[CAFR1]

Originally Posted by gldskr

Walter

I agree 100% in the workability of what you propose, however, it appears you are sidestepping the major points of contention.

1. The fraudulent nature of the monetary system which your proposal requires.

2. The inevitable double digit inflation that will surely ensue.

3. Blind faith that the government can/will downsize.

As an interim measure it would surely be preferable to what we have today, but you have admitted that its achievement will take an inordinate amount of energy and head butting. Wouldn't it be a better use of that energy to strike at the root rather than pruning a few branches?

Now, if this proposal was sold as an interim measure, with the ultimate goal of a return to honest money, that would surely be more palatable. As a stand alone it is still snake oil and the bitter taste will linger, long after its soothing effects have vanished.

gldskr

Gold Seeker:



Sidestepping, not at all. The underlying “money” system is your contention for correction. What I am addressing is the underlying “Political” system.



What a currency is backed by will inevitably be determined by market forces. The gold backed currency was dropped due to the inflexibility for all of “the boys” to make a profit. He who owns the gold makes the rules adage was just that. The gold of consequence was held by “Select” parties. This made the general consortium of countries and players weak on the idea of a gold backed currency.


Thus in the 70’s the free for all began. The flexibility of the usury “Paper” currency had and did offer unlimited potential and of course the ability for unlimited abuse.


The TRF is an issue of returning direct and absolute ownership to the people of which in no respect “IS IN PLACE AT THIS TIME”.


The underlying currency of a country issue is very simply a choice of barter to be used. Commodity backed or not, market forces can determine what transpires there. Direct, visible, and accurate accounting for ownership by the people of what “is there” is the only issue of my concern.



Inflation? You comment as if the people were the true owners, inflation factors become an issue disqualifying to the TRF. Inflation factors are always at play. If the government owns the wealth or the people, I will choose the consequences of inflation as the true owner of the wealth every single time over the consequenses of inflation as an observer.



Again, with market forces at play, when you go from a cash, tax, and investment system to a cash, and investment system only, inevitably the free ticket trillion dollar a year welfare system will shrink exponentially as the private communities take over the effort of taking care of their own. (Government no longer has the motive to expand budgets to take more money) They make more money by downsizing and being more efficient under TRF operations. Plunder through taxation is taken out of the equation, and an emphasis for a prosperous people is strongly enforced into the same equation.



From my prior post, I will repeat myself. TRF managed funds will probably have very active investments in many commodities, gold and the like.



People who say that currency should be backed exclusively by gold, on an investment sense I can not respect that position due to its limitations and the reality of whom would ultimately be in control. A broad based commodity index backing I would be in favor of. There the viability is sound and not limited to one specific “item” agenda that may be contrary to the interest of the many.
.
.