It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Tears might have dried from my eyes as I was born
again after a countless births; and the horrendously
augmenting robotism of this planet; rendering each
part of my dwindling body; to just an unemotional
machine,
But I still feel like a solitary warrior perennially
oozing blood in the midst of the ominously excoriating
battlefield; barbarically dying every instant although
possessing fountains of mystical breath; without your
aroma of ingratiatingly oneness and stupendously
ever-pervading charm.....
And tears might have dried from my eyes as fleeting
minutes sped into wholesomely new civilizations of
tomorrow; with each element of my penurious visage
extraordinarily busy; in acclimatizing to the devilish
dust around,
But I still indefatigably pledged to end priceless
life; with each beat of my heart transforming into a
skeleton of worthless hatred; without your perpetually
poignant principles of humanity; your unassailable
belief in the religion of unshakable mankind....
Brought to you by monied God-less scienctific military industrial
complex playing god at all costs...all in order to engineer a more
durable and efficient bio-robotik human being for lesser cost.
In other words, death and disease for profit.
What is in reality happening is that the amway-inspired global financial
machine has run amok, and is seeking instant gratification and greed
into -ITs- self-ordained future as a merchant of death.
Monied science designed to benefit the few = death.
Non-monied science designed to benefit all = life.
So...why NOT abolish the power of money?
What good is usury debt? Usury debt limits growth. Why not abolish usury
debt for the good of all our relations, including those transhumanists
intent on committing suicide...?
Originally posted by Blueracer
It doesn't sound like him. The wording is different.
I'll dumb it down for you... You don't acquire commodity X, but you acquire
the money to buy commodity X, and then you acquire commodity X. A two bit
deal, not one bit as envisioned by economist. Money has to come from
somebody else... Now for you to have this money, third person Y, must not.
He will only unload money for your use if there is something in it for him
(profits, exploitation). The selling and rebuying puts pressure on the
money supply, and gives the money changers profits.
The only way to avoid this would be to have an infinite currency system,
such that every contribution reflected an universal credit, and each
consumption represented a debit, such that the money supply could grow with
the economy.
What determines if the buyer or seller's currency is used? Is their
data on how often the currency must be bought before the commodity
bought? Amounts? Per country? Does this explain dollar hegemony?
Is their detailed information on the balance statements of each
country's central bank in comparison format?
When a central bank expands their M0, do they buy their own M2/M3 or
other's M2/M3(like dollars/Euros/gold). What is a peg? The
alternative to a peg? What is a speculative attack?
How did the gold standard work? What percentage of the time were the
various countrys' currencies fractionally backed with gold, (as
opposed to 100% backed with gold). How did Bretton Woods determine
the price of gold? Did the gold to gold claim ratio have anything to
do with determining price?
In the Civil War of the US, what determined the value of the
confederate's currency? Did the South steal wealth from the North, by
not burning all dollars in their possession, when they introduced
their own currency? (Since they could acquire northern goods, with
nothing in return.) Would/did this cause massive inflation in the
north? Was Southern currency fractionally gold based?
When country's have historically expanded has there ever been the
option for the acquired lands to trade in their old currency? How
often have seceding countries been able to unload the old country's
money, while issuing their own money?
When the Euro joined currencies, who got to determine whose currency
was worth relative to the other currencies? Was the Mark to compose
90% of Euro M0 or 20%? Is the Euro currency going to include new
countries soon? When a country is added do the citizens have to
acquire Euro's or can they convert the old currency to Euro's. Are
there any other feasible plans for currency unions elsewhere in the
world?
For that matter, what determines any currencies worth relative to
other's if they are both intrinsically worthless pieces of paper that
can(?) be replaced with each other?
Does the US share seignorage profits with any other dollarized nation?
Thanks in advance for any replies!
As a textbook, would put it, no. However... To me the X's ability to create
is the same as Y's inability to create. In this sense, profits can maximized
by externalizing cost, while internalizing profits. You always want to
internalize your intermediary of exchange, else you are having to pay in
real wealth to those who can export worthless pieces of paper, while you
export land and/or stored labor. Think about it...
Money is not so much as OCD as it is an addiction...
Those that create money create addiction to what creators of money
create.
Lovers of money represent pavlovian trained social darwinism. Greed, as
a human condition created and enforce with the power of money.
Why not simply disempower money in order to cure diseases?
Monied christianity is monied jewish.
Monied jewish is monied christianity.
Both represent love of money.
The love of money is the root for all evil--1 Timothy 6:10
Both represent love of monied evil.
Both are monied fraternal organizations employing fraternal monied
dogmalogic ritually in order to own the souls of every living creature,
with money...
Money was/is created in order to sell the love of money...
Why not choose another alternative?
Why not choose to disempower monied evil?
How...?
Think about the benefits of more freedom from the power of money, and
pass your findings on. Learn to share, for the good of all our
relations. Simple.
Money is backed by a source of value defined by money? As I see it, the
value of any labor, production, and/or resource is defined by money in
order to legitimize money as a monied tool of monied trade.
So which is it...? Is money an asset all on its own, or does money
define an asset in order to define the monied value of money?
Also, how can inflation be a concern when free money is available for all?
It seems to me that should inflation run amok, all one need do is gather
more free money in order to cover the costs of inflation.
Why won't more printed money[free for all] fuel the economy and
stimulate more labor, production and/or resources? A rule of thumb of
economists is that money in the pocket stimulates growth, does it not?
I believe money has outlived its usefullness. Simply put, money has
failed as an evolutionary tool. Greed as a way of life is destined to fail.
Originally posted by mr-lizard
They just take me to a generic page.
Originally posted by Blueracer
It doesn't sound like him. The wording is different.
Originally posted by Mr Tranny
Nix the last profile i linked to, the one I said I wasn’t sure about…….. That is one of a writer from India, The reason I locked onto that one was his mention of how good the feeling of infinite currency would be in one of his poems. Then when I seen that part I quoted in my first post, it freaked me out.
.........edit.......
All the links work for me……… I don’t know how else I can link to them. The best Idea I have is just search google groups.edit on 9-1-2011 by Mr Tranny because: (no reason given)