The ROOT of the PROBLEM

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Gregory K. Soderberg's picture
Gregory K. Soderberg
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 8 2009
Posts: 32
The ROOT of the PROBLEM

the ROOT of the PROBLEM Rising debts and increasing bankruptcies are the result of Congress suspending the free-coinage of metals INTO MONEY and switching us to bank credits as our medium of exchange. 

These acts converted America from a Wealth monetary system, where people created money for society’s benefit through the fruits of their labor, to a monetary system where now, ALL NEW MONEY IS CREATED AND LOANED INTO CIRCULATION AS INTEREST-BEARING DEBTS.

 Since this system ONLY CREATES THE PRINCIPAL and NEVER THE INTEREST, THE DEBT IS ALWAYS GREATER THAN THE MONEY SUPPLY.  This fraudulently created and unpayable debt forces Americans to borrow constantly so the system can function. Eventually, the process becomes unworkable as society, mortgaged to the hilt can no longer afford to borrow. 

This debt creates extreme stress for us as we struggle to meet impossible money obligations. The RESULTS are: a constant rise in the cost-of-living, downsizing, mergers, layoffs, consolidation, family breakdown, increased drug and alcohol use, an increase in crime and a general moral breakdown

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Naah....  the root of the problem is GREED, people wanting new toys NOW, whether they can afford them or not.

Mike 

DavidLachman's picture
DavidLachman
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 4 2008
Posts: 153
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Mike,

I thought it was the GREED of bankers, politicians and corporations for POWER, WEALTH, and STATUS.

pinecarr's picture
pinecarr
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 13 2008
Posts: 2244
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Make that "insatiable greed"...apparently enormous power, wealth and "status" is not enough!

barrt's picture
barrt
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Posts: 171
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

I think that greed is the effect of the system Mr Soderberg describes, so many of our problems point back to this flawed system.

Gregory you are obviously very knowledgeable on this subject, what do you think is happening now and in the short term future and what is the solution to this?

mpelchat's picture
mpelchat
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 10 2008
Posts: 214
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Hello everybody,

You are all right, Greed is the huge problem but the only way to have greed is have a monitary system based not on sound priciples but having one basis on rapid growth.  Than the rapid growth system needs greed to keep it growing to keep it alive.  Than to keep the greed alive more rapid growth of the monitary system is needed, which gives leads to needing more greed.

They need each other until it explodes.  Which came 1st?  Well, which came 1st the chicken or the egg?

Woodman's picture
Woodman
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 26 2008
Posts: 1028
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

It's clear our current monetary system depends on greed and growth, ie.e. always a bigger future, to sustain itself.  Are we greedy because of our current system requires it or do we promote our current system because we are naturally greedy???  It seems to be a loop that feeds back on itself.  And when we have tweaks within that system, such as cutting interest rates excessively low or getting off the gold standard, the growth of greed is facilitated further.  I suspect humans are generally inheritly to some extent driven to prosper and grow, always looking forward to an improved future.  Perhaps if we could get away from this debt based monetary system we could still decide whether to be greedy but we wouldn't have to depend on being greedy.  Wow that's enough philosphy for this morning!

Navarone's picture
Navarone
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 8 2008
Posts: 25
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Everone is getting closer:

The ROOT of the PROBLEM is GROWTH.  The crash course outlines this perfectly: there aren't enough resources on a finite planet for both GROWTH AND PROSPERITY.

Most of the people on the planet could live in considerable luxury if there were only a few million of us.  But if we decide we want growth, too, then we have to reduce either our prosperity or our finite supply of resources. 

Obviously we want a certain number of people on the planet to do work and provide innovations, so to some extent more is better.  But at some point (some ecologists suggest around 500 million, perhaps) the law of diminishing returns kicks in, and the planet is essentially, overcrowded.  With too many people it becomes impossible for everyone to get a decent education.  This means, because intelligence is distrubuted more or less randomly across society, that many innovations will be lost by families that cannot afford to send their children to be educated, and even if they provide labour, this will simply accelerate the use of resources, meaning fewer to go around, meaning less prosperity per person.  With too many people, not everyone can own gold (as there is not all that much out there, ever mined) nor can everyone have a car, nor can everyone use lots of electricity, and so on.  So it becomes a fierce, often ruthless (as any set of established rules will likely become ignored as the resources become more scarce) competition for for whatever you ("you" could be a state, a group, or an individual) can get. 

Fewer people will not allow us to have quite as many trinkets (such as plastic life size busts of Elvis) as it will mean slightly less specialization, but it will also mean more resources per person, so everyone's basic needs can easily be met, with leftovers for a few luxuries (and hopefully well made, so that they might last many generations, rather than being cheap, plastic, and disposable so that they are in the garbage within a year).  More people means fewer luxuries for everyone (with a possible exception of the most ruthless competers, who at this time appear to be the US government and major corporations [it doesn't matter if you set up rules written by Ludwig Von Mises or Karl Marx; they will be ignored]), and if growth continues, not only fewer luxuries, but even basic needs for most will not be met.

So we really are at a tipping point.  The elephant in the room is the ever growing human population, and very few are willing to even have a discussion on the topic.

 

Edit: Spelling

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Gregory K. Soderberg - well said, you have squarely struck the beast.

 

 

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

"In the search for the "guilty men" responsible for the near-collapse
of the global economy, one obvious group of scapegoats has escaped
blame: the economists.

By "economists" I do not mean the talking heads (myself included)
employed by the media and financial institutions to "explain",
usually after the event, why share prices or currencies have gone up
or down. Nor do I mean the forecasters whose computers churn out
scientific-looking numbers about what will happen to growth or
inflation, but whose figures are revised so drastically whenever
something "unexpected" happens - as it always does - that their
forecasts are really nothing more than backward-looking descriptions
of recent events.

What I mean by "economists" are the academic theorists who win Nobel
prizes, or dream of winning them.

To see why these seemingly obscure academics deserve to be hauled out
of their ivory towers and put in the dock of public opinion, consider
why the bankers, politicians, accountants and regulators behaved in
the egregious ways that they have. It may be true that all bankers
are greedy, all politicians venal, all regulators blind and all
accountants stupid. But such personal failings do not explain their
behaviour in the past few years. After all, bankers do not like
losing money and politicians do not like losing power. All
these "guilty men" behaved as they did because they thought it made
sense.

And why did these greedy bankers and stupid politicians hold beliefs
that, in hindsight, seem so ludicrous and self-destructive? Why, for
example, did they think it reasonable for a bank with just $1 billion
of capital to borrow an extra $99 billion and then buy $100 billion
of speculative investments?

The answer was beautifully expressed two generations ago by John
Maynard Keynes: "Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite
exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of
some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the
air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a
few years back."...


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article5663091.ece

cedar's picture
cedar
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 7 2008
Posts: 96
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

I do not agree that this is the root of the problem.

I do not like fiat money systems for all of the reasons discussed in the CC.

However, even in a fiat system, no one forces anyone to borrow. If people chose to live within their means we would not have the problem we have today.

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Damnthematrix said:

"In the search for the "guilty men" responsible for the near-collapse
of the global economy, one obvious group of scapegoats has escaped
blame: the economists.

Many economists have been thoroughly and consistently wrong but are still given great credence.  The thing I can't figure out is why do we accept the notion that economics can never be more than a theory, a pseudoscience at best.

Shouldn't economics include more science?

Most economists seem to buy into a specific set of beliefs - Keynesian, Austrian, Binary, etc.  Creative and critical thinking has given way to tribalism.

DurangoKid's picture
DurangoKid
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 25 2008
Posts: 174
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Actually, it's both.  Greedy people have created a system of money that enriches them at the expense of everyone else.  Because it is based on an abstraction that only partially couples to physical reality, it has a tendency to become unstable at times.  Also, it is possible for these greedy people to manipulate the system they created, again for their own profit.  Money is a human institution and as such has the possiblity of sharing some human deficiencies.  The monetary system is also the sum of the actions of all who participate in it.  Those who make the rules of the system will have the greatest effect on it.

If we get back to basics, we might find a better way.  For instance, in the early days of exchanges (before currency) there was sharing in small related groups of humans living in a hunter gatherer existance.  Personal property was limited to what you could carry or territory you could defend.  Energy capture consisted of gathering stuff that didn't run away from you and eating it.  The other strategy was to hunt it down, kill it, and then eat it.  Social cohesion was maintained by sharing out what you had found or captured.  As there was no way to store materials, it made no sense to hoard anything.  Better to share it, make friends, and avoid waste.

A settled life brought higher population densities, divisions of labor, hierarchies, etc.  It also made hoarding a good strategy against scarcity.  Higher complexity also requires a body of rules to encourage cooperation and discourage aggression.  Under such circumstances exchanges of commodities for abstract units of value were possible because they had a social context that provided security that money and contracts would be honored.

A side effect of the the new levels of complexity was alienation from the activities that directly contribute to energy capture.  In a complex society it is possible to create value without directly contributing calories to your diet.  One could be a scribe and trade documents for food.  Another side effect is the transformation of social reality that normalizes the separation of labor from primary energy capture.  We now have wage labor to buy a car, fuel, and road access to drive to a store to buy foods made by someone you don't know from someone you won't invite to dinner.  We drive the food home, cook it, eat it, and a day or so later deliver its remains back to the environment via the city sewer, which is in turn run by people you'll likely never meet.

The fact that we engage in activities that do not directly lead to the aquisition of energy for metabolism opens us up to another sort of problem.  It is now accepted that performing actions not related to food gathering is right and normal.  It's only another small leap of intuition to use abstract units of value to produce yet more abstract units of value through various contractual obligations.  An outgrowth of this is the accumulation of a lot of stuff that 50,000 years ago wouldn't make a lot of sense.  We also find ourselves in the position of having more than we need and not being the happier for it.  It's a constant around the world that the increase in personal happiness stops when the basic needs for food, shelter, security, leasure, etc. are met.

The sad outcome of this is millions of people burdened by their stuff.  Like refining heroine from poppy, we've given ourselves an overdose of prosperity that is considered normal and desirable.  By turning inanimate matter and energy toward our assumption that if some is good, more is better, we're flooded with stuff in a continually degrading environment.  The human made environment is getting progressively louder and uglier.  The answer, we're told, is to get more stuff.  Even our social relations are moderated by inanimate stuff.  Is blogging on the internet the only way I can be heard?  I certainly have no voice in the local or national media.  The owners of the media stuff use their propertiy rights to their stuff to keep me from it.  There's even talk of ending net neutrality for the sake of profit and control.  Just as some ancient duke or baron appropriated the common grazing land for his own profit, the media royalty want the same control over the internet commons.

Is the answer to become a modern-day Luddite?  I have a lot of stuff I'd like to get rid of.  Where do I start?  How do I reduce the complexity in my life without feeling deprived or left out?  Sooner than we'd like, that decision will be made for us as the inanimate matter-energy matrix begins to degenerate.  Without a constant supply of inputs the matrix will come apart.  All that depends on it will adapt or perish.

That we call this situation a "problem" only shows our arrogant or perhaps delusional thinking.  To call it a problem implicitly assumes there must be a solution.  If the cost of getting new stuff is too high, technology will get us our new stuff on the cheap.  If there's no oil, we'll just use the next miracle energy source to come along.  It's always been that way so it must always be that way.  Like it or not, the factors that have come together to build our matter-energy matrix have now arrayed themselves to destroy it.  There is no solution to this problem.  It's not a problem.  It's a constraint.

The root of our problem is to have collectively been taken in by our cleverness.  We ask could we but never should we.  Because we could we assumed we should.  And who wouldn't?  Who would refuse a life of abundance with little work?  We took a long series of tiny steps to get where we are.  Each step along the way seemed to confirm that al the previous steps were in the right direction.  Unfortunately, the process was more akin to telling a string of little lies that compounded into a grand fantasy that everyone shared in and no one wanted to question.  Like a game of musical chairs, so long as the music plays, everyone gets to have fun.

Now we've run up against the physical limits of the system.  The collapse has started and nothing can stave off the inevitable.  On a geologic scale it will all play out in the blink of an eye.  In less than one human lifespan the hydrocarbon block party will stop.  The keg will be empty.  There'll be a lot of trash to pick up.  It will be one more entry in the history of our species.

straight's picture
straight
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Posts: 103
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

YOU!

The root of the problem is YOU!

The root of the problem is that you are a human, and that as such you behave like a human.

Why do we behave like we do?  We don't care why.  If we did, you wouldn't be in this mess.

The denial of our human nature is, in my opinion, the cause of all the ills on the CC. 

That denial defines us.  Since our race became self aware, we have been in denial because we have not had the intellect to explain our nature.  Now we do.  But we don't care.

When you care enough to explore your own nature and its limitations and how that drives your behaviour we will emerge from this mess.

Until then, keep stocking up on the freeze dried meals, guns and ammo [see other threads on this forum if you want to know the best gun to own]

 

 

cedar's picture
cedar
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 7 2008
Posts: 96
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

nice post DurangoKd

Sorry if I came across as minimizing the "problem". Not my intent.

My broader point is that I am tired of everyone blaming someone else, be it the government, leaders, banks, monetary system, corporations, etc. etc.

The fundamental problem is us. Nothing will improve until the majority of the public understand everything in the CC and we are willing to make fundamental changes to our behavior.

It's easy and convenient to blame someone else. It's hard to change our own behavior.

barrt's picture
barrt
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Posts: 171
Re: The ROOT of the PROBLEM

Its my guess that Mr Soderberg and Dr. Luv are getting pretty frustrated and dare I say it, despondant? Here they are trying to point out how we are enslaved by an unjust money system and the families that own/ control it, and We The People not only cannot understand what they are trying to tell us but we are completely divided as to what our actual problem is! and so we deny the true problem, thereby perpetuating it!

To blame We The People for the problems is silly, what choice do we have when dragged up through a schooling system and media organisation that only prepare us for the grindstone?only aftern we wake up can we make the right choices!

Dr Luv, Mr S, dont give up the good fight, please. If i can now see it with my cannon fodder education i was given, then the light is truly coming on all over the world

Change the system before it changes us!

Oh no! its too late for that isnt it? Doh!

FREEDOM!!!!

Halleluya!

End the Fed, before it ends us. 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments