“Curiouser and curiouser.”
We were told that the seven hundred billion dollars (but not relative to what three trillion might represent in bailout terms) was enough to prevent more foreclosures and unemployment lines by greasing the banks’ lending skids if done properly (but we’re not told what ‘properly’ means nor where the money went to do the job, 'properly').
Looking again at the ‘just gone missing’ military funds, seven hundred billion dollars us less than a third of an obscure military budget that simply no longer exists and which made absolutely no discernible social or economic impact as it left the building.
What are we really faced with here is – how much is big?
Are there independent economies that have been operating throughout history, some based on normal sustainable supply and demand (although often debt-based depending on how much usury is either perceived or tolerated by the governing system of the time, in which case you’re talking Capitalism); and others running on resource-based military necessities outside the perceived realm of fiat economies?
How much would you need to depend on a fiat economy when you had no need for it?
What If you owned its system generators, its performance capacities, the number of people it involved and their welfare or if even its very existence depended on your good will?
What If you, like the kings of medieval city-states, actually owned the entire system: the people, the land, the towns and villages, the cities that ran on a fiat economy that you also owned?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
