HOME, FOREWORD, SITE DIRECTORY AMENDMENT BLOG FORUM GLOSSARY TESTIMONIALS FREE NEWSLETTER CONTACT JOIN PFMPE™

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.

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

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.

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009

Alternate PFMPE? logo.

What should concern us is who stands in the way of solution, and why.

mike montagne

OBAMA IS ‘KENNEDY-ESQUE’?

I receive far more correspondence than I can reply to, but occasionally it may serve some of us at least to respond to a particular piece which reflects the disinformation and confusion we need to see our way through. I have no idea who Michael Gerson is, but I received and responded to this letter today:

EMAIL FROM “BILL” (2009 10 28)

Read and save………

Bill

Justice is what love looks like when it takes social form.

Giving democracy a dose of clarity

By Michael Gerson, Wednesday, October 28, 2009

There have been various attempts over the decades to bury moral philosophy ??to dismiss convictions about right and wrong as cultural prejudices, or secretions of the brain, or matters so personal they shouldn’t even affect our private lives.

But moral questions always return, as puzzles and as tragedies. Would we push a hefty man onto a railroad track to save the lives of five others? Should Petty Officer 1st Class Marcus Luttrell, in June of 2005, have executed a group of Afghan goatherds who, having stumbled on his position, might inform the enemy about his unit? (Luttrell let them go, the Taliban attacked, and three of his comrades died.)

These examples and others ??price-gouging after Hurricane Katrina, affirmative action, gay marriage ??are all grist for the teaching of Michael Sandel, perhaps the most prominent college professor in America. His popular class at Harvard ??Moral Reasoning 22: Justice ??attracts about a sixth of all undergraduates. For those lacking $49,000 a year in tuition and board, he has written “Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?” which has been further translated into a PBS series and a Web site, JusticeHarvard.org.

Sandel practices the best kind of academic populism, managing to simplify John Stuart Mill and John Rawls without being simplistic. His discussion of Immanuel Kant’s case against casual sex was almost enough to make me dig out my college copy of “Critique of Pure Reason.” Almost.

But Sandel is best at what he calls bringing “moral clarity to the alternatives we confront as democratic citizens.” In this cause, he outlines three attempts to define the meaning of justice, each with large public consequences.

Definition one is the maximization of social welfare ??the greatest happiness for the greatest number. But utilitarianism, in Sandel’s view, has glaring weaknesses. It allows no principled defense of individual rights. What if the sum of social happiness is increased by throwing a minority to the lions? And utilitarianism ultimately can make no distinction between fulfilling higher forms of happiness and degraded ones. Why should we prefer the pleasures of art museums to the pleasures of dog fighting?

A second definition of justice consists of respecting individual freedom. This approach can take the form of market-oriented libertarianism ??the belief that justice is identical to the free choices of consenting adults. Or it can have a more egalitarian expression, in which society is organized for the benefit of its least-advantaged members. But both of these views assume that government’s only job is to set fair rules and procedures; it is entirely up to free individuals to choose the best way to live.

Many Americans would find this view not only unobjectionable but also unassailable. Sandel assails it. “I do not think,” he says, “that freedom of choice ??even freedom of choice under fair conditions ??is an adequate basis for a just society.”

This equation of justice with freedom, he says, is unrealistic about the way human beings actually live. Our views of right and wrong, duty and betrayal, are not merely the result of individual free choice. All of us are born into institutions ??a family that involves our unconditional love, a community that elicits feelings of solidarity, a country that may demand a costly loyalty. Sandel argues that a liberal individualism cannot explain these deep attachments. We are “bound by some moral ties we haven’t chosen.”

Sandel, in the good company of Aristotle, contends that knowing “the right thing to do” in any of these institutions requires a determination of its purpose. And the purpose of government is not only to defend individual rights but also to honor and reward civic virtues ??patriotism, self-sacrifice and concern for our neighbor. This third definition of justice, by nature, is a moral enterprise.

Because Sandel is a progressive, he calls this approach “communitarian.” The stars of his political firmament are Robert Kennedy, for his call to vigorous citizenship, and Barack Obama, for his recognition that social justice is often based on moral ideals. But Sandel’s belief in family and community, his respect for religious motives and his defense of patriotism might also be called conservative, at least in an older sense of the term.

Sandel sets out to confront the most difficult moral issues in politics. He ends up clarifying a basic political divide ??not between left and right, but between those who recognize nothing greater than individual rights and choices, and those who affirm a “politics of the common good,” rooted in moral beliefs that can’t be ignored.

[Email omitted to preserve privacy of author.]

Dear Bill,

We live not in a democracy, but in a republic; and there are no “different kinds” of justice; there is one justice, which is defined by the bounds of liberty ??the actual maximum limits of liberty ??beyond which liberty would infringe upon and negate the equal liberties of others. As for the oxymoron of being “bound by moral ties we haven’t chosen…” since when do we not choose every such attachment? We have no control or perpetual choice in what we practice?

The divide Sandel must fail to clarify then is that a)?”those who recognize nothing greater than [but?] individual rights and choices” can only serve the purpose of breaching liberty, assumably hoping to attain and reserve for themselves the advantages of its excess (which are injustice); and b)?that “moral beliefs” therefore are no more (and no less) than to opine the natural bounds of liberty without regard for the qualifying arguments.

An example of both transgressions would be one generation claiming prosperity only by passing off criminal, insoluble, wholly artificial sums of debt to their own progeny ??likewise hoping to pass this off as justice, even as they would object to its double standard if they too were forced only by this irresponsibility, to bear an equal measure of its injustice. The generation claiming justice thus advocates injustice which is not merely “a moral or immoral ‘belief,’” but which further imposes an even ever diminishing possibility of prosperity, because what they call economy in fact merely presupposes (and does not justify) that we must borrow our own promises to pay at interest, which in turn makes it mathematically impossible even to maintain a vital circulation without perpetually re-borrowing principal and interest as ever greater and eventually terminal sums of debt. The assumed justice of the first generation, prospering relatively more under initial, far lesser sums of debt, certainly cannot be justified by the fact they refuse to acknowledge, much less to pay the public debt incurred by their time (and mere “moral belief”). On the contrary, to ask us to “believe” likewise is to ask us to accept the contradiction of purported prosperity which would be more than wiped out if the claiming generation *were* to pay the debts which are the only possible and terminal consequence of the system it presumes to justify by no more than claiming a “moral belief” which its very evasion of consequence of course invalidates.

The problem then with (or fault of) reducing the eternal and self evident bounds of liberty to mere “moral beliefs,” rather than facts of infringement, is that anyone wanting to breach the explicit bounds of liberty can argue against mere “moral beliefs,” because to express them only as such is to say only that this is what “I believe” versus what “you believe.” The very form of expression itself is completely (and usually intentionally) ignorant of the governing fact of infringement ??which even comprises the only possible prevailing arguments.

On the other hand, no one on the contrary can argue successfully against a case of exceeded bounds, because the compromising of the equivalent rights of others is always demonstrable. Worse then, the faults of “immoral beliefs” (asserting justice in exceeded/duplistic bounds) will always percolate to the fore, because their exercise can only compromise the equal liberties of others. In fact, this is the very reason we perceive and defend ourselves against injustice; and it is likewise the foremost governing principle which the design of a republic is in fact intended to preserve instead, in one, just liberty.

If it hasn’t already, time at least will prove who is right, even when whole generations hope for no more than to escape the consequences of their own undoings of liberty. But to call this morality only because it is an unqualified “belief” which can only serve that injustice ??that’s a stretch of truth which not only will never pass the ultimate scale of time, but the faults of which are unraveling before us in the very artificial, unnecessary, and unjust monetary failure before us.

Obama then can never rightly be considered a champion of liberty OR justice, so long as he serves the imposed systems of exploitation, which can only heap artificial debt upon us until we find nothing moral whatever in that preposterous pursuit which usurps a presumed authority to publish our promises to pay, not only to unjustifiably collect principal equal to all industry ever pretended to be “financed” by this obfuscation ??but further to multiply that artificial indebtedness until we are not only completely dispossessed by it, but can no longer afford either to produce, or to afford the artificial costliness of whatever little, unconsumed production might remain for some fast vanishing while.

If Obama is a saint for perpetuating that graft, then so are Geithner, Emanuel, Volker, Greenspan, and Alexander Hamilton ??against Jefferson, Adams, Monroe, Madison, Franklin, Jackson, and Lincoln. But the present men are hardly “Kennedy-esque” then either, for in fact JFK instead sought to remove this unassented and unwarrantable power from the so called Federal Reserve ??which of course, for the sake of its strictly adverse purposes, is neither federal nor an actual reserve of anything. Kennedy if you remember issued EO 11110, which at least sought to return us to a constitutional currency, even if it fell far short of a solution to the issues before us.

That famous EO, which so distinguishes Kennedy too from the current genre of men, of course has never been honored. And so, contrary to the pretended similarity of (a “Kennedy-esque”) intention, it is instead only in the same vein of corruption which of course ensued Kennedy’s assassination that, quite to the very opposite extreme, Obama has assembled all the very exploiters instead; and that instead, this is to preserve the unassented and unjustifiable system of exploitation, even as it works its final destruction.

Regards,

mike montagne

founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?; author, mathematically perfected economy? (1979).

RELATED MATERIAL

“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? (1968-1979)

? COPYRIGHT 2009, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2009/10/28/obama-is-kennedy-esque/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewforum.php?f=22

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Monday, May 4th, 2009

INITIAL DRAFT OF OUR 2009 [WORLD] AMENDMENT FOR MATHEMATICALLY PERFECTED ECONOMY? AND GOVERNMENT INTEGRITY

We have just posted our initial draft for our 2009 AMENDMENT FOR MATHEMATICALLY PERFECTED ECONOMY? AND GOVERNMENT INTEGRITY. This is your chance for serious peer review and contribution, and to get involved with this effort ahead of the curve. Please review the document at:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/pg-amendment.html

Many people are responding privately, and before finishing their study. All responses have been very positive except one, which I have posted to our forum:

17.01.2013
Enrice
Hi people, i want improve erections. Plz recommend me some pills and places where i can buy it.
08.02.2013
Carla
Hello Enrice the best pills to increase potency is Tadadalafil or Cialis. Buy cheap cialis online, you can on this online store: http://buycheapcialisonlinemg.com/

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewforum.php?f=104

We would appreciate your posting responses to our forum, that any dialogs, questions, and answers be open to all.

“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)

Friday, January 30th, 2009

What should concern us is who stands in the way of solution, and why.

mike montagne

UTTER HYPOCRISY AT DAVOS “WORLD” “ECONOMIC” FORUM

Hypocrisy couldn’t run thicker than at the Davos World Economic Forum, where the slogan is “improving the state of the world.”

Owning, manipulating, and exploiting the state would be a more appropriate description. Neither is Davos a world forum of course, because its attendees, structure and curriculum are opposed to the general, natural disposition of the world which has been made the mere unassenting subjects to all likenesses of Davos’ intentions.

Every visible aspect of this exclusive convention proves on the contrary that any effort to establish genuine monetary rectitude at Davos would be most unwelcome, for even Davos’ monitoring and moderation of online comments is a testament to world adversity and exclusion. In fact, despite millions demonstrating around the world against the imposed system of exploitation which Davos exclusively represents, there is only one comment ??and that only mildly testy. Only 300 characters are allowed ??hardly room to put Davos into perspective. Naturally, every polite comment demonstrating that mathematically perfected currency? alone solves the issues which nonetheless are raised as consequences of Davos’ singular, exclusive intentions, has been refused posting.

Every one.

Do you imagine that anyone at Davos can or will provide a proof of alternate solutions to inflation, deflation, and inherent, irreversible, inevitably terminal multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation?

Absolutely not.

Davos thus is not a “world” forum. It most certainly will not even seek to solve inflation, deflation, and inherent, irreversible, inevitably terminal multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation; and so converse to the claimed purpose of improving the state of world, its beligerant purpose will remain solely to preserve the system of exploitation, even in the face of that selfish idea’s obvious costs to the world Davos pretends yet to represent.

After all, if Davos were a “world” “economic” forum dedicated to improving the state of the world, why would Davos be so tidy in its certain exclusion of mathematically perfected economy?, but that we, the world, could pay each other for our own production with no more than equal measures of our own production?

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2009/01/30/utter-hypocrisy-at-davos-world-economic-forum/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewforum.php?f=22

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Monday, January 26th, 2009

What should concern us is who stands in the way of solution, and why.

mike montagne

September 29, 2008 proposition to immediately arrest monetary failure without cost by transitioning to mathematically perfected economy?, requested by Obama Campaign regulars as sent, and simply returned by the so called Obama Economic Policy Team.

REGARDING OBAMA’S REFUSAL TO SECOND GUESS THE FED

The most disturbing thing about a President who says he “won’t second guess the Fed” is, if you understand the nature of their obfuscation of money, you’re way above second guessing them: you know all they can do is a) make incoming publications of our own promises to pay (”money”) more or less expensive (raise/lower interest), and/or b) loosen or tighten restrictions, “hoping” that can increase the volume sufficiently in that way, while the inherent multiplication of debt “may” “or may not” have increased the sum of debt already to a terminal sum of debt, itself disqualifying us from borrowing further as remains necessary to maintain a vital circulation of what we’re perpetually compelled to pay out of it to service the existing, escalating sum of debt.

There’s no “second guessing” involved in where that’s going; you know it’s all wrong and you know it’s all heading *only* the wrong way if you know the first thing about their obfuscation of “money.”

The next most disturbing thing is that once the sum of debt reaches terminal stature from the artificial obligation to maintain a vital circulation by perpetually re-borrowing so much as all the principal and interest we pay out of the general circulation in servicing a sum of debt which thus increases by ever greater periodic sums of interest on an ever greater sum of debt… they can only maintain a vital circulation by accumulating debt we cannot service. That means federal overspending… issuing themselves free money to buy our production from us without producing… all that sort of thing (artificial sustention).

The latter can only work so far as it sustains every sector of “the economy” (purposed system of exploitation), with the tumbling of certain sectors having the mass and inertia to bring down anything and everything dependent upon it.

So are housing, the auto industry, airlines, transportation infrastructures, industry, and even our expatriated industry failing elsewhere… are all those things sufficient mass?

If they weren’t, then they wouldn’t be tumbling.

And tumbling far they do not have to go.

So what does a President mean when he “won’t second guess the Fed?”

He means his singular approach is to let rats attempt every trick, deception and futility to sustain their imposed system of exploitation, so they can continue to exploit us to the maximal degree possible.

If he meant something else, he’d be speaking to us about mathematically perfected economy?. If he waits much longer, and has half a good monetary bone in his body, he’ll only have eleventh hour pretenders who by the dozens now are lining up on the side of “interest-free monetary” systems, proposing “their own” solutions, which of course can only compromise a singular solution for 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation, engendering inevitable systemic failure at a finite system lifespan defined by an inevitable, terminal sum of insoluble debt.

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2009/01/26/regarding-obamas-refusal-to-second-guess-the-fed/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewforum.php?f=22

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Thursday, January 22nd, 2009

As I wrote to Mike privately awhile ago, the essence of his solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy, is at once an economic principle and an ethical one. The principle is that of non-intervention; a principle which is found at the heart of Democratic Theory. His conception appears to my mind as an economic analog to the conception of civil liberties which seeks to guarantee for each individual all those freedoms which are consistent with the same guarantee for every other individual. In its economic manifestation it can be stated as follows (Mike’s definition of MPE): It is every prospective debtor’s right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.

From this perspective it should be abundantly clear that bankers as legally sanctioned usurers and faux creditors have no place in a democratic society. They are neither desirable nor necessary. They should be no more welcome than slave owners, political dictators or murderers. They have no right to insinuate themselves into economic relations as the only legal arbiters of debt and credit. But having done so, they have impaired every other freedom inherent to the democratic ideal and continue to prevent a truly free market economy from taking shape.

Jim Eldon, December 30, 2008 Response to Ellen Hodgson Brown

RESPONSE TO PETER J. COOPER’S GOLD BUG WEBLOG

This page briefly responds to a gold bug’s anxious anticipation of a 2009 DOW “equaling” gold:

US ECONOMIC IMPLOSION

Obviously only a terrible implosion of the US and global economy could produce such a massive shift in asset values. But I fear that is what is coming in 2009 and the moment to prepare for it is now before it is too late.

Just look at those US auto figures for November, down 37 per cent, and that is the figure across the board - the Japanese and Korean manufacturers also got their sales walloped, albeit Chrysler took the biggest hit of 47 per cent.

No manufacturer on earth has profit margins big enough to absorb that sort of a sales collapse. That it is the largest consumer goods section of the world?s largest economy just sets the whole US economy up for a collapse. The only historical parallel is 1930.

The article to which we respond advocates buying gold.

Gold has no power to save us. You can’t eat it. Its finite quantity cannot sustain industry requiring a circulation far beyond the finite quantity. It cannot arrest multiplication of debt by interest, as we are compelled to maintain a vital circulation by re-borrowing principal and interest paid out of the general circulation to service the sum of debt… as an ever greater and eventually terminal sum of debt. This manifestation of the obfuscation of the role of creditor, which gold/silver have no power to rectify, of course is the cause of the so called “credit crisis” ??a sum of debt which we can no longer afford to service, which destroys our credit-worthiness to borrow further as we must to maintain a vital circulation, with the final payments against the existing sum of debt depleting the circulation and leaving us ever less capable of sustaining the industry which must collapse under the weight of the debt and vanishing circulation together.

Because they make themselves count on unearned gain themselves, those who buy gold or silver to hedge their positions against an inevitable failure soon enough become predisposed against solution. They become enemies of the one and one only manifestation of a truly free market, in which every prospective debtor can and would issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.

Today, while unearned gain and hedging of wealth is championed in lieu of monetary solution, all the present problems ??even those of the hedger and secondary exploiter of the wastage of usury ??all the present problems descend from obfuscation of the role of creditor for the unbending purpose of exploitation. This is your real issue, and its solution is your only possible protection of your wealth, because if you do not rectify multiplication of debt by interest, you will, as Thomas Jefferson and so many others warned, you will be dispossessed of your wealth, your gold, your silver. A bar of gold may soon not buy a tomato.

As I say, it is impossible to maintain a vital circulation without re-borrowing principal and interest as ever greater sums of debt, with the sum of debt thus inherently and irreversibly increasing so much as ever greater periodic sums of interest on an ever greater and eventually fatal sum of debt. That day is here. But why is it here? It is here because you evade solution to your own demise, and to the demise of all the rest of us. The only reason you suffer this terminal multiplication of debt is because you allow exploiters to pretend the role of creditor, to merely publish the promises to pay of all debtors at virtually no cost whatever to the pretend creditor; and then, as if the costless promises of the debtor represented real, earned wealth of the pretend creditor, you allow that pretend creditor charge the debtor for their own promise to pay. This wholly unjustifiable intervention on the natural relationship of the real creditor (who gives up real wealth for the promise to pay) inevitably dispossesses the subject system of all wealth by the vehicle of exploitation, which is the obfuscated currency ??a currency which is the promise to pay of the debtor, published without cost by a pretend creditor, who thus denies the real creditor of “interest,” pretending further all the while, that the earned wealth being at stake justifies interest.

Of course, the real creditor is paid in full from the outset, and asks no interest. So the whole scam is bogus. But it inevitably destroys every subject nation.

Come to my garden after the curtain falls with your gold, and if I can figure something worthwhile to do with it, perhaps I’ll sell you a tomato.

ADDENDUM

I’m advised that while my post to Mr. Cooper’s Blog shows up on my system, it is not displayed on others’.

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2009/01/22/response-to-peter-j-coopers-gold-bug-weblog/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewforum.php?f=22

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Saturday, January 10th, 2009

As I wrote to Mike privately awhile ago, the essence of his solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy?, is at once an economic principle and an ethical one. The principle is that of non-intervention; a principle which is found at the heart of Democratic Theory. His conception appears to my mind as an economic analog to the conception of civil liberties which seeks to guarantee for each individual all those freedoms which are consistent with the same guarantee for every other individual. In its economic manifestation it can be stated as follows (Mike’s definition of MPE?): It is every prospective debtor’s right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.

From this perspective it should be abundantly clear that bankers as legally sanctioned usurers and faux creditors have no place in a democratic society. They are neither desirable nor necessary. They should be no more welcome than slave owners, political dictators or murderers. They have no right to insinuate themselves into economic relations as the only legal arbiters of debt and credit. But having done so, they have impaired every other freedom inherent to the democratic ideal and continue to prevent a truly free market economy from taking shape.

Jim Eldon, responding to Ellen Hodgson Brown (Web of Debt)

FALSE IDEA OF ‘CORRECTIONS’ UNDER USURY

This blog topic responds to the Information Clearing House article, “What is to be Done? The End of the Washington Consensus,” by Michael Hudson and Jeffrey Sommers, which proposes among other things, the present system’s purported and often cited ability to self correct.

If you are digging for the truth Mr. Hudson and Mr. Sommers (and I hope you are), you are still at least a way short of your goal.

In the “potentially” fatal events around us, and certainly for instance in losses such as sustained foreclosure of more than 10,000 homes a day for more than a year, the so called markets or subjects of the imposed system are certainly not purposely “correcting” some anomalous behavior to its proper result, for in the end of what you and many others call a correction, those who produce nothing come to own our production. Is that the “correct” result?

All along the way to that purported correction yet, a constant, perpetual consequence is that those who produce are forced to pay many times their own production to those who do not produce; and all this yet, is only to procure their own production from each other in transactions conducted under a further obfuscation which requires us to maintain a vital circulation by perpetually re-borrowing so much as periodic principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt, perpetually increased so much as periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt. Obviously still, to inherently and irreversibly multiply artificial sums of debt in proportion to a vital circulation is inevitably terminal. But in fact then, unless all this perpetual, escalating, and inevitably terminal incongruity is both just and of use to the subjects of the imposed systems, no such thing as a correction to rectitude is even possible in what you still call “a correction.”

Altogether, on the contrary then, the very idea of such an ostensible result is neither defined nor then agreed upon, in whatever terms would make the consequences of such a process “a correction” ??or the imposed system itself, “self correcting.”

But we can also invalidate this dubious assertion on further obvious terms, for if we possibly understood the assertion, and if “the market” or subjects were self correcting, why then are they not always self correcting, instead of only intermittently?

How furthermore can we even say there is a rectitude in the result, if we cannot or have not determined it otherwise? What have you or anyone else determined at all in fact is “correct” about the result, other than that it is merely an eventual state amongst undetermined factors, which in all cases of your self-correcting system, simply takes off again from the spot “a correction” returns it to?

Nothing at all of course, or I’m sure you would be the first to say so.

No one then can truly claim to understand anyone’s unqualified expectation of a purported correction, in fact because there is nothing scientific or even logical about claiming an equally unqualified and readily invalidated magic power to “self correct,” in a system which can only heap an eventually terminal, artificial sum of debt upon us, merely by obstructing our right to issue our promises to pay each other, so that posing as “creditor,” it can falsely claim that our promises, which comprise virtually no cost whatever to a purported central bank, justify charging us interest (for our very own promises to pay, of all things) ??all of which itself of course disproves the pretended justification of interest by depriving the real creditor of interest ??who of course accepts our promises in exchange for their former property.

Thus without even resolving these critical questions of rightful creditor, purported justification of interest, rightful issuance of our promises, as well as the questions of any and all purported integrity thereof, none of us have determined that your consequence is a correction. Yet in fact too, to know what has corrected afterward, in the least is to be able to determine what a “self correcting” system would have done if indeed, all the while it were self correcting.

The thing you refer to as a correction then is instead merely a consequence like pushing something up which you cannot continue to push up, and which then falls down. Does it fall to its right spot? Or some other? If so, why push it up; or what ostensible systemic power pushes it up, but this artificial multiplication of debt itself ??particularly as a monetary system only has the power to regulate the volume and cost (or rate of multiplication) of the debt which comprises the currency? What are the principles of determining a thing’s right place in your alleged self correcting system? If said system is indeed self correcting as you expect, why does it not instead at all times keep things in all their right places, rather than escalating our rush to ruin?

I declare on the contrary, that we can readily demonstrate that there is one and one only way to achieve all the intended, natural, and necessary objects of order; and I add therefore that your said system has no power whatever to self correct, because it is an explicit and purposed violation of the one set of principles which keep all things in their right and usually intended order. But by all the usual aspects of applying terms still, your idea of self correcting is a misnomer even on its shallowest surface. If we look deeper yet, then what is it?

Certainly, it isn’t even possible under the imposed system to rectify commerce to the usual concept of the subjects ??that they should be able to trade their production for whatever they deem to be equal measures of the production of others. Is this a principle which an economy should uphold? Is it useful to the subjects of the system that they should be able to pay for a home with the work of producing the home? Or is it useful to the subjects of your system that they pay two or three times their production for their own production ??of course to unassented entities which produce nothing, and which only intervene on our affairs to publish our own promises to pay at such cost to us?

No matter how you answer, the stupefied concept of “correction” nonetheless cannot even be said to return to such a goal of just exchange, because in a system which can only inherently and irreversibly multiply debt into terminal debt, any eventual state of what you wrongly call a “correction” leaves ever greater unearned taking *from* the pool of wealth, to the mere publishers of *our* promises to pay each other.

Likewise, neither then are we restrained to the bounds of some ostensibly beneficial amplitudes of “correction” by some ostensibly beneficial regulation on our behalf, for on the contrary, what precludes the very desirable goal of trading our production for the equivalent production of others is the very system itself.

All you have here then, is the inevitable result of allowing a pretended creditor to usurp the role of the real creditor, imposing upon real creditor and debtor a form of currency which can only multiply debt in proportion to the circulation until we succumb to a terminal sum of debt. I can even show you how to calculate how long it will take for any given instance of such a system to terminate itself. You remark loosely about the consequences, and lament the failure to correct, when the real cause is so simple and rectifiable, if it weren’t for those who intend to preserve the iniquities of a system which from its very imposition was an intended vehicle of exploitation by multiplication of debt.

The real problem isn’t that we can’t identify the cause of this terminal multiplication, or solve it, because I did so thirty years ago. I also provided the first term of the Reagan Administration with computer models which projected that implemented rates of interest and growth would multiply debt in proportion to the circulation until we suffered a terminal sum of debt at approximately 2010 AD.

That was 25 years ago; and those models (which you can still download from our pages and run the same numbers to render the same projections) have accurately projected the accumulation of debt since, merely by replicating the very process the unassenting subjects of the system are required to meet, merely to maintain a vital circulation. That is, to maintain a vital circulation, the models simply borrow back principal and interest paid out of the general circulation, as subsequent sums of debt ??which of course perpetually increase by ever greater increments of periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt until the costs of servicing an eventual, terminal sum of debt exceed the entire circulation. The reason this sum of debt is terminal furthermore, is that the previous sum of debt already requires all it is possible to pay, and the resultant, terminal sum of debt (which we yet need to borrow further, to replenish the vital circulation) requires even more ??a cost of servicing debt which is impossible to meet.

Perhaps this inevitable juncture of terminal debt sounds familiar, even as you write of a wholly unqualified and impossible power of self correction. Perhaps in your unique obfuscations of “corrections” and the like, which obviously are not natural phenomena, but imposed, man made consequences of all the unearned taking… perhaps instead you fall among those who intend somehow to perpetuate this purportedly noble crime. If there weren’t so many of the latter obviously, we would have resolved these simple issues thirty years ago, that none of us would have cause to make these remarks.

The real end of an era then is only so certain as the rest of us are ready to account for the obvious. We have but few issues here, and specifically/categorically, those issues are 1)?inflation and deflation, 2)?systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3)?inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation.

As to the latter issue, which of course is the principal cause the present terminal conditions (and irreversible, escalating furtherance of those conditions to the worse), what we have to realize is that the producer is the real creditor, because they are forced to take a promise to pay (note) from the debtor. Ordinarily, in a system where the promise can be guaranteed (as in mathematically perfected economy?), the debtor issues their promise, because after all, it *is* *their* promise.

What we have effectively is a third party which intervenes upon this natural relationship, obstructing the debtor from issuing their promise to pay on their paper. This extrinsic party, which produces nothing, and which yet will eventually and quite injuriously acquire title to all property merely for the resultant obfuscation… this extrinsic, usurping party merely publishes the promise of the debtor at virtually no cost to the extrinsic party, claiming all the while that the costless promise is equivalent then (as it might later be, if we give scope to it) to the wealth we attempt to trade as that form of currency multiplies indebtedness until we succumb to a terminal sum of debt.

The exercise of your article then is hardly intellectual or scientific, because it carefully avoids recognizing these simple facts and their inevitable ramifications.

From the very beginning, the problem was the facades, corruption,, and escalating injustice of the very system which was imposed upon us despite political promises to the contrary. Now we attempt to perpetuate those arguments in favor of preserving the system, hoping for “corrections,” or justice ??against a stronger tide, sweeping justice away at an inherently escalating rate?

As surely as the imposed and unjustified system can only multiply debt into terminal debt so long as we maintain a vital circulation by perpetual, redundant borrowing, it is mathematically impossible that there’s a chance of succeeding in perpetuating that system. It can only produce a Second Great Depression after a First, a Third after a Second, and so forth ??all the while of each lifespan dispossessing its unwitting and unassenting subjects to an ever greater degree.

If we are on the other hand to keep all things in their right places, we must recognize and adopt a singular possible, integral solution to 1)?inflation and deflation, 2)?systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3)?inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation ??and because we can transform the present system to mathematically perfected economy? immediately, and without cost.

All that is required to establish mathematically perfected economy?, is to refinance our promises to pay without your “self correcting” (terminal) system’s imposed vehicle of exploitation, and to pay the resultant debts at the rate of depreciation or consumption (which are to be understood to be equivalent). How many homes, sirs, would be going into foreclosure if we paid only $1,000 per year or $83.33 per month for a $100,000 home with a hundred-year lifespan?

You ask us not to pay our debts, but the artificial, perpetually escalated, and inevitably terminal debts of mere usurers. And you call the consequence of that, “self correcting.”

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2009/01/10/false-idea-of-corrections-under-usury/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewforum.php?f=22

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Monday, December 22nd, 2008

What should concern us is who stands in the way of solution, and why.

mike montagne

RESPONSE TO ELLEN HODGSON BROWN’S CLAIM TO ANSWER TO THE CONTROVERSY

This article responds to Ellen Hodgson Brown’s claim to answer to our controversy (http://webofdebt.wordpress.com/questions-and-answers/response-to-mike-montagne-on-the-pennsylvania-provincial-bank/):

Mike Montagne has posted this on his website, concerning a “controversy” with me of which I was unaware until it was sent to me by someone else.

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2008/10/18/open-letter-to-global-research-on-the-controversy-with-ellen-hodgson-brown/

My sources on the Pennsylvania land bank are here:

Alvin Rabushka, “The colonial roots of American taxation, 1607-1700: The low-tax beginnings of American prosperity,” Policy Review (Hoover Institution, Stanford University, August/September 2002); “Representation without taxation: The colonial roots of American taxation, 1700?1754,” ibid. (December 2003 & January 2004); Stephen Zarlenga, The Lost Science of Money.

The math works like this: you print $105, lend $100 at 5% interest and spend $5 into the economy on government salaries, projects, etc. $105 is now circulating in the economy, which comes back to the government bank as principal and interest on the $105 loan. You lend THE SAME $100 all over again and spend $5, which returns to the government as principal and interest; etc. The interest funds the government, replacing taxes. No inflation, no government debt, no taxes ? as proven by the Pennsylvania experience.

Ellen

What you only call simplification is hardly a virtue if it fails to account for the issues at hand. It’s not complicated to account for those issues; nor is it an excessive complication to account for those vital issues, as your inability to account for those issues asserts.

You merely claim that the few aspects of the cycle you cite accounts for all issues. You’ve claimed that over and over again, without ever answering to the questions I’ve asked; and of course, you’ve pretended weak answers to others account for their questions, which they have asked (I’ll get to those next).

You don’t even explain for instance what you’re loaning “THE SAME $100 all over again,” assumably back into circulation for. So what simpleton can even truly pretend to understand your purportedly “simple” example? Tell us with necessary certainty, supporters of this proposition, what is she lending the $100 back into circulation for? And how is that this “simple” explanation determines a wholly accountable solution, which is non-inflationary, non-deflationary (able to sustain all industry or trade of all wealth), and so forth? There are no further questions, just because you prefer not to think of them?

In your purported account of accountability, you don’t even cite what the circulation should or must be, if it is to account for or sustain all the stresses which might be (and will be) imposed upon the circulation. Why loan the same $100 back into circulation, as does the present fractional reserve system? How is the same circulation to account for different purposes simultaneously, particularly if for instance we were to trade all wealth at once? How would that same $100 suffice to do that? How does your circulation sustain the possibility of such a transaction?

Worse, how do simpletons pretend to know it can, or that your “solution” is even “more simple,” *unless* they indeed understand that it can?

Do they understand that, Ellen?

It doesn’t of course, because there isn’t an effective circulation equal at all times to the remaining value of all represented wealth. That’s pretty simple. Just a “small” detail we don’t need to account for, or even explain?

Obviously, your purported circulation can only sustain the trade of all wealth if there is an effective circulation equivalent to all wealth. You don’t even understand that there’s a question of such an issue… so you merely reply that’s an unnecessary complication ??one which, of course, you don’t understand.

If you did understand it, you would not be giddy about the proposition or model of a land bank, which can only of course finance the purchase of land (as your earlier correspondence indicates).

Furthermore, obviously, there are further issues which make your proposition ??I’ll give you the simple version, since you prefer that ??”idiotic.” What would make it idiotic?

Because you’re doing two quite inept things here, and only pretending you have answered for these things.

First of all, the only assumable reason you have to spend interest back into circulation is so that it can be paid without re-borrowing it, to maintain a vital circulation (so that it can be paid). In other words, tacitly, your purported solution recognizes my principle that any currency subject to interest inherently multiplies debt in proportion to the obligated circulation, until this multiplication produces a terminal sum of debt.

So all you’re really doing, is paying taxation through what you still call interest (although this is neither its definition or consequence). And of course, you’re doing that only to avoid multiplication of debt by actual/conventional interest, even as you carefully avoid plagiarizing the vital reasons for that, which I provided so long ago ??and all the while since. Of course, neither can your readers possibly understand or appreciate that necessity but in veritable terms ??even as you merely describe the process as a Ponzi Scheme, which of course hardly reflects the need to re-borrow interest as subsequent increases in the sum of debt (to maintain the necessary circulation) ??a requisite and process which certainly is not defined by or incumbent to “Ponzi Schemes.”

While yet you deny this principle that conventional interest multiplies debt in proportion to the obligated circulation, you advocate an obfuscation of taxation, imposed in a form similar to interest, but with the further provision, to avoid the consequence of interest which I raise, of spending all interest payments back into circulation (so that these payments don’t have to be borrowed back into circulation, as is the case with the pattern of *conventional* *interest*).

At the same time, I’ve asked you how this properly administers taxation. How do you ??what is your formula for ??properly adjusting interest so that everyone might pay for instance, different rates of interest, which might properly distribute their burden of taxation, if particularly, it were the case that some or others of us not rightly bear the same proportion of taxation? Worse, how is it those who do not assume debts are taxed? Or what is the connection between government service and proper rates of taxation, which makes “interest” levied against debt the proper rate of taxation for all cases?

The idea that your arbitrary rate of interest answers to any of these issues is preposterous; and even the lowliest simpletons should realize this.

I’ll give you one clear example of how ludicrous this idea is: I’m paying the “right” amount of taxation for the degree to which government serves me. Then, without receiving any more service of the government, it is necessary for me to assume say 100 times my previous debt. Now I’m paying 100 times as much taxes through your obfuscation of interest. How is that right? Because it’s ostensibly “simple”?

To simply not answer the question, neither conveys a virtue of your proposition, or the purported simplicity you claim, for if you had accounted for these things, you would explain in sufficient detail all the more complicated processes by which interest rates might be adjusted upward or downward as more property per government service was financed (requiring lower interest rates for all), or individuals opted out of government programs (which requires lower interest rates for them), or further government spending on the accounts of some increased the share/interest of government costs for others, and so forth.

After all, once a person has paid their debts, or if a person assumes no debt, they are paying no taxes whatever, regardless however much their enjoyment of government services might stress the taxation system, placing the burden on others.

This is not solution. It’s preposterous pretension of solution. Nor is it simple, because it obviously places tremendous complications upon implementation, merely if we are to distribute the tax burden justly, for all logical cases.

Obviously, this is a far more complicated scheme than it needs to be; and I have already detailed some of the injustices it would impose. How do we resolve all these issues more simply?

We simply eradicate (real) interest to solve the adverse consequences of interest; and we impose taxation in the most straightforward, justly distributed manner.

How do we do that?

We restore to the individual the right to issue their own promises to pay. We aren’t taking “interest” from the real creditor, who is the producer of the subject property, who accepts the promise to pay as currency… for that producer is denied such “interest” now, by an extrinsic party, which produces the promise of the real debtor at virtually no cost whatever, pretends to loan that to the debtor (only by denying the debtor the right to issue their own promise), and, as if that freely (virtually costlessly) published, obfuscated promise represented earned wealth of the intervening publisher… we pay *the publisher* (of all parties!) the “interest,” instead of the actual creditor (producer of the subject property).

You too in fact are denying the true creditor interest, so what exactly is your justification of interest? (!)

So the simple answer is that mathematically perfected economy? alone sustains the whole necessary relationship of money to represented wealth, without multiplication of debt by interest, and while, the whole while, debtors pay for the wealth they consume, as they consume of it.

In other words, the simple solution is to pay for wealth, only the cost of the wealth, and to pay for taxation according to the separate rules which might determine however we should be paying for taxation. Otherwise, OF COURSE, you’re going to place ridiculous complications upon your preposterous notion of obfuscating a rate of interest to pay for government costs, the burdens of which obviously may never be JUSTLY distributed in any uniform rate of interest, applied yet to further disparate, individual volumes of debt.

The fact is, Ellen, if you sorted all that out, you’d come to the simplest implementation of all:

Should we be able to pay for a house, what the house itself should cost us? Of course, this is a just goal of economy, and therefore of solution.

Should we be able to pay for government services, what those services should cost *us*, regardless of however much we might or might not borrow? Of course as well.

So then, for all cases, there is one way to do this:

Pay for the property you acquire, only the costs of the property; and pay for the costs of government, only what you should have to pay as well ??which obviously, has no consistent, uniform *rate*, relative to however much debt we might assume in whatever we have to do.

When you were asked why not eradicate interest, you simply answered you thought it was too complicated to implement such a system. Of course, you didn’t say how; and I responded in detail how the (unanswered) complications and/or injustices which your proposition imposes comprise a greater set of (redundant) difficulties.

The simpler solution then, *IS* mathematically perfected economy?.

Why?

Because the subjects of the system *do*, in all cases, simply pay for the wealth they consume. If it is a $100,000 home with a 100-year lifespan, they’re paying for the home at the overall rate of $1,000 per year, or $83.33 per month ??the very rate they consume of it. They’re not paying taxes at the same time, for ostensible government services they may or may not consume, and which too, are not necessarily relative/proportional at all to however much the house *should* cost!

Likewise, in the case of *actual* government services they might *elect* to consume, and should pay for to some different proportion or relationship, they simply pay for those services by equally simple processes. How so?

If the usage of roads provided by government is decided to be levied proportional to gasoline consumption, the tax is levied in the cost of gasoline… which *alone* of course, with no complication whatever, determines just payment across the very duration of the consumption of the government service, as you propose to decide rightly by your uniform rate of taxation, instead applied to a wholly disproportionate sum of individual debt!

Not only have you not answered the questions then… the injustices of your system impose greater complication than mathematically perfected economy?.

The difference is not that your proposition is less complicated. The difference is, you don’t account for the further complications, by the simplest answer to all the requisites of a just implementation. The difference is, you don’t provide accountable arguments. You just fire off your idea, without ever establishing even to yourself, that it solves the things you pretend to solve.

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2008/12/22/response-to-ellen-hodgson-browns-claim-to-answer-to-the-controversy/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewforum.php?f=22

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Sunday, December 21st, 2008

What should concern us is who stands in the way of solution, and why.

mike montagne

mike montagne REBUTS HYPERINFLATION AS A CAUSE OF AN INEVITABLE, SECOND GREAT DEPRESSION

The idea of national or world-wide monetary failure as a consequence of some ostensible, dramatic manifestation of inflation, conflicts with an eleventh hour, ever growing array of further assertions, submitted likewise without conclusive argument. The conditions we are presently combating, and which are the cause of the mounting failure, on the contrary embody a scarcity of circulation respective to a growing sum of debt, with the resultant collapse being a consequence of a resultant inability to service debt.

As the failure mounted prior to the recent efforts to purportedly rescue the system with increasing artificial infusions of capital, in fact then neither inflation nor hyperinflation can be truly said to be causative, for at best now (both being absent), either can only eventually manifest in the wake of the onset of failure. Thus it is only in understanding the actual, previous causative forces, that we can accurately project further consequences (which may ultimately include inflation). Likewise, it is only by understanding those previous causes that we can develop or identify solution, responding to actual cause (versus the said, eventual consequences).

What is obviously contradictory to a mere assertion of hyperinflation as a present cause then, is that the basic reasons for the present rush to resume sufficient “credit” as will maintain a vital circulation, speaks instead to a perpetual, prevailing deflation of the circulation by present obligations to service the most monumental sums of debt in history. It is this escalating obligation to service an inherent, irreversible, and terminal multiplication of debt then, which in fact is the only present cause of the downturn. Thus the mounting failure is instead manifested from a starvation for sufficient circulation to sustain a diminishing industry, which in fact too, is already largely expatriated by the previous stress of ever escalating indebtedness upon markets and producers alike.

On top of this systemic stress of inherent multiplication of debt, certainly we suffer further stress of downstream exploitation. But the monumental primary obligation to service multiplying indebtedness comprises an escalating deflation, in which servicing the escalating debt perpetually and ever more dramatically depletes the circulation in such a way as can only require ever more borrowing, to replenish the circulation.

The fact of this escalating deflationary process thus obligates any assertion of circulatory inflation as a potential cause of failure, to prove first that the necessarily escalating act of borrowing further, so much as may or may not even replenish the circulation of the deflation, actually prevails in a purported increase in circulation. Secondly, such unqualified assertions are obligated to prove that it is the increasing circulation which actually causes failure, versus the underlying, singular disposition of the imposed system to perpetually multiply debt in proportion to a finite potential to service illimitable debt.

On the contrary then, artificial inflation of the circulation is not a cause of failure at all. Ultimately instead, artificial inflation is the only possible, eventual, systemic recourse against an irreversible systemic process, which, in perpetually re-borrowing so much as would replenish a vital circulation of ever escalating depletion, inherently transforms interest and principal paid out of the general circulation into the very escalating sums of debt which ultimately impose failure. But inflation of any kind or magnitude then is not causative. On the contrary, the very need for artificial inflation, rescues, and so forth, testifies to the cause of failure being irreversible, inherently escalating multiplication of debt. Eventual inflation of any eventual magnitude is a consequence of preserving the system of exploitation, versus establishing mathematically perfected economy?.

The subject currency of course was privatized (versus rectified) for a purpose; and the very disposition of the imposed system therefor is a device to take unearned profit, multiplied at inherently escalating rates. Only because the device of taking is itself irreversible so long as it exists, does the usually (but not necessarily) privatized system ultimately impose such a sum of debt that the subjects cannot afford to borrow further as would otherwise enable them to replenish the circulation against its perpetually escalating deflation.

Failure therefore is an inevitable culmination of this systemic, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to the obligated circulation; with ever more massive inflation being a consequence both of inherent systemic failure, and a public which fails to recognize and adopt solution.

The system of exploitation thus fails for a simple combination of inevitable events:

  1. Merely to maintain a vital circulation, the subjects are inevitably compelled to perpetually re-borrow principal and interest paid out of the general circulation, as subsequent sums of debt, perpetually increased so much as periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt.

  2. The sum of debt thus multiplies at an ever escalating rate, requiring ever more monumental further borrowing, merely to maintain a circulation.

  3. All the while, ever more of the obligated circulation is dedicated to servicing debt, leaving ever less of the circulation to sustain the industry which is obligated to do so.

  4. Ultimately then, an eventual sum of debt exceeds the finite capacity of industry to service it, which in turn exceeds a limit of credit-worthiness which the artificially indebted public can in fact service.

  5. Because they can service no further debt, they cannot borrow further, as remains necessary to replenish the circulation of the deflation ??which in turn results in depletion of the circulation across their final days of servicing the existent sum of debt.

  6. With the inability to borrow further to replenish the circulation, and with the primary obligation being to service debt (versus sustain industry), this depletion further makes it impossible to sustain the industry which is obligated to service the debt.

  7. As failing sectors quickly take down multiple dependent sectors, the failure of the first important sectors soon escalate into complete failure, in which the falling subjects are only further compromised to maintain a sustainable circulation by taking on the further debt which they are already proven unable to afford.

Thus opposed to this proposition that hyperinflation will cause the present failure, the nature of the currency which Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, McFadden and so many others of this caliber warned against, is the cause of a sudden and inevitable depletion, in which a mortal, final period of servicing a terminal sum of debt deflates the circulation, leaving the subjects unworthy of borrowing further, simply because the fatal sum of debt can only multiply their obligations above what they already cannot service.

If anything then, hyperinflation will only eventually manifest from artificial attempts to preserve a process which still, will continue to inherently and irreversibly multiply debt in proportion to the obligated circulation, as will only allow pathetic subjects to marginally tread water against the eventual culmination in failure.

All this of course was projected thirty years ago, not only in my proposition of mathematically perfected economy?, but in computer models I provided the Reagan Administration which projected the accumulation of this debt, manifesting in potential world wide failure at approximately 2010 AD. Now curiously, even those who argued most against this idea of inevitable failure and singular solution, lay claim to eleventh hour projections which still yet deny recognition of what they argued against, both as the inevitable cause of failure and singular basis solution ??and the only veritable thing therefore from which anyone can truly predict the failure they boast only now of predicting.

There is one and one integral solution only for 1)?inflation and deflation, 2)?systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3)?inherent, irreversible, and inevitably terminal multiplication of debt in proportion to the vital, obligated circulation ??and the only reason you won’t have that solution is the very pretended representatives you have chosen, remain the very people most dedicated to your exploitation.

Visit http://www.change.gov/page/s/yourvision to pressure the Obama Transition Team to adopt mathematically perfected economy?. I’m aware the president-elect is hiring all the wrong people; but the fact you demanded representation when you could draws the line between the bad guys ??and the rest. Make sure you mention mathematically perfected economy? explicitly (maybe even providing a link to these pages), or your appeal may be lost in the ever escalating number of late comers who pretend to advocate a solution which existed long before them.

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2008/12/21/mike-montagne-rebuts-hyperinflation-as-a-cause-of-an-inevitable-second-great-depression/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=202&p=489#p489

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Friday, December 19th, 2008

What should concern us is who stands in the way of solution, and why.

mike montagne

KUDOS AND SOLUTION FOR ECUADOREAN PRESIDENT CORREA

Thanks to Mario Sikorski, Poland:

Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa officially announced that he will not be making the interest payments on his foreign bonds. The country has officially defaulted on its debt obligations. This is the second Ecuadorean default in ten years.

“I have given the order that interest payments not be made,” Correa said. “The country is in default.”

Source: http://www.chartingstocks.net/2008/12/ecuador-defaults/

Correa Defaults on Ecuador Bonds, Seeks Restructuring
Bloomberg - 19 hours ago
12 (Bloomberg) — Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa halted payment on foreign bonds he calls ?illegal? and ?illegitimate,? putting the South American …
Ecuador Defaults on Foreign Debt Upside Down World
Ecuador Declares Foreign Debt Moratorium Prensa Latina
Ecuador Drops the Money Ball: President Correa Threatens to Stiff … The Indypendent Australian

The solution for Mr. Correa (and the rest of the world) is simple:

Ecuador has simply allowed usurers to pose as creditors (producers), and to issue irredeemable promises to pay of the real debtor(s), at ever greater cost to all, and eventual collapse under terminal sums of debt.

Mr. Correa *CAN* therefore pay their debts; and it may take more balls *NOT* to do so.

What he needs to consider is making a “good faith” (equally good faith) gesture to “repay” “the debt” by issuing an equivalently legal irredeemable promise to pay. Whatever “the debt” is, scribble out on a piece of payer, “Will pay you bastards, whatever you bastards say the debt is at any moment.” Sign the equivalent irredeemable promise to pay as the legitimate representative of the Ecuadorean people, and *VOLUNTEER TO GO TO COURT*!

The world *WILL* be watching… The revolution *WILL* be televised… and the issue *WILL* be a) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to the circulation, to inevitable collapse under terminal debt; b) the equivalence of the irredeemable promises to pay; and c) singular solution (or the crime against the people).

Meanwhile, re-finance all debt without interest, and re-schedule payment to the rate of depreciation/consumption; re-publish to the people their losses (such as savings for retirement) suffered under usury; and sustain all that with mathematically perfected economy?.

If Mr. Correa is afraid “the U.S.” (mis-directed, usurped resources of the U.S.) will take him down… then simply resign after doing all this in one day. Let the world watch while the mis-directed, usurped resources of the U.S. are wrongly applied to setting up another puppet government to sustain usury; *THEN* the world will understand the scope and nature of the whole problem.

Visit http://www.change.gov/page/s/yourvision to pressure the Obama Transition Team to adopt mathematically perfected economy?. I’m aware the president-elect is hiring all the wrong people; but the fact you demanded representation when you could draws the line between the bad guys ??and the rest. Make sure you mention mathematically perfected economy? explicitly (maybe even providing a link to these pages), or your appeal may be lost in the ever escalating number of late comers who pretend to advocate a solution which existed long before them.

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2008/12/19/kudos-and-solution-for-ecuadorean-president-correa/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=243

[END PERMALINK(S)]

Wednesday, November 12th, 2008

“Banking was conceived in iniquity, and born in sin. Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from them, and all great fortunes like mine will disappear. And, they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be the slaves of the bankers, and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money, and control credit.”

Sir Josiah Stamp, former president of the Bank of England

UPI.COM

Until last spring, Iceland’s economy had the fourth-highest gross domestic product per-capita in the world. Unemployment rates were between zero and 1 percent, but forecasts for next spring are as high as 10 percent.

The country’s banks have failed and its currency has plummeted in the last month. Inflation in Iceland is at 16 percent and rising. The krona, a year ago, was at 65 to the dollar; now it’s 130. “No country has ever crashed as quickly and as badly in peacetime,” said Jon Danielsson, an economist with the London School of Economics.

SAVING ICELAND’S ECONOMY

Every “monetary” system subject to interest ultimately terminates itself under insoluble debt.

The problems of no country subject to interest therefore are unique. To arrest further multiplication of debt, you must eradicate interest. To restore an unaffected, natural monetary state, you must re-finance all debt without interest, crediting principal for all payments made by debtors (up to the remaining value of the subject property). All equity can be financed; and unlimited further funds are made available, not by monetizing existing assets/wealth, but by monetizing the new wealth by the natural relationship between true creditor (producer) and debtor.

Only countries which do so can pay off their debt and be without debt. As the Hazard Circular testifies, the brains and wealth of other nations will go to such nations, because there alone can brains, productivity, and wealth prosper.

Rather than suffering collapse under irreversible multiplication of debt, every country transitioning to mathematically perfected economy? therefore will inherently have to devalue all currencies subject interest. Monetary failure is not engendered by representing the people; it is engendered only by preserving systems of exploitation, even as those systems impose failure.

In terms of the goals of solution, being President of Iceland is no different than being President of the United States:

[?KEY?]??IF I WERE PRESIDENT ??HOW TO ARREST WORLD WIDE MONETARY COLLAPSE IN A DAY

RELATED MATERIAL

“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)

? COPYRIGHT 2008, by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy?.

Except for profit making ventures or entities otherwise granted explicit permission to publish this copyright material, this article may be distributed or reprinted in whole only, from and including any quotes preceding its title, through and inclusive of the following permalink(s), by email or otherwise. Visitors may also download our entire directory of regular/main site articles from our downloads page: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-free-pfmpe-downloads.html. If you want to save your country, we encourage personal distribution of this material to all conducive recipients of your personal address books. Of course, you may also send only the following permalink:

http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/2008/11/12/saving-icelands-economy/

DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PFMPE? FORUM:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=152

[END PERMALINK(S)]

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.

Firefox™.BEST VIEWED WITH MOZILLA FIREFOX™.


Search perfecteconomy.com     Search Web