Monetary Reform

1. Federalize the IRS and change name to Internal Revenue and Currency Service(IRCS). Its function would be to collect taxes and issue currency to the producing members of the public. Currency would be issued via debit cards, federal ATM machines, and check books. Currency would be loaned interest free. Credit limits would be set according to a person’s collateral, income history and projected time of retirement. Currency loans would not have to be paid on until the creditor retires from the market and as long as he is paying taxes on income. Currency can be used in the purchase or sale of commodity or service or deposited into an IRCS account as a credit. Tax payments could be made at any time at local IRCS offices or transferred electronically via internet or ATM. At the end of the year, underpayment of taxes would be due and overpayments would be credited. Taxation of income would be a flat rate and at no time would currency be given away in order to eliminate any confusion as to whether this system is communism or not. Banks would be relegated to storing, guarding and brokering precious metals for a fee, and managing electronic and checking transfers of said metals.

2. Take over all current bank and credit card accounts. Stop all interest accruement of debt and credit. Pay creditors off in US currency dollars Issued by the new IRCS according to how much debt is owed the banks. Debtors would now be in debt to the IRCS. The amount of currency in circulation would generally equal the amount of debt in order maintain intrinsic value. Exceptions could be made in the instance of inflation or deflation.

3. Replace all paper and coin Federal Reserve notes with US currency notes after an inventory and value assessment period. The purpose of this is to reduce the inflationary effect of the undoubtedly millions of unreported Fed notes being horded (just in case of monetary reform occurring) by “power elite” members with current access to Fed printing presses. After said period Fed notes would be relegated to collector items.

4. If you got any money you better get your gold now.

5. Put a Verichip in everyone’s forehead for identification purposes. Just kidding.

Please feel free to offer suggestions.

If a group of people were stranded on a deserted island and possibly just the last people on earth, in other words they had to start from scratch, it would behoove them to work together to survive. One of the first things they would want to do is acknowledge that they are part of a “market”. Each person has particular skills, talents, and different demands on those assets that they bring to the market. Soon, for obvious reasons, they would want to create some sort of currency to facilitate transactions. To keep the “current” of commerce flowing. Assuming that everyone was trustworthy, the members of the community could take a clamshell or rock, scratch a number one on it, and use that as a universal IOU as long as when they left the market they were in possession of that rock or one like it that someone else created. As long as no one was just simply spending rocks indiscriminately, with no intent to recapture those rocks, you would have an economy running at maximum velocity. Just to be safe, you of course would have someone with accounting skills working with someone with engraving skills be the “office” of currency issuers. This would be the first evidence of a government. Here is an example -  you bring an asset to market. You trade part of it for two shells. You “issue” yourself one shell and then trade three shells for something you acquire. You then sell more of your asset for a shell. Now you are even. As long as a person intends to and does recapture whatever was issued to them before they ultimately retire from the market, debt should be free. You wouldn’t care that it is interest free debt because you are being given the opportunity to trade that debt with others. The paradigm that debt means usury must be abolished. Wealth lies in the assets you bring to and take from the market. Wealth is in something with intrinsic value. Wealth lies in the fact that you know that if you have an “extra” shell in your possession from your transaction in the market, someone is in debt for that shell and is providing a form of asset to recapture that shell. Currency is something to facilitate transactions. It should not be thought of as “money”. Money is something that is minted, or a certificate representing it. There would be no “bank” as we know it. There would be no storing “shells” for a promise of interest. Interest would mean dividend. The only investment opportunities would be in property and stock shares of companies. It is imperative for this system to work that no one that does not produce something is issued currency and that everyone pays the same percentage in taxes. Ironically it would be the IRS that issues currency. You might be wondering what would happen if a segment of the population decided to hoard the currency they traded for even though there is no incentive to collect interest on the savings. If people did decide to save in currency instead of buying something they could use or purchasing stock, you would have a deflationary period followed by bankruptcies then inflation, unless the extra money defaulted on is taxed out of circulation. Or, extra currency could be spent into circulation as a dividend to those in debt as soon as deflation is detected and taxed out later to re-equalize the currency supply. If currency stagnates, you can’t really call it currency any more can you? (stagnancy?) It is highly unlikely anyone will hoard currency. Consider what we have now.  Private bankers issuing money with interest attached to it. They decide what industries get large credit limits thus cornering and controlling the market. They confiscate property from those who inevitably default on their loans. The bankers skim profit from the interest thus increasing the money supply. The surplus money is taxed out of the system from the producers. Instead of the money being “unissued” to curb inflation, it is spent back into the market to support the lavish lifestyles of politicians. So unless you are getting a cut from the companies that the bankers favor, good luck. It is unlikely the interest on your savings is going to keep up with inflation. It is imperative for this system to work that wealth is extracted from producers and given away to non-producers and there is a “progressive” tax code. Currently the economy is stagnating because far more currency is being extracted from the market through interest payments than is being loaned (so that more interest can be accrued). Suffice to say, this system must die.

The more I learn about this communist system the more I am amazed. It appears that with wealth-redistribution you have division which allows private bankers to covertly control the money supply. As the bankers rape the public, a vast pool of welfare recipient inevitably follows. In other words there is no way to not have vast poverty under this system and there is no way this system can work without wealth-redistribution.

The winner of the prize I do not have goes to the “Conservative Party” afr.org .  The funny thing is that you have to buy the guys book to find out about how the guy thinks.

Do you know how around tax time each year you hear someone mention the day that we finished working for the government and we’re finally working for ourselves? It’s not exactly that simple. That may be the average day, but the day for every individual is different. With our system, the less you make per day, the less days you work for the government. In other words the more money you make per day, the more days you work for the government. This is  the way it is in the interest of “fairness” and “equality”.  The result of this policy is a political party that wants to add days to the people that make more and subtract days from the people that make less. Of course you can’t have a party like that without a party that wants to subtract days from those who make more and add days to those who make less. Meanwhile private bankers collect interest on money they don’t nor did they ever have. It’s just more important to fight over more or less then to expose the people who control our economy.

In case you’re telling yourself that it’s absurd to assume there is no one suggesting getting rid of wealth-redistribution besides me, I will be offering a 1 million dollar award to anyone who can find them, and I don’t even have a million dollars. Check it out for your selves. You would think that “Flat” taxers , or “Fair” taxers (dichotomy) would be the winners. No, they just want less. In fact theirs is the most backhanded class warfare inciting rhetoric you could possibly come up with. Their proposals were carefully crafted to be the same as what we already have – that’s why they will never happen. But that’s how communists work. Always offering a new “solution”. Meanwhile the banks and Wall St. bookies keep their power. Some want more wealth-redistribution, some want less, but you all want it. You’re the same but divided, conquered, sad.

 What is a “progressive” economist?  One that wants more wealth-redistribution than a  non-progressive economist? Or vice versa?  I wouldn’t trust any economist who’s part of “big college” or the “college industrial complex”. He can only skirt the truth or he loses his job. So if I write an I.O.U. to my buddy for fixing my car I have to make sure there’s some gold involved? Currency’s purpose is to grease the wheels of commerce so we can all work together to raise our standard of living. Why is it so hard to figure out how to issue it to ourselves? To give ourselves credit?

I’ll tell you why – this is communism. People are divided over something that was only conceived to create division. They can’t think straight. That’s why we let banksters and bookies extract the fruit of our labor. It’s time to cut out the middle man. Once a year everyone is taxed what they figure is ten percent of the trade they’ve done . If the majority thinks we need less common use assets such as roads and care for the disabled, the tax percentage will be lowered. If inflation occurs, the percentage will be raised and a percentage of that will be taken out of circulation. Do you get the point? No more fighting over more or less wealth-redistribution. We can figure this out.

Sometimes I ask myself if I am the one that’s ass backwards but as I model a capitalist society it becomes clear why people are so confused. The definitions of capitalism and communism have pretty much been completely reversed. A system with wealth-redistribution(communism) is a system with division which allows a private bank to issue the currency the commune uses to make its transactions. The bank then makes huge profit on the interest it charges on money it never had in the first place. Anyone with the privilege of having a large credit line with the bank stands to make huge profits utilizing that credit in business ventures. They control the rate at which the money is issued creating “booms and busts”. Eventually you end up with nothing but “the haves” and “the have not’s”. It’s not even about the standard of living as it is about the fact that someone has less. “I don’t care if the Earth is a huge garbage can as long as I have someone to serve my tea.” You have all kinds of secretive business dealings going on leading to massive pollution and products that poison people.

A system with no wealth-redistribution(capitalism) issues itself the credit it needs to conduct transactions. There is no parasitic banker extracting usury fees. There are no booms and busts. Everyone who wants to be self-employed that can produce something has the opportunity to be issued credit. The community knows who is being issued credit and what they are producing. Profit margins would be minimalized if not reducing the business owner to a mere wage earner. “If you want to be the boss then you’re not going to be paid as much as everyone else.” The community works together to raise its standard of living. “I’m living in luxury but I can’t find anyone to serve my tea cheaper than I can do it myself.”

Granted I have simplified these two systems but I think I’ve made my point. I think.

Just read the American Monetary Act published on “monetary.org”. This document was carefully crafted to be the most excruciatingly painful to read document ever written. Between this and the Monetary Reform Act, I would have to say the communist bankers could not have come up with a better dichotomy of options that will never change anything. How do they come up with this stuff. How many banker agents does it take to infiltrate these organizations to have total control of everything that’s published? Maybe everyone’s a banker agent. I don’t know. You got one side saying you can’t let the government issue money because that’s communism. Then you’ve got the other side saying you can’t have the government issue money unless it issues money to people that haven’t produced anything. Absolutely brilliant. Ok, here we go, it’s not communism unless you issue money to people that haven’t produced anything! Just don’t let the commies know that you know that.

So I forced myself to read the “The Monetary Reform Act” published on “the money masters. com”. Pee-yuu. What a stinker. Blah, blah, blah, change things while staying the same. Ridiculous subterfuge. Then I get to the last paragraph of #13 in the end notes. That explains it. Apparently the guys that wrote this never learned that wall street and the bankers were the ones that brought Lenin to power. What does taking from the producers and giving to the non-producers, or ‘communism’, have to do with the government issuing money to the producers? The “essence of communist economics” is wealth-redistribution, not the government issuing money. That basically is the only job the government should have. Buy ships, planes, tanks, pay for common use infrastructure(general welfare) and issue money for the use in commerce so we don’t have to rely on barter. Oh, but that would put wall street and bankers out of business. Maybe they could try getting elected to office. Office in a government that’s a fraction of the size it is now.