Rolling Jubilee - for Mashman, with love, Occupy Wall Street

[mashman]

...the first rule of fight club, is...

((erase the debt record, we all go back to zero))

Ignore them and do what you think is right?

or ignore it entirely and move forwards without it as a consideration.

[mashman]

And...make it a hell of a lot harder to acquire new debt.
I think though , that for example if the debt was zeroed out that the average Joe would think "Choice,now what can I buy". Then the economy would surge & we'd be back to raping & pillaging the planet again.

Agreed completely. That is why I can't vote for social credit. If money/value is involved in day to day living in any way shape or form, we'll end up in exactly the same position. I'm all for giving us a shot against mother nature. It's what we've done best so far, but she's making it harder and harder and will likely make it even harder at any given point in time. Why let the politics of economics add to the complexity of dealing with "disaster". We can do better. Ohhhhhhh can we do better.

Sent from my Ipissed

[blue rider]

Agreed completely. That is why I can't vote for social credit. If money/value is involved in day to day living in any way shape or form, we'll end up in exactly the same position. I'm all for giving us a shot against mother nature. It's what we've done best so far, but she's making it harder and harder and will likely make it even harder at any given point in time. Why let the politics of economics add to the complexity of dealing with "disaster". We can do better. Ohhhhhhh can we do better.

Sent from my Ipissed

Credit and loaning money in itself is not the problem. The interest attached to the loan however is. Banks today charge upward to 20?/% interest on loan, credit cards etc. They advertise bigger loans for smaller interrest rates, adjustable rates (this should be a banned practice by now) and so on.... This practice that is ruining a lot of people. And to those that say peeps should have known better, a lot don't know and have never been tought.

If a bank can loan money from the fed or the government at almost 0% interest rate, the the re-loaning of that money should be at the same or just slightly larger rate. But this is not the case.

It is the credit and accumulated credit on loans that kill people.
And all that credit paid to the bank, is not returned to the economy where it is needed, it serves no other purpose that feeding the bottomline of a share holder.
Time to bring back ursury laws.

[Akzle]

Credit and loaning money in itself is not the problem. The interest attached to the loan however is.

actually. it is.

when you get a loan/ mortgage from the bank, they "make" money, based on your corporate assurance/ signature -that you will generate the "money" (debt) and give it to them.

it's not as though they're loaning you money that they have, or anything.

recently found out that a certain bank had a capital worth of 4, but had loaned 63 (billion or million, can't remember)
sounds like a recipe for insolvency, innit?

the ursury/ "interest" you pay, most people view as the cost of servicing the loan. in fact, it isn't, because they took no risk in the first instance.
you took the risk, by acting as a corporate person, to play a corporate game. (that is: private gain or profit)

there is actually NO MONEY in society. yours, mine, anywhere.
a pound sterling used to be just that - a pound of silver.
pop quiz: what is the "value" of sterling silver nowadays?, then newton overvalued gold and bought it in as a "standard" - on the assumption that scarcity gives something inherent worth. then the yanks did a gold snatch (literally confiscated gold of everyone in the country and called it"national reserves" (not dis-similar to "common-wealth")), and since then, "money" has not actually been backed by anything tangible.
the "value" of your/your country's debt ("money") is calculated at an international level by a bunch of scheming jews, based on how many corporate persons are registered on any given landmass, and the assumption that X% of them will be generating revenue (tax) for 50 years of their life - this (your sweat) is traded. legally.
but apparently slavery has been abolished.

look on those pretty bits of paper in your wallet and you'll find the words "legal tender" and "promisary note" - not "money" (and nothing so obvious as "debt")
IT IS WORTH NO MORE THAN THE INK AND PAPER USED TO MAKE IT
it's perceived worth, however, is immeasurable. (by the sum of the damage it's done to people and indeed "society")

so to say "money isn't the problem" is both right and wrong, right in the sense that it doesn't exist, wrong in the sense that you didn't know that, and it's your, as well as the rest of your society's, belief in the debt system that very much IS the problem.

[oldrider]

actually. it is.

when you get a loan/ mortgage from the bank, they "make" money, based on your corporate assurance/ signature -that you will generate the "money" (debt) and give it to them.

it's not as though they're loaning you money that they have, or anything.

recently found out that a certain bank had a capital worth of 4, but had loaned 63 (billion or million, can't remember)
sounds like a recipe for insolvency, innit?

the ursury/ "interest" you pay, most people view as the cost of servicing the loan. in fact, it isn't, because they took no risk in the first instance.
you took the risk, by acting as a corporate person, to play a corporate game. (that is: private gain or profit)

there is actually NO MONEY in society. yours, mine, anywhere.
a pound sterling used to be just that - a pound of silver.
pop quiz: what is the "value" of sterling silver nowadays?, then newton overvalued gold and bought it in as a "standard" - on the assumption that scarcity gives something inherent worth. then the yanks did a gold snatch (literally confiscated gold of everyone in the country and called it"national reserves" (not dis-similar to "common-wealth")), and since then, "money" has not actually been backed by anything tangible.
the "value" of your/your country's debt ("money") is calculated at an international level by a bunch of scheming jews, based on how many corporate persons are registered on any given landmass, and the assumption that X% of them will be generating revenue (tax) for 50 years of their life - this (your sweat) is traded. legally.
but apparently slavery has been abolished.

look on those pretty bits of paper in your wallet and you'll find the words "legal tender" and "promisary note" - not "money" (and nothing so obvious as "debt")
IT IS WORTH NO MORE THAN THE INK AND PAPER USED TO MAKE IT
it's perceived worth, however, is immeasurable. (by the sum of the damage it's done to people and indeed "society")

so to say "money isn't the problem" is both right and wrong, right in the sense that it doesn't exist, wrong in the sense that you didn't know that, and it's your, as well as the rest of your society's, belief in the debt system that very much IS the problem.

Sounds like you have been reading about "Social Credit" as opposed to "Social Debt" ... the funny money system that we are currently enslaved to!

That's all it takes ... the stroke of a key board and the "will" to make it happen! Interesting thread!

[mashman]

Credit and loaning money in itself is not the problem. The interest attached to the loan however is. Banks today charge upward to 20?/% interest on loan, credit cards etc. They advertise bigger loans for smaler interrest rates, adjustable rates (this should be a banned practice by now) and so on.... This practice that is ruining a lot of people. And to those that say peeps should have known better, a lot don't know and have never been toughed.

If a bank can loan money from the fed or the government at almost 0% interest rate, the the re-loaning of that money should be at the same or just slightly larger rate. But this is not the case.

It is the credit and accumulated credit on loans that kill people.
And all that credit paid to the bank, is not returned to the economy where it is needed, it serves no other purpose that feeding the bottomline of a share holder.
Time to bring back ursury laws.

Pretty much similar to the last line of Akzle's post, except I'll go a wee step further. As well as society's belief in the debt system being the problem, I don't see how any other form of transaction medium that has value attached to it, be it barter, trade, time etc... is going to change how society values individuals. For me that's what it's all about. I was told the other night that the Doctor can do the job of a Binman. That may well be the case, but if the Doctor is doing the job of a Binman, who's doing the job of the Doctor? It's the value we put on the effort of an individual that is at the heart of the problem. The moment that we start to believe that one service/product/job is more important than another, to the extent that the people involved in providing the service/product/job are "rewarded" on perceived effort, is the exact same moment that you create a "tiered" system. This instantly means that there will be those who have and those who don't and given that there are individuals, at both ends of the spectrum and inbetween, that will go out of their way to "accumulate" what they want and stop at nothing to get it, we will still end up with the "shit" part of society i.e. crime, death, poverty, poor education, lack of work ethic etc... So irrespective of whether it's Social Credit or 2 apples equals a banana or 100 minutes work equals a loaf of bread, there will always be those who will go out of their way and skew the system again. Whilst a "valueless" mechanism may not be perfect, it'll all but remove the ability for a tiered system to grow.

I struggle to see why value is required in any "transaction" when we're talking about feeding people, educating people, fixing people, all playing a part in "production" etc... Why should some have and some have not based on their perceived contribution? In either system, value or valueless, these exact same people will exist. Punishing them using value does not change them and likely never will. In a valueless society, there is no need to punish them. That punishment punishes the perceived good citizens, that's you and me, ok maybe just me . We plough money, tax, into the "system" and leave ourselves with less to "spend" on the basics, maybe some toys etc... Whereas feeding them, housing them, clothing them etc... at no "cost" does not punish the perceived good citizens, even further it removes the need for certain crime... hell we could start to leave our doors open again. Ditch the value, accept the lazy (maybe offer the incentive of travel, dunno) and do what we currently do. The big issues solved and truly moving forwards at break neck speed (not just bigger and better neon lights), building things to last etc... and noone need "financially" suffer because of the actions of others blah blah blah.

[blue rider]

I don't see loaning money, or services as a problem. I have always worked, and have always had money, but sometimes in order to buy a larger items....beryl comes to mind, i might get a loan and pay that one off. To me that is no issue, it is good business practice.

I might also loan money to a friend in hardship, or hand over a bowl of sugar and a couple of eggs to a neighbourgh. I get the loan from my friend paid back and my neighbourg will return the sugar and eggs. But I will not charge interest. and this is were the difference is to me and a bank.

Even in a barter system I might loan seeds in exchange for a later payment of say cucumbers. I can loan my seeds for equal amount of cucumbers, or for an extra ten percent of cucumber.
Any which way we want to call it, loaning or borrowing is not an issue unless the repayment of the loan becomes unfeasable due to excessive interest rates, fees etc.

and Akzle....to much green.

[mashman]

I don't see loaning money, or services as a problem. I have always worked, and have always had money, but sometimes in order to buy a larger items....beryl comes to mind, i might get a loan and pay that one off. To me that is no issue, it is good business practice.

I might also loan money to a friend in hardship, or hand over a bowl of sugar and a couple of eggs to a neighbourgh. I get the loan from my friend paid back and my neighbourg will return the sugar and eggs. But I will not charge interest. and this is were the difference is to me and a bank.

Even in a barter system I might loan seeds in exchange for a later payment of say cucumbers. I can loan my seeds for equal amount of cucumbers, or for an extra ten percent of cucumber.
Any which way we want to call it, loaning or borrowing is not an issue unless the repayment of the loan becomes unfeasable due to excessive interest rates, fees etc.

and Akzle....to much green.

So you're expecting an interest free loan? In which case why bother having money in the first place?

If your friend/neighbour told you that they would not be paying you back, would you still make the "loan"?

You're adding on a 10% margin because you've given seeds? Or are they just small cucumbers ... In essence you're expect something back because you gave?

My view. I just gave a guy a half cooked chicken because it looked like he needed it more than me. If I had been hungry, I would have shared it. In either case, I chose to "help", I expect nothing back. similarly when I lend something to a mate, I'd like to get some things back, but if I don't I ain't going to lose any sleep over it if I don't really need it. If I need it, I'll ask for it back.

[Akzle]

The moment that we start to believe that one service/product/job is more important than another,

i'll add to this, what i think a pertinent example.
people would, on a day to day basis, not value a sewerage worker highly. (particularly in a big shitty, like auckland)
BUT, if those men stopped turning up to work, if aucklanders shit didn't go away when they flushed and they actually had to deal with it themselves, the value of sewerage workers would treble overnight.
the "cog in a machine" example comes in, but i think a more natural analogy is required. we are all part of an ecosystem, or unified conscious body, whether we act conscious of it or not, whether we call it god or jah or ganesha, and, as a body is the sum total of all parts, we are all required for it to go good. a body missing a hoof is lame an cannot outrun or evade a predator, a body missing a hand cannot feed the mouth, or tie shoelaces... all parts need to work together for the health of the whole.
society is discombobulated, the whole is not healthy.

(...)
and Akzle....to much green.

cool belief. so, who do you bank with? is it one of the sharia compliant banks? a credit union? do they support the open banking resolution? (biggest. fuckup. ever)

if the green offends you so, highlight it, then it turns purple.

[Akzle]

You're adding on a 10% margin because you've given seeds? Or are they just small cucumbers ... In essence you're expect something back because you gave?

similarly when I lend something to a mate, I'd like to get some things back, but if I don't I ain't going to lose any sleep over it if I don't really need it. If I need it, I'll ask for it back.

1) never lend anyone anything unless you're prepared to write off the relationship, or the item in question.

2) actually.. from one seed comes a plant. from one plant comes many cucumbers, from many cucumbers come many more seeds. i think he may have been lining up to charge compound interest based on the capital returns of the investment!

[Akzle]

further it removes the need for certain crime...

actually, i think, without money there'd be exactly 4% crime.
(consider the current crime rate to be 90% and fluctuating, bearng in mind most of it goes unnoticed, unrebutted and with no recourse to the victims/"taxpayers")
a lot of unemployed lawyers, cops, judges and politicians, and idle hands are the devils plaything. so maybe we need to dig a big hole. or send a rocket to the sun.

[Akzle]

Sounds like you have been reading about "Social Credit" as opposed to "Social Debt" ...

i haven't. i skimmed over that when i was recommended to the democrats for social credit party.
i am not, either, for "social credit". while accept a "medium of exchange" can be a useful thing (in a transitional sense), a "store of value" is certainly not, whether it's debt or credit makes no difference

i have read a stack of stuff on a stack of things, money just happens to be bullshit and lawdy lawdy when the populi realise it there'll be some changin done 'round here.

[blue rider]

mashy, really, i know you think your principle is worthy and would/should/could work, if we all gave up our worthy possesions and started sharing and living only on what we need.
however, this according to my experience is not going to work, as there will always be someone who would like to be king at the place of the king.
there will always be someone who will have no issue screwing over yer dear neighbourgh for a farting.

many books have been written about this phenomen and many revolutions have been had, heads have rolled and some got shot, in the end we are back to the system of the biggest one screws the weakest one. I think that was Darwin, also an old bugger.

So when I lend a friend some money, most of the time i do not expect it back, nor the sugar and eggs I give to the lady next door. But I sleep tight in the knowledge that should I need sugar and eggs and maybe a coin, my friend and the lady next door will be there to lend me a hand and a shirt if need be.
No interest charged.

In our current system it is not so much the lending that screws people, it is the usurious interest rates and other from of frivolous charges attached to a loan. This needs to be addressed first and foremost. IF a bank will only pay 1.25% interest on savings, and if a bank only pays 1 - 3 % interest on interbank loaning, how the hell can they justify 17% + interest charges on money the lend to their customers. And where is the governemtn to address this issue?

Peeps will need loans, they will need a car to go to work, heck some might even go in overdraft to pay 200$ monthly bus ticket to go to work. Why the heck should there be a 17% interest charge attached to that overdraft! That is what gets ordinary peeps in trouble.

And unless someone shows me a statistic that shows peeps only getting loans for boats, jewellery and a fake pair of tits, i believe firmly that loans for many is something they only got because they had too.

I exclude myself of that group, cuz i wanted beryl, and well I kind a need her too. but only really cuz i want her.

[oldrider]

Money is not the root of all evil ... the people that control the issue and cancellation of it "are"!

Not the people that do the work, the people who are controlling them ... the real 1%!

[mashman]

i'll add to this, what i think a pertinent example.
people would, on a day to day basis, not value a sewerage worker highly. (particularly in a big shitty, like auckland)
BUT, if those men stopped turning up to work, if aucklanders shit didn't go away when they flushed and they actually had to deal with it themselves, the value of sewerage workers would treble overnight.
the "cog in a machine" example comes in, but i think a more natural analogy is required. we are all part of an ecosystem, or unified conscious body, whether we act conscious of it or not, whether we call it god or jah or ganesha, and, as a body is the sum total of all parts, we are all required for it to go good. a body missing a hoof is lame an cannot outrun or evade a predator, a body missing a hand cannot feed the mouth, or tie shoelaces... all parts need to work together for the health of the whole.
society is discombobulated, the whole is not healthy.

Aye, and both the human with missing bits and the society with bits missing can benefit from lubbly technology.

1) never lend anyone anything unless you're prepared to write off the relationship, or the item in question.

2) actually.. from one seed comes a plant. from one plant comes many cucumbers, from many cucumbers come many more seeds. i think he may have been lining up to charge compound interest based on the capital returns of the investment!

1) very true, the item can get fucked coz as ya say, if I really needed if it would have a GPS tracker and disable the user device attached to it.

2) and you said you weren't an economist.

actually, i think, without money there'd be exactly 4% crime.
(consider the current crime rate to be 90% and fluctuating, bearng in mind most of it goes unnoticed, unrebutted and with no recourse to the victims/"taxpayers")
a lot of unemployed lawyers, cops, judges and politicians, and idle hands are the devils plaything. so maybe we need to dig a big hole. or send a rocket to the sun.

or they could retrain and do something useful for a change?