1
1
1
The crisis is the ultimate and inevitable culmination of a process which inherently and irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to the circulation, until we can no longer afford to service the resultant sum of debt, and the system collapses. It is *an inherently terminal* system; and the only way to avoid its inevitable termination is to eliminate the *artificial* multiplication of debt.
Why aren't the banks lending?
The banks *can't* lend any more *because the system itself destroys credit-worthiness*; it destroys credit-worthiness to an ever greater degree across its limited lifespan; and ultimately, at the end of its life cycle, credit-worthiness is completely destroyed by a sum of indebtedness which we can no longer afford to service. In other words, the fact the banks are not lending itself is a testament of the critical fault of their system of exploitation. It is not justified in the least degree, because they are not the real creditors; but it is certainly one of the greatest crimes in history that *twice* we have allowed this illegitimate system to terminate "the world's"- "economies."-
Is this juncture not inevitable unless we perfect the system of inherent multiplication of debt?
Absolutely this juncture is inevitable. I provided computer models to the Reagan Administration in 1983 which calculated the maximum possible lifespan of any such system, and which projected that the terminal accumulation of debt would occur at approximately 2010 AD.
What is the consequence of the present destruction of *credit worthiness*?
So the system itself has destroyed credit-worthiness"- and the present hearings are no more than a side show, unless they address the meat of the matter, which is this process of inherent multiplication of debt. But the consequence of arrested lending itself is the potential death knell of the system, because to maintain a *vital* circulation, we *absolutely must* not only be able to borrow perpetually, but at a perpetually escalating rate. To deny us this sole means of replenishing the circulation therefore means that surviving industry will absolutely be deprived of the circulation which is vital to sustaining itself against its obligation to service the sum of debt.
Denied that sole means of replenishing the circulation, the curtain will fall. Quite possibly before Obama takes office (not that he's planning anything fundamentally different, and capable of saving us).
BUT THERE IS a solution; and I provided it to the Reagan Administration as well. On our page, "If I Were President--I lay out exactly how to arrest the monetary in a day, and how to establish mathematically perfected economy in no more time than required to adopt existing infrastructures to manage the accounts of the people under mathematically perfected economy.
I will take on all naysayers here or elsewhere. Why Alex hasn't had me on the show I don't know, but I do know many people have asked him. Maybe Alex can disprove there is one and one only solution to 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible, terminal multiplication of debt by interest.
These of course *are* all our problems. I published the solution in 1979. It's available to Mr. Obama right now, and if I were anyone here who is truly concerned with rectification, I'd be visiting our pages at least, and putting the pressure on the president-elect to adopt mathematically perfected economy immediately.
As for Mr. Kashkari, he is as phony as phony gets. I wish I could answer each of these questions with its solution from the chair next to him. Mr. Kucinich, when are you going to have me testify in Washington?
