Let's learn something from the birds

Birds generally do not compete between their different species - unless predatory or egg-eaters.

Throw a handfull of crumbs for a group of birds, and they will peck away contentedly until there is little left, when they will, within their species, compete for what is left.

Throw a few bigger pieces to them and they will contend for them, taking them from one another until the last crumb is eaten and there is nothing left.

Throw a single piece to them, and they will all compete, except for those which give up and do without.

Apply this to our modern world.  The planet produces abundance for all to take sufficient for ourselves, but put us in towns without access to land and we have to acquire our necessities from others.

Over the millennia we have been taught that money is the only real substitute for the real unreachable world, and that we have to have money in order to participate in the world - a neat lie, but a lie nevertheless. However, the lie was swallowed and was therefore effective, so that everyone had to compete for money. Those who could take the most and could invent and install 'leaders' could then buy influence over others and take faster from controlled populations.

Today a couple of families have almost all the money, which they use as a weapon against the rest via the creation of wars by our bought 'leaders', and by buying up essential commodities such as food, and raising the prices beyond the reach of many or most, who have to work ever harder just to survive.

A hundred years ago, a single family was known to have already taken half the money of the world. They then took the rest during the next decade or so, but had learned that such visible opulence carries risk, so the fact then became a secret, and they settled for reputations of spurious 'quality' rather than mere wealth.

All that money - now some forty to sixty quadrillion dollars-worth - was, and is, contained in tax-exempt 'Trusts', which are abstract contrivances to contain the equally fictional contrivance of 'money', which in reality has no value other than that 'said' by its manipulators. From there it is wielded as necessary to mop up the rest of their fictional cash as they print it and it is 'earned' by our work, and to systematically impoverish any and all who are in a position to be impoverished - vide the Philippine-Malaysia-Indonesia bloc fifteen years ago, then Russia, then Argentina, America today, the rest of us tomorrow.

Just now they are throwing the world too little oil and too little food, at prices they have artificially raised, and throwing us all too little money with which to acquire them and too many wars for us to fight in their interest. Fun, eh?  Well, for folks who delude themselves that they are a different species, sure. 

Hmm. I may not be the cleverest person in the world, but I don't have the slightest problem with simple sums. So I have no difficulty at all in prioritizing whether to annihilate forever four billion innocent, working, self-sufficient people as is intended or, irrespective of who or what they are or suppose themselves to be, a few or a few hundred or thousand parasitic vermin who intend to eliminate the rest so that they can continue in even lazier undeserved luxury. - Do you have any difficulties over simple arithmetic like that?

Alternatively - because, while not the cleverest, your modest author is not totally devoid of sense - would it not be easier and more comprehensive to abolish the vermins' totally illusory tool of finance once and for all and in so doing return the world to sanity and the planet to health?

Think, work three months a year, no more debts or taxes, no more wars, no more hunger or want, much less crime, no more scrimping and saving, no more paying, no more swindling or conniving, no more paperwork . . .

So, let's just get eliminating, eh, of one or the other, whichever makes the most sense.

But let's get on with it.