tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6610803937818981970.post2758591664345070958..comments2012-04-22T07:17:27.858-07:00Comments on Under the Veil: Fisheries In An Equal Money SystemKim Doubthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16664978930030125818noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6610803937818981970.post-41276034466087954572012-01-20T22:09:40.646-08:002012-01-20T22:09:40.646-08:00copy and paste the link to your browser:
http:/...copy and paste the link to your browser: <br /><br /><br />http://kimberly-kline.blogspot.com/2012/01/response-to-mike-and-mathematically.htmlKim Doubthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16664978930030125818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6610803937818981970.post-20244740586196496372012-01-20T22:07:35.297-08:002012-01-20T22:07:35.297-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Kim Doubthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16664978930030125818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6610803937818981970.post-29583563803346957642012-01-20T12:12:34.923-08:002012-01-20T12:12:34.923-08:00You know, upon a further look at the "EqualMo...You know, upon a further look at the "EqualMoney" site... I'm afraid I can only say these preposterous propositions are a dime-a-dozen now. EqualMoney.Org doesn't even articulate the artificial monetary problems of our time. Much less does it solve them. If we're all guaranteed an equal wage, you destroy the whole principle of just reward; but neither do you solve the impetus for over-consumption. You still have to regulate harvesting if you don't want to over-harvest, because after all, if everyone can afford a share of the harvest, you have all the more mouths to feed (better than they are).<br /><br />How do you reach monetary ideals, and how do you likewise meet the political requisites which accomplish these goals?<br /><br />1. First of all, you remove undeserved profit and cost from food. These involve the artificial inflation of (all) costs by perpetual multiplication of falsified indebtedness. This is solved not by promising an equal income, but by eliminating exploitation from the currency. Thus, as I wrote, mathematically perfected economy alone solves these issues; and likewise provides for us to sustain the most cost-effective means of production and distribution. <br /><br />2. Equal income therefore solves nothing -- if anything, it might encourage many (or at least some) not to contribute to our overall prosperity as much as they might otherwise. The just rewards of true free enterprise therefore are the only real impetus to maximal overall prosperity -- shared equitably according to contribution. If you are hungry and you pick a plum from a ripe tree, needing 5 to stave your hunger, is your problem solved by promising to give you 4 more, even without a way to warrant someone will pick them?<br /><br />3. On the further hand, if there are 5 of us, and there are only 10 plums on the tree, we *do* recognize our right is to two apiece. Neither is that object accomplished by a guaranteed income -- especially if that income equates to possible consumption still of more than 2 plums apiece. <br /><br />4. To solve the problem of just consumption therefore, we have to decide to limit consumption to a just share. This isn't to artificially increase the costs of plums beyond the regular cost of harvesting them. It just means we have to say each of us can only have two.<br /><br />5. The only solution of all this then is mathematically perfected economy™, in conjunction with responsible regulation of rights to consume finite resources.mike montagne (PFMPE)https://www.blogger.com/profile/03733395957400030773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6610803937818981970.post-1838542577892840342012-01-20T11:50:01.147-08:002012-01-20T11:50:01.147-08:00Kim,
I think you are coming up just short of dis...Kim, <br /><br />I think you are coming up just short of distinguishing between two concepts of "profit" here. On the one hand, just reward is regularly referred to as "profit," even as it represents only what we deserve from the pool of wealth we have contributed to. The "profit" I presume you're really advocating against could be said to be "unearned profit" -- that is, taking from the rest of us, beyond what has been contributed to the overall prosperity of the whole. <br /><br />We need at least to distinguish between the two then, unless just reward too has to be dispensed with. While I agree with your object of arresting over-exploitation however, I don't think you can accomplish that object by eliminating just reward; and neither do I think you'd accomplish that object by eliminating unearned taking (exploitation). <br /><br />The reason is, that so long as the object of fishing is to take fish, even the pursuit of just reward compels exhaustive harvesting of fish. Of course, exploitation of a power to harvest compels even more taking (so you are right that eliminating unearned taking will at least reduce the compulsion to over-harvest).<br /><br />But we can't dispense with the proposition of just reward, because it's the very premise for our due, from the sum of prosperity to which we have contributed.<br /><br />Thus we can't solve the problem of over-harvesting until we recognize the limited effectiveness and impropriety of doing so "economically" or monetarily.<br /><br />Largely, over-harvesting of natural resources is a consequence of a further impropriety (which we can resolve). We believe wrongly that we borrow money from purported banking systems which in fact only publish further representations of our promissory obligations. The further unwarranted fact that these representations are subject to interest, inherently multiplies a sum of falsified debt, as we are forced to borrow principal back into circulation as new debt, equal to any former sum of debt which might otherwise be presumed to be resolved; and as we are forced to borrow interest back into circulation -- perpetually increasing a sum of falsified indebtedness by so much as periodic interest on an ever greater and eventually terminal sum of falsified debt.<br /><br />This perpetual escalation of indebtedness is what compels us to harvest and to produce more and ever more, just to tread water against the resultant escalation of debt. Fix that (by mathematically perfected economy™), and you relieve the extent to which we must harvest more and more — but you wouldn't necessarily prevent over-harvesting or over-consumption, either.<br /><br />As monetary justice has to meet its requisites, we can hardly serve our purpose by compromising monetary justice (eliminating just reward for example). Thus to achieve your object, we need to recognize that we have to directly limit harvesting. It's as simple as that.<br /><br />What's really important to understand therefore is how much the present exploitation of our money system compels us to our own destruction. We have two fronts here (also at least a third): 1) monetary justice; 2) just harvesting of resources (which owes an equal right to further generations; and 3) preservation of a rightful environment for all future generations.<br /><br />We can only fix the latter two if we fix the first, because the first will make it impossible otherwise even to afford fixing the latter two.mike montagne (PFMPE)https://www.blogger.com/profile/03733395957400030773noreply@blogger.com