deanwins Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 What is the relation between the manipulators who run the Federal Reserve and the common citizen who doesn't understand the monopolization of money and money inflation?If the elite find that the mass of common man would and do take their property, violating their property, then maybe to them running the Federal Reserve and Federal Government protection racket is justified to them in order to take the property back? Then would it be unjustified slavery, or would it be justified incapacitation with collateral damage?Are we who understand Austrian economics, but still have to work for slave money for a living... are we collateral damage? Could it be possible that running the Federal Reserve, and knowingly manipulating the common population of the world into working for money that you can print, actually be in the long term self interest of your family (in an evolutionary time frame perspective, not a Randian perspective)?I wonder this with an open mind. I'm undecided. Potentially to the elite we are their cattle (or at least the common man is), as cows are to humans. Do their families flourish using this strategy more than they would if they tried to rather enforce capitalism instead of manipulating and monopolizing money to enslave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Are we who understand Austrian economics, but still have to work for slave money for a living... are we collateral damage? The pain of "working for slave money for a living" can be the perfect motivation for slaves to learn how to set themselves free. That worked for me, and I'll never go back to pulling an oar down in the hull of someone else's ship. Whoever finds the motivation to actually do something productive to set themselves free from their own self imposed slavery has absolutely nothing to do with the Federal Reserve. They're not the enemy. But anyone who regards the Federal Reserve as the obstacle to securing their financial freedom is their own worst enemy. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanwins Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 Greg, The Federal Reserve enforces the use of the dollar around the world as use in trade. For every moment that you have dollars in your wallet or bank account, the Federal Reserve is stealing from you through inflation. The more dollars you hold in this way, the greater a slave you are to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Greg, The Federal Reserve enforces the use of the dollar around the world as use in trade. So what? The Federal Reserve is powerless to prevent anyone from producing to create wealth. This is the beauty of American Capitalism. There are no obstacles between anyone and their financial freedom... ...except obviously, themselves. The value of the dollar is stable enough for financial transactions. As a long term store of wealth there are always plenty of other suitable alternatives. For every moment that you have dollars in your wallet or bank account, the Federal Reserve is stealing from you through inflation. The more dollars you hold in this way, the greater a slave you are to them. That's why I simply do what the bankers do. Since they don't use their own Federal Reserve Notes as a store of wealth, neither do I. The Federal reserve is not the enemy. They don't have the power to prevent any productive American from securing their own financial freedom. The Federal Reserve can only prey on those who deserve to be its victims through their failure to properly order their own lives. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Ayn Rand allegedly complained about living in a world of children (N. Branden). Greg isn't complaining, just explaining. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Ayn Rand allegedly complained about living in a world of children (N. Branden). Greg isn't complaining, just explaining.--BrantAyn Rand brought it on herself. She be came a Den Mother to several maladjusted folks.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanwins Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 The Federal reserve is not the enemy. They don't have the power to prevent any productive American from securing their own financial freedom. The Federal Reserve can only prey on those who deserve to be its victims through their failure to properly order their own livesThe Federal Reserve's "prey on those who deserve to be its victims" is used to fund the enforcement of taxes on those who do not deserve to be its victims. Also, through their monopoly, they get to monitor all financial transactions and identify productive people to steal from. Also, through their monopoly, transaction fees I'd highly suspect are much higher than would be in a free market. Do you not pay taxes and transaction fees? Do you not recognize that costs of goods are significantly higher due to taxation and litigation against productive individuals and companies? Cut off the corrupt funding of the Federal Reserve and Federal Government, and then it will have to fund itself through more voluntary means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Ayn Rand allegedly complained about living in a world of children (N. Branden). Greg isn't complaining, just explaining. --BrantAyn Rand brought it on herself. She be came a Den Mother to several maladjusted folks. Ba'al Chatzaf Possibly she didn't think of those close to her when thinking this. Dunno. --Brant I like "Den Mother," but not to NB who was something of a Den Father Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanwins Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 Re: Rand is surrounded by "children"I'm thinking in one way... that the mob of children demanding protection and wealth redistribution... is just asking for predatory "sociopaths" to take the reins. So far in history it seems like said sociopaths are quite successful in attaining property and raising families through their manipulative enslavement of the mob and the individualists. But through their secret betrayal of those whom they swear to protect, and their success not by production but by using the same old trick... and their lack of competition that naturally weeds out inbred decadence, one day I suspect their system of following this same old trick will result in catastrophic failure, and their descendents will be destroyed.But that is just in pure form, given that there actually is no mixing between the sociopathic elite manipulators and the elite producers in the world. Maybe the elite producers do mix with the elite manipulators, and hence such a system might be stable... although still more vulnerable to natural disaster than if the manipulation was not there.Surely in general technology and standard of living for the whole populous would increase if it weren't for the manipulation. But for the standard of living of the elite manipulators (and maybe elite producers too?), maybe for them, their standard of living would decrease if it weren't for the manipulation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Ayn Rand allegedly complained about living in a world of children (N. Branden). Greg isn't complaining, just explaining.--BrantAyn Rand brought it on herself. She be came a Den Mother to several maladjusted folks.Ba'al ChatzafThird time I'm asking this question, in general form, although you've changed the particulars of the description.Who precisely - by name - do you mean amongst the folks to whom you say Rand became a Den Mother? It's irresponsible of you to continue making a vague charge against a group of people while never saying which persons among that group you mean. Barbara Branden, for instance. Do you think she was "maladjusted"? Harry Kalberman? Elayne Kalberman? Allan Blumenthal? Joan Blumenthal? Alan Greenspan? Who in particular? If you aren't thinking of any of those people, then you're being unfair to them in sloppily tarring them with a charge which you don't mean as applying to them.Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Ayn Rand allegedly complained about living in a world of children (N. Branden). Greg isn't complaining, just explaining. --Brant Ayn Rand brought it on herself. She be came a Den Mother to several maladjusted folks. Ba'al Chatzaf It could have some applicability to meetings of "The Collective" in her apartment, but most likely to hoi polloi generally speaking and the world they sanctioned and perpetuated thereby that she did not like. "Children" to me are people living off of the government, directly or indirectly, counting on the government to take care of them. --Brant she said "world" of children and The Collective was for her social relief from the world out there that did not cause her to break concentration on writing Atlas Shrugged Third time I'm asking this question, in general form, although you've changed the particulars of the description. Who precisely - by name - do you mean amongst the folks to whom you say Rand became a Den Mother? It's irresponsible of you to continue making a vague charge against a group of people while never saying which persons among that group you mean. Barbara Branden, for instance. Do you think she was "maladjusted"? Harry Kalberman? Elayne Kalberman? Allan Blumenthal? Joan Blumenthal? Alan Greenspan? Who in particular? If you aren't thinking of any of those people, then you're being unfair to them in sloppily tarring them with a charge which you don't mean as applying to them. Ellen See misplaced comment by me above meant to follow Ellen's post. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 The Federal Reserve's "prey on those who deserve to be its victims" is used to fund the enforcement of taxes on those who do not deserve to be its victims. Also, through their monopoly, they get to monitor all financial transactions and identify productive people to steal from. That kind of unhealthy attitude of viewing yourself as a helpless victim of injustice will not serve you well in life, because blaming others can become a smokescreen to cover the failure to be usefully productive in the business world.. Also, through their monopoly, transaction fees I'd highly suspect are much higher than would be in a free market. Those transaction fees are just other businessmen who get paid for providing a useful service. Do you not pay taxes and transaction fees? Yes. They're merely costs of doing business which are passed on to the end users. This is Business 101. Why don't you know this? Do you not recognize that costs of goods are significantly higher due to taxation and litigation against productive individuals and companies? So what? Any decent productive American capitalist produces enough to pay the costs of living in this world just as it is. It's called freedom. Freedom from slavery to circumstance. Only failures blame others. Cut off the corrupt funding of the Federal Reserve and Federal Government, and then it will have to fund itself through more voluntary means. You don't have the power to change Federal Reserve or Federal government public policy... while I have the power to free myself from it without needing to change it. This demonstrates the contrast between our two different individual approaches to life. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I think Greg is onto something lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 It kind of reminds me of Meyer Lanski. He often told the mob "stop trying to hide everything!" The man payed MILLIONS in taxes. The beast left him alone. Died of old age... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanwins Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 Jules, Re something: The word that came to my mind was "denial". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Ostrich with his head in the sand syndrome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Jules, Re something: The word that came to my mind was "denial". Each of us naturally views the other's approach to life as being flawed because it was the view we each did not choose. Only the reality of the consequences of our own actions is objective enough to determine the validity of each of our approaches to life. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I for one strive to avoid actions where there are "consequences". Consequences as a word in my eyes are the results of poor choices.(my first wife was definitely a consequence of poor judgement!!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I for one strive to avoid actions where there are "consequences". Consequences as a word in my eyes are the results of poor choices.(my first wife was definitely a consequence of poor judgement!!!) There are also good consequences which are just as deserved, although your implied point is well taken that they are not normally associated with the word "consequences". Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now