Walter
I admire your idealism.
Quote:
Originally posted by Walter
The “mechanics” of funding government over the last 100 years as it is currently, is based on deception and outright fraud. The public’s focus is directed to taxation as the funding source when in fact if you digest total GROSS income government receives, only 1/3rd is tax income and 2/3rd is NON-Tax income. The commodity in a fiat system is the productivity value of the people.
|
True, but eliminating the fradulent funding mechanism still leaves us with a fraudulent money system. Fiat money is, by definition, inflationary, whereas increased productivity is just the opposite. This effectively leaves us running on a treadmill.
Quote:
Originally posted by Walter
The difference in a “Slave” society and a “Prosperous” society is the real value of true spend-able income the individual receives and "maintains". Yes, it is true that for thousands of years (not 100) precious metals were used as the standard bartering tool for trade value. Also included were livestock, land, ect. Also true was that 95% of the population over a period of 4000 years was impoverished by the overlords in control of 99% of that Gold and Silver.
|
True, but our founders were well aquainted with the results of fiat money and its 100% failure rate, ergo its prohibition. It isn't a handfull of evil overlords that have made us a society of serfs, affluence and laziness has done the job quite well. The PTB are simply reaping what has been sown.
Quote:
Originally posted by Walter
My “solution” as you call it is to reassert ownership for the public by making “them” the direct beneficiary whereby government “must” be motivated by seeing the people prosper to truly prosper themselves.
|
The government is motivated by one thing, power; to suggest that they would settle for a win/win situation is simply naive. The people are already the direct beneficiaries and the trustee has embezzeled the profits. He needs to be hung and you would give him a raise.
Quote:
Originally posted by Walter
The TRF mode of operation allows for transparence, but of even greater importance, it shifts the “mode” of operation that now puts the “motive” focus on downsizing, efficiency, and keeping the public prosperous. The less spent by government and the more stabile prosperity that ensues, government administration and management will be able to live high-on-the-hog also with the public being the “direct” beneficiary of the investment wealth under management by government.
|
Government is like a vat of yeast; it constantly grows until its food source is consumed. Transparency is all fine and good but is meaningless unless the people are willing to look. How long will it be before the cloak reappears. Once behind that cloak it will be business as usual again.
Quote:
Originally posted by Walter
When you mention “unworkable in the real world”, that is false. It already is working in the real world and is the “primary” driving force IN THE REAL WORLD. Government now gets over 2/3rd of its income from non-tax sources. We will be changing the direct beneficiary IN THE REAL WORLD.
|
True in a fiat world; what I should have said was unworkable in a world of honest money and limited government.
Quote:
Originally posted by Walter
Expanding investment helps absorbs inflation. Massive investment, to say the least under the principle of operation of the TRF. Government pension funds (standing at about 26-28 trillion dollars strong) drove the economy over the last 65 years as they grew. TRF funds can and will drive the economy for the next 500 years or longer.
|
Expanding investment absorbs inflation as long as it just sits in an investment account. But once it is "reinvested" into the economy it dilutes the existing currency, diminishing its value. Paraphrasing from Warren Buffet, "with (26 trillion dollars), I can throw a pretty good party too." Sooner or later the party must end. What rate of inflation is acceptable? To any right thinking person, the only acceptable rate is 0%.
The biggest problem I have and I think most Sui Juris members will concur, is that your solution is still premised upon the fraudulent FRN. Somebody eventually ends up holding the bag. Not only economically but with the additional detriment of lost freedoms. Had it not been for Bretton Woods in 1944 we would be living in a very different US of A today. Can you say Argentina?
There is also the problem of sustainability. The system works precisely because of its inherent deception and fraudulence. Once out in the open, its foundation is shattered and sustainability lost.
gldskr