[MD] Commie Talk and USA bashing?

[Woods Woods]

Chris, and Andre (question for you near the end of this post),


Chris:
I was going to clarify a few things here I think. Woods asked some stuff. 
Tell me If I forget something. When I talk about the free market, or the 
totally free market, I mean just that the buying and selling of stuff, and 
the production of the stuff is not overlaid with restrictions by law in any 
way. If there is laws that say "an emplyer must pay his employees a 
reasonable amount"  then that's not a completely free market one can argue, 
or if there is law that say "you can't charge more than X amount for a 
certain type of medicine" that's not a completely free market. Now I say 
that that kind of system isn't around (I think) anywhere, because people 
know it leads to hell on earth (I know you aked about that)



woods:
    Exactly.  And I think, at least Craig thinks this way from discussing with 
him about cronies, that's what we mean by free market.  We live in a society that 
needs laws, if not then we'd be dealing with criminals, which there are rumors that 
criminal activities occurred in this crisis, for one I think the Federal Reserve is 
performing criminal acts, but this country has another immoral habit.  It doesn't uphold 
it's laws all the time.  The illegal border crossings of noncitizens and then them working 
in U.S. jobs, that's illegal for U.S. businesses to hire them, but this country has 
let it slide.  Other illegal acts are let go too.  This is actually a core issue as to 
the degeneration of confidence in the U.S.  Without law and the application of the law, then 
a country loses it's confidence in its' gov't and this country has lost a lot of its' gov'ts 
confidence way back when JFK was president and then was assassinated.  That incident 
and other incidents, Vietnam, etc..., made a lot of people turn away from their gov't, and it 
has only grown worse I'd say.
     Here's an example of law in the business sector that having money backed by gold would 
naturally result, one could say a law that would freely arise.  I brought up how credit-swaps on 
mortgage securities, which mortgage securities are investments on everyday 
citizen house mortgages.  These investments (the mortgage securities) on citizen house mortgages 
were made by many people, including foreign banks from Europe and China.  They all invested in 
these everyday citizen house mortgages due to the housing bubble (houses in the U.S. were becoming 
worth more and more quickly) so thinking they could invest in these mortgages and as the house 
would increase in value they could then make more money on these mortgages.  If they would sell 
there mortgage securities, their investments, on a house mortgage that increased in value, well, they 
then bought the mortgage security based on a house that was worth less than it is now worth.  So when 
they sell, they sell higher and make a profit.  
     So far so good.  Now back to those credit-swaps that are taken out on those mortgage securities.  
These credit-swaps are insurance.  They are insurance on the mortgage securities.  If the house mortgage is 
defaulted, that is, if the mortgage of the house is not paid and then the house is foreclosed on, the people are 
kicked out of their house, then those companies/corporations that invested in these houses would lose 
their money.  BUT, if they took out insurance, those credit-swaps, on the mortgage securities, then if a 
house is foreclosed and nobody makes payments on the house anymore and the banks lose money, therefore 
those corporations that invested (mortgage securities) in these houses lose money, BUT, as said, if they took 
out insurance, those credit-swaps, then they don't lose money.  They don't lose their investments.  Now 
who was giving them all these mortgage securities and giving them credit-swaps (insurance) on these 
mortgage securities.  The big investment firms such as Goldman-Sachs, Bear Sterns, AIG, JPMorgan, Lehman 
Brothers.
    Now in another post recently to Platt, I mentioned how these credit-swaps built up to around 40-60 trillion dollars.  
People were insured to 40-60 trillion dollars on their mortgage security investments.  The dollar amounts are 
so high because you could invest in one house (usually these investments were in house bundles, meaning 
many houses at once are invested in, but to keep it simple I'll say one house), therefore, you could invest in 
one house 100 times if you wanted to.  You could take out credit-swaps, insurance, for those 100 investments 
on one house.  Well, in the U.S. we've got these houses closing up and foreclosures happening.  Investors 
want their money from the insurance they bought.  As I said to Platt, who in the world REALLY has 
40-60 trillion dollars.  NOBODY.  How do you pay out all that money?  You can't.  So you go bankrupt, like 
Lehman Brothers, or the gov't bails you out on some of those investments, like AIG, hoping that people 
invest back into your corporation and therefore don't ask for paper money from their lost investments.  
They will just say, "Put my money somewhere else in your firm, invest it somewhere else."  Well, they 
don't have much of a choice cause AIG couldn't possibly pay out all that money, if people 
demanded it then AIG goes broke and the gov't can't keep bailing them out, even though they are 
so far, but for how long?  
    So I wonder were is this 40-60 trillion dollars at?  Is it being shoved into bankrupt banks so the banks that 
are still working don't get pulled down by any people who demand their credit-swaps?  Or is the money still 
floating out there somewhere?  I don't know.
    The point of all of this, is if the U.S. dollar was backed by gold and other metals, then this tremendous 
amount of money, 40-60 trillion dollars, wouldn't even IMAGINATIVELY be cultivated.  Yes, it is imaginative 
money.  Nobody has this amount of money.  Not even in paper.  With the dollar, even in your country, is backed 
by gold and other metals, then the amount of money that can be anywhere is limited by the amount of 
gold and other metals.  So without that backing, people can greedily make up any kind of imaginative investments, 
with imaginative dollars.  This whole long situation I just wrote here, is part of the heart of why this 
whole global economic crisis happened.
    The dollar being backed by gold and other metals would be a natural, freely arising law in 
how investments can be made.  What kind of investments can be made.

    Now, this is one law.  Other laws that would have to be legislated would be 
necessary too.  That's why this U.S. country has a legislative branch.
    Also, the dreamy land of the moq, puts morals first.  Moral intellect, a moral 
society, puts immoral biological motives in check, such as greed.  And there is 
the bigger problem.  This country is immoral.          


Chris:
And the reason I say that is because I have read 19th century history, and 
both people then and historians now have described the situation for the 
workers in, say, Manchester to be hellish. I'll translate and quote from one 
of my books used by the department of history at Lund University describing 
Manchester in the 1840s :
"The houses were in many cases not worthy of human beings and gave rise to 
many illnesses, among them tuberculosis. The salary of the workers were at 
best at subsistence level, and could only provide the workers with poor 
food, and thus the infant mortality was very high. In addition to this, the 
factory workers could not depend on getting paid all the time, since they 
could be fired at any time"
This attracted attention even by wealthier people at the time that wrote 
with horror about it, although the liberals at the time would say that the 
workers situation was brought on by themselves as a result of weak moral or 
Godlessness or something along that line.
So in short that's what an unchecked market produces, so soon everybody with 
some wit realised that this produces a most unstable society with high 
criminal activity etc - and some people even felt compassion and argued from 
that point of view (weird thing to do right?). And so restrictions on the 
market was introduced.
Still, we see today what a destructive force the hunger for profit is, when 
big shipping companies dump toxic waste in Africa, poisoning thousands of 
people, just to save a few dollars. That kind of stuff has never ended, 
because that social value - MONEY - is far stronger than any other, such as 
perhaps morality.


woods:
   Your right.  The moral decisions to get these immoral situations turned 
around was good.  The immoral conditions is solved by the moq philosophy, which 
puts the value in the person and other forms of life, etc...  Where the SOM objective 
way of doing things rids the value in people, and makes the world something inert, dead, 
and of no value, no morality.  
And this money stuff, that's why I call for only a sales 
tax.  Rid all other taxes.  This way, if greed or other forces infect the money 
system (which can bring good when good people are involved), then we 
can escape the infected system without being forced to work in 
that kind of infected environment.  You can escape out of that infected 
system, by choice or by crisis, and easily find homage in the other 
systems still in play.  
    
    Andre, if you read this far, I have a question.  I've 
heard China still has a barter system and other economic systems.  
If they are not taxed and forced to find money somewhere, then 
you can freely opt. out of the monetary system when it gets immoral.  You freely 
opt. out when you don't buy anything.  Thus, this also puts the power 
in the hands of the people more.  If they find out a corporation is corrupt, then 
they don't buy their products.  This could hurt the economy and the tax revenue, 
and thus force the U.S. gov't to get involved so the gov't doesn't lose its' 
tax base.

Hopefully you've read this far, for solutions are everywhere in here, but then the 
current hitch - people actually doing this stuff.


woods