and costly.

Ballistics for instance is a relatively exacting science; but it is not perfectly exact. We *can* determine the relatively exact minimum velocity of a throw a third baseman might have to make to first base. But is it necessary or conducive for the third baseman to make that determination in the midst of the play? No. Instead, by experience and training, they recognize when they must hurry a throw, and thus how much routine carefulness they must forfeit to try to make the out.

There are for us likewise, rules or principles we should follow.

I dismiss the idea that we should account for supply and demand, because on the contrary, the idea of supply and demand is merely a tool of exploitation: It does not determine the value of production; instead it determines the stress it can impose on a market deprived of the opportunity to decide the value of the work of production. The concept of supply and demand determining “value” therefore is a destruction of the concept of determining the value of production. That destruction can and will usurp earnings from the deserving while multiplying unfair prices to whatever degree the market can stand.

Supply and demand therefore is utter corruption both of the idea of determining real value, and of appropriate distribution of wealth (or just reward for production).

Your question is pertinent, and it is a goal we should have, at least in some cases which I mention subsequently.

But in my estimation, at least 3 things will go awry in the best efforts we can reasonably make to determine “exact” value:

  1. no way will we truly account for all things exactly;
  2. nor will the other guy with whom we’re trading;
  3. and finally then, neither will *we* have any real basis to determine equality in the other’s work.

All we can do then is the best we can, with reasonable dedication to determination of approximate value.

Largely in fact, we are best assisted in this effort by the integrity of the society.

Only in a society where no one is seeking unearned profit, and where instead everyone is conscientious about the relative value of their own work, can we trust in the price they ask of their work.

Integrity therefore is the most valuable and expedient tool for determining value as “exactly” as is practical.

For ages, except as compelled by usury to seek unearned gain ourselves, we’ve settled for integrity determining value, because it gives us the opportunity to forego repeating all that determination ourselves without access to the many vital facts which would determine value.

Where there is integrity, instead we can trust that suspicion will be raised by some clue that the principle of integrity is violated. *Then* we the buyer can roughly determine approximate value, in fact actually appraising the integrity of the price asked.

The more unearned gain usury demands of us on the contrary, the more the subjects of usury themselves are driven to corruption, and the more we can trust instead that price involves maximal possible unearned gain.

An obvious penalty of usury therefore is destruction of integrity, because integrity is least likely to survive the penalties of usury.

In mathematically perfected economy™ therefore, the only penalty we suffer is whatever errors we make in trying to determine equivalence.

In the end, just as in dividing the task of weeding your yard, as the extra effort we may make in *trying* to determine exact equal value may very well exceed the small difference we are trying to determine “exactly,” we do better in terms of the time we give up by taking the loss of our rough estimation. Let your kids pick or draw the lots, or determine them among themselves.

So we resolve the issue more effectively be settling for what we cannot determine exactly, but can determine roughly or to sufficient satisfaction by simple means.

We know for instance that carpenters and plumbers and electricians and dry-wallers and roofers and so forth are involved in building the home we want to buy. None of these are equivalent to our own trade; neither if they were, is our work worth exactly what these practitioners’ is. But perhaps we are that second welder; and although the many contractors who gladly employ us keep us working all we need, no, they don’t pay us but a pittance of what we’re worth to them but by giving us a few overtime hours here or there. We accept that or we don’t. But if we do, we’re not going to get equal production for our production, are we?

Absolutely not.

But because we are paid at least somewhat better for our demanding class of work, at least we can buy our house for substantially less *time* than the workers who produced it put into it; and we don’t have to pay the bankers 3 houses to get our 1… for publishing a promise to pay we should issue ourselves.

If you or anyone else in history has a better idea, I’m all ears. But it isn’t to make time the unit of currency.

It is not the job of an economic system therefore to impose a method of determining value. Nor are markets free to determine value, if they are subject to usury or market manipulation by cost and demand through vehicles such as commodities trading.

The only truly free market therefore is mathematically perfected economy™, because only mathematically perfected economy™ eliminates all the redundant, unearned factors which exploit price to the detriment of the producer and ultimate market.

It is hogwash for instance that Austrian Economists — who in fact advocate interest — assert that if we leave determination of price to markets which are subject to interest or buyers of futures, “the market” resolves value.

On the contrary, unnecessary cost is imposed by exploitation. Only a market free of predation, and subject only to the real costs of production, is free first to determine the value of production, and secondly to distribute wealth justly (to acquire just reward for its endeavors).

Thus I do believe we should leave it to truly free markets to determine value; and I’ll tell you why:

First of all, that’s what the market wants to do: it wants to be free of predation; and it wants to be free to determine value. So why not let it?

Secondly, what’s going to happen with our second welder?

Given the minimal costs of mathematically perfected economy™, with the opportunity to readily afford going into business for himself, he can tell each contractor he works for that he will settle for a wage say 8 times the going rate for his fellow welders (taking 80 percent of his demonstrated value to make the working situation quite comfortable to his employer); or, to base his wage on production, making it even more conducive to the sanctity of his employers, he can divide a day’s wages by the usual 2 effective welds per day, and offer to take something like 80 percent of that per weld. In either case, the contractor is making an extra 20% profit over usual wages, and our second welder can at least make 80 percent of what he’s worth in terms of volume of production.

On the other hand, if the contractors refuse to give him that, he can buy a welding truck for a pittance under mathematically perfected economy™ and compete with the contractors by under-bidding their welding costs by 20%, and they can’t touch him while he makes a due comparative fortune for the efforts which make him excel at his craft.

A truly free market can indeed determine just value.

But where contracts can be purchased by corruption, or the dollar is subject to interest, or futures traders might fix the value of his work without any consideration whatever for its costs or real value — or denying him the opportunity to acquire the value of his work — just value and reward are only made impossible.

So to summarize…

  1. No one determines value exactly;
  2. If we had to wait for a perfect method of determining “value,” we would never have mathematically perfected economy™;
  3. Not only is that prospective delay unnecessary then, it would be quite pretentious of us to conceive it is even worthwhile to try to determine value “exactly,” given even the likely errors of the many who would have to correctly apply the method, and the even higher costs of just trying.

You and all the rest of us have made do in terms of determining the relative value of our money, even as that money can only multiply debt into terminal debt, and even as that money is constantly devalued by the process which does so.

The most real possible value of money which is strictly a token of wealth however, is still merely relative, and approximate.

The best we can do so that the approximate value of money we have decided to our relative satisfaction is enduring however, is to eliminate multiplication of debt in proportion to the money, and to maintain a circulation which at all times is as equivalent as we can rightly determine, with the remaining value of the property which, across time, we intend for it to represent. This is why these are goals of mathematically perfected economy™, which of course have long been recognized goals of real producers, even if they have been made impossible by ages of usury.

Shall we continue paying “bankers” 3 houses for printing *our* promise to pay on *their* paper until the sum of debt was terminal yesterday?

Or shall we cut our losses to the small inconsistencies we have so far found agreeable in determining approximately equivalent value… especially as there may not even be any overall benefit in the potentially impractical task of “determining value exactly”?

“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 — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

mike montagne — PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™.

"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™

While 12,000 homes a day continue to go into foreclosure, mathematically perfected economy™ would re-finance a $100,000 home with a hundred-year lifespan at the overall rate of $1,000 per year or $83.33 per month. Without costing us anything, we would immediately become as much as 12 times as liquid on present revenue. Transitioning to MPE™ would apply all payments already made against existent debt toward principal. Many of us would be debt free. There would be no housing crisis, no credit crisis. Unlimited funding would immediately be available to sustain all the industry we are capable of.

There is no other solution. Regulation can only temper an inherently terminal process.

If you are not promoting mathematically perfected economy™, then you condemn us to monetary failure.

© COPYRIGHT 1979-2009 by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.COPYRIGHT 1979-2009 by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. TRADEMARKS: PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, Mathematically Perfected Economy™, Mathematically Perfected Currency™, MPE™, and PFMPE™ are trademarks of mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, perfecteconomy.com. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.


Search perfecteconomy.com     Search Web