Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Capitalism's Self-Inflicted Apocalypse
After the overthrow of communist governments in Eastern Europe, capitalism was paraded as the indomitable system that brings prosperity and democracy, the system that would prevail unto the end of history.
The present economic crisis, however, has convinced even some prominent free-marketeers that something is gravely amiss. Truth be told, capitalism has yet to come to terms with several historical forces that cause it endless trouble: democracy, prosperity, and capitalism itself, the very entities that capitalist rulers claim to be fostering.
Plutocracy vs. Democracy
Let us consider democracy first. In the United States we hear that
capitalism is wedded to democracy, hence the phrase, "capitalist
democracies." In fact, throughout our history there has been a largely
antagonistic relationship between democracy and capital concentration.
Some eighty years ago Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis commented,
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth
concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." Moneyed
interests have been opponents not proponents of democracy.
The Constitution itself was fashioned by affluent gentlemen who gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 to repeatedly warn of the baneful and dangerous leveling effects of democracy. The document they cobbled together was far from democratic, being shackled with checks, vetoes, and requirements for artificial super majorities, a system designed to blunt the impact of popular demands.
In the early days of the Republic the rich and well-born imposed property qualifications for voting and officeholding. They opposed the direct election of candidates (note, their Electoral College is still with us). And for decades they resisted extending the franchise to less favored groups such as propertyless working men, immigrants, racial minorities, and women.
Today conservative forces continue to reject more equitable electoral features such as proportional representation, instant runoff, and publicly funded campaigns. They continue to create barriers to voting, be it through overly severe registration requirements, voter roll purges, inadequate polling accommodations, and electronic voting machines that consistently "malfunction" to the benefit of the more conservative candidates.
At times ruling interests have suppressed radical publications and public protests, resorting to police raids, arrests, and jailings-applied most recently with full force against demonstrators in St. Paul, Minnesota, during the 2008 Republican National Convention.
The conservative plutocracy also seeks to rollback democracy's social
gains, such as public education, affordable housing, health care,
collective bargaining, a living wage, safe work conditions, a non-toxic
sustainable environment; the right to privacy, the separation of church
and state, freedom from compulsory pregnancy, and the right to marry
any consenting adult of one's own
choosing.
About a century ago, US labor leader Eugene Victor Debs was thrown into
jail during a strike. Sitting in his cell he could not escape the
conclusion that in disputes between two private interests, capital and
labor, the state was not a neutral arbiter. The force of the
state--with its police, militia, courts, and laws-was unequivocally on
the side of the company bosses. From this, Debs concluded that
capitalism was not just an economic system but an entire social order,
one that rigged the rules of democracy to favor the moneybags.
Capitalist rulers continue to pose as the progenitors of democracy even as they subvert it, not only at home but throughout Latin America, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Any nation that is not "investor friendly," that attempts to use its land, labor, capital, natural resources, and markets in a self-developing manner, outside the dominion of transnational corporate hegemony, runs the risk of being demonized and targeted as "a threat to U.S. national security."
Democracy becomes a problem for corporate America not when it fails to work but when it works too well, helping the populace move toward a more equitable and livable social order, narrowing the gap, however modestly, between the superrich and the rest of us. So democracy must be diluted and subverted, smothered with disinformation, media puffery, and mountains of campaign costs; with rigged electoral contests and partially disfranchised publics, bringing faux victories to more or less politically safe major-party candidates.
Capitalism vs. Prosperity
The corporate capitalists no more encourage prosperity than do they
propagate democracy. Most of the world is capitalist, and most of the
world is neither prosperous nor particularly democratic. One need only
think of capitalist Nigeria, capitalist Indonesia, capitalist Thailand,
capitalist Haiti, capitalist Colombia, capitalist Pakistan, capitalist
South Africa, capitalist Latvia, and various other members of the Free
World--more accurately, the Free Market World.
A prosperous, politically literate populace with high expectations about its standard of living and a keen sense of entitlement, pushing for continually better social conditions, is not the plutocracy's notion of an ideal workforce and a properly pliant polity. Corporate investors prefer poor populations. The poorer you are, the harder you will work-for less. The poorer you are, the less equipped you are to defend yourself against the abuses of wealth.
In the corporate world of "free-trade," the number of billionaires is increasing faster than ever while the number of people living in poverty is growing at a faster rate than the world's population. Poverty spreads as wealth accumulates.
Consider the United States. In the last eight years alone, while vast fortunes accrued at record rates, an additional six million Americans sank below the poverty level; median family income declined by over $2,000; consumer debt more than doubled; over seven million Americans lost their health insurance, and more than four million lost their pensions; meanwhile homelessness increased and housing foreclosures reached pandemic levels.
It is only in countries where capitalism has been reined in to some degree by social democracy that the populace has been able to secure a measure of prosperity; northern European nations such as Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark come to mind. But even in these social democracies popular gains are always at risk of being rolled back.
It is ironic to credit capitalism with the genius of economic prosperity when most attempts at material betterment have been vehemently and sometimes violently resisted by the capitalist class. The history of labor struggle provides endless illustration of this.
To the extent that life is bearable under the present U.S. economic order, it is because millions of people have waged bitter class struggles to advance their living standards and their rights as citizens, bringing some measure of humanity to an otherwise heartless politico-economic order.
A Self-devouring Beast
The capitalist state has two roles long recognized by political
thinkers. First, like any state it must provide services that cannot be
reliably developed through private means, such as public safety and
orderly traffic. Second, the capitalist state protects the haves from
the have-nots, securing the process of capital accumulation to benefit
the moneyed interests, while heavily circumscribing the demands of the
working populace, as Debs observed from his jail cell.
There is a third function of the capitalist state seldom mentioned. It consists of preventing the capitalist system from devouring itself. Consider the core contradiction Karl Marx pointed to: the tendency toward overproduction and market crisis. An economy dedicated to speedups and wage cuts, to making workers produce more and more for less and less, is always in danger of a crash. To maximize profits, wages must be kept down. But someone has to buy the goods and services being produced. For that, wages must be kept up. There is a chronic tendency-as we are seeing today-toward overproduction of private sector goods and services and underconsumption of necessities by the working populace.
In addition, there is the frequently overlooked self-destruction created by the moneyed players themselves. If left completely unsupervised, the more active command component of the financial system begins to devour less organized sources of wealth.
Instead of trying to make money by the arduous task of producing and marketing goods and services, the marauders tap directly into the money streams of the economy itself. During the 1990s we witnessed the collapse of an entire economy in Argentina when unchecked free marketeers stripped enterprises, pocketed vast sums, and left the country's productive capacity in shambles. The Argentine state, gorged on a heavy diet of free-market ideology, faltered in its function of saving capitalism from the capitalists.
Some years later, in the United States, came the multi-billion-dollar plunder perpetrated by corporate conspirators at Enron, WorldCom, Harkin, Adelphia, and a dozen other major companies. Inside players like Ken Lay turned successful corporate enterprises into sheer wreckage, wiping out the jobs and life savings of thousands of employees in order to pocket billions.
These thieves were caught and convicted. Does that not show capitalism's self-correcting capacity? Not really. The prosecution of such malfeasance- in any case coming too late-was a product of democracy's accountability and transparency, not capitalism's. Of itself the free market is an amoral system, with no strictures save "caveat emptor."
In the meltdown of 2008-09 the mounting financial surplus created a problem for the moneyed class: there were not enough opportunities to invest. With more money than they knew what to do with, big investors poured immense sums into nonexistent housing markets and other dodgy ventures, a legerdemain of hedge funds, derivatives, high leveraging, credit default swaps, predatory lending, and whatever else.
Among the victims were other capitalists, small investors, and the many workers who lost billions of dollars in savings and pensions. Perhaps the premiere brigand was Bernard Madoff. Described as "a longstanding leader in the financial services industry," Madoff ran a fraudulent fund that raked in $50 billion from wealthy investors, paying them back "with money that wasn't there," as he himself put it. The plutocracy devours its own children.
In the midst of the meltdown, at an October 2008 congressional hearing, former chair of the Federal Reserve and orthodox free-market devotee Alan Greenspan confessed that he had been mistaken to expect moneyed interests--groaning under an immense accumulation of capital that needs to be invested somewhere--to suddenly exercise self-restraint.
The classic laissez-faire theory is even more preposterous than Greenspan made it. In fact, the theory claims that everyone should pursue their own selfish interests without restraint. This unbridled competition supposedly will produce maximum benefits for all because the free market is governed by a miraculously benign "invisible hand" that optimizes collective outputs. ("Greed is good.")
Is the crisis of 2008-09 caused by a chronic tendency toward overproduction and hyper-financial accumulation, as Marx would have it? Or is it the outcome of the personal avarice of people like Bernard Madoff? In other words, is the problem systemic or individual? In fact, the two are not mutually exclusive. Capitalism breeds the venal perpetrators, and rewards the most unscrupulous among them. The crimes and crises are not irrational departures from a rational system, but the converse: they are the rational outcomes of a basically irrational and amoral system.
Worse still, the ensuing multi-billion dollar government bailouts are themselves being turned into an opportunity for pillage. Not only does the state fail to regulate, it becomes itself a source of plunder, pulling vast sums from the federal money machine, leaving the taxpayers to bleed.
Those who scold us for "running to the government for a handout" are themselves running to the government for a handout. Corporate America has always enjoyed grants-in-aid, loan guarantees, and other state and federal subventions. But the 2008-09 "rescue operation" offered a record feed at the public trough. More than $350 billion was dished out by a right-wing lame-duck Secretary of the Treasury to the biggest banks and financial houses without oversight--not to mention the more than $4 trillion that has come from the Federal Reserve. Most of the banks, including JPMorgan Chase and Bank of New York Mellon, stated that they had no intention of letting anyone know where the money was going.
The big bankers used some of the bailout, we do know, to buy up smaller banks and prop up banks overseas. CEOs and other top banking executives are spending bailout funds on fabulous bonuses and lavish corporate spa retreats. Meanwhile, big bailout beneficiaries like Citigroup and Bank of America laid off tens of thousands of employees, inviting the question: why were they given all that money in the first place?
While hundreds of billions were being doled out to the very people who had caused the catastrophe, the housing market continued to wilt, credit remained paralyzed, unemployment worsened, and consumer spending sank to record lows.
In sum, free-market corporate capitalism is by its nature a disaster waiting to happen. Its essence is the transformation of living nature into mountains of commodities and commodities into heaps of dead capital. When left entirely to its own devices, capitalism foists its diseconomies and toxicity upon the general public and upon the natural environment--and eventually begins to devour itself.
The immense inequality in economic power that exists in our capitalist society translates into a formidable inequality of political power, which makes it all the more difficult to impose democratic regulations.
If the paladins of Corporate America want to know what really threatens "our way of life," it is their way of life, their boundless way of pilfering their own system, destroying the very foundation on which they stand, the very community on which they so lavishly feed.
- Posted in


161 Comments so far
Show AllPretty good examination of the 'free-market' capitalist myth.
The Reagan-Bush-Cheney worldview sees the Capitalist as Scavenger, creating havoc among markets and institutions in order to profit from their disintegration. War is a favorite tool of these montsters.
q
"Free markets" exist for those who own one.
Wrong!
It is "the Market" which has made America the most prosperous nation on earth.
"Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control -- and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous." - Our President Barack Obama
Why should I be embarrassed for: 1) agreeing with Obama, 2) having my own opinions, and 3) not becoming a CD "dittohead"?
Finding "who's arguments are most valid" is the curse of humankind. When we find all arguments to be valid we will be free at last.
I need not tell Joe to keep being a painful reminder of our need to work through equality, from what I get through his persistence that is self driven, I may as well request he not sell his soul to the devil.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Capitalism will always fail because it ennobles wrong-doing and is, allegedly, based on the negative concept of competition rather than the positive one of cooperation. It rewards the best liars, cheats and thieves and elevates them according to their ability to exploit and oppress those who are honest, creative and hardworking. Capitalism has a built in self destruct mechanism that can’t be eliminated. It’s part of the system.
Anyone who can voice any defense whatever for any aspect of “free market" capitalism at this point is beyond delusional. Try completely psychopathic. "The proof of the pudding" as they say. We've had this trickle down bullshit shoved down our throats long enough, centuries in fact. Noblesse Oblige is a myth.
It's true that government interference is largely responsible for the current disaster we’re facing. Can you say deregulation? That’s what has allowed the criminals who run corporate/fascist amerika and wall street to do whatever the hell they please with absolutely no thought of any consequences. Even after driving the country into complete bankruptcy and collapse they are being handed something like $2.5 trillion, probably a lot more, to make sure they won’t suffer any undue inconvenience or discomfort from the catastrophe they caused.
After virtually millennia of repeating the same mistakes you might expect rational beings to “get it”. Apparently this isn’t true. The human race seems content to keep repeating the same cycle of exploitation, oppression and bloody revolution over and over ad nauseam.
A species as destructive, arrogant and self-serving as homo sapiens should not have survived even this short time. Our extinction is overdue. We have abused and exploited our world and its resources far too long; nature will take its course and we will be fortunate to survive at all.
There is no way to Peace. Peace is the Way.
ColdWarBaby,
Come on, capitalism is just an incredibly efficient economic system. It's not pure evil. It can be used for good or bad purposes. But to say that "capitalism will always fail" is ridiculously ignorant. History clearly shows that communism has failed, not capitalism. Even Cuba and Vietnam are beginning to transition into more capitalist societies, in the same way as China has done.
But if capitalism is not for you, there's still N. Korea. I just hope you don't mind not having enough electricity, starving to death, and having every aspect of your life controlled by the state. But if that's what you want, well, bon voyage! Enjoy yourself!
Perhaps all of you Marxists need to construct a time machine to get yourselves out of the 19th century.
OK joe.
“If you don't like it here, go live someplace else.”
A typical response from a well indoctrinated money worshiper. Spouting shibboleths and slogans as if they are facts does not make them so. You can put a cat in the oven, that doesn't make it a biscuit.
As I stated in my comment, the “evils” of capitalism are inherent in the system. It rewards the worst characteristics and punishes the best. Beyond that, any time a monetary/economic system is based on debt subject to interest it is guaranteed to fail. At some point, such as the one we have currently reached, such an economy will destroy itself when the debt becomes insoluble.
Whenever any variety of just and equitable society begins to show any signs of defying capitalist fascism it is immediately set upon by the propaganda, military and political machinery of capitalism. If the offending leaders can’t be persuaded, bribed or intimidated into compliance they are simply assassinated and replaced by a more amenable dictator who will simply kill, at the behest of his capitalist masters, anyone, in any numbers, who doesn’t like it. It’s a very common amerikan practice. What can you expect from a country built on genocide and salvery?
“In the bloody coup of September 11, 1973, Henry Kissinger and the CIA helped General Augusto Pinochet overthrow the democratically-elected leftist government of President Salvador Allende. The Fascist puppet-regime of Augusto Pinochet then embarked on a 17-year terror campaign against the people of Chile, which included mass arrests and executions, death squads, torture and disappearances. Many of the victims were fingered as “radicals” by lists provided by the CIA.”
“In February 1963, Juan Bosch took office as the first democratically elected president of the Dominican Republic since 1924. Here at last was John F. Kennedy’s liberal anti-Communist, to counter the charge that the U.S. supported only military dictatorships. Bosch’s government was to be the long sought “showcase of democracy” that would put the lie to Fidel Castro. He was given the grand treatment in Washington shortly before he took office.
Bosch was true to his beliefs. He called for land reform, low-rent housing, modest nationalization of business, and foreign investment provided it was not excessively exploitative of the country and other policies making up the program of any liberal Third World leader serious about social change. He was likewise serious about civil liberties: Communists, or those labeled as such, were not to be persecuted unless they actually violated the law.
A number of American officials and congresspeople expressed their discomfort with Bosch’s plans, as well as his stance of independence from the United States. Land reform and nationalization are always touchy issues in Washington, the stuff that “creeping socialism” is made of. In several quarters of the U.S. press Bosch was red-baited.
In September, the military boots marched. Bosch was out. The United States, which could discourage a military coup in Latin America with a frown, did nothing.
Nineteen months later, a revolt broke out which promised to put the exiled Bosch back into power. The United States sent 23,000 troops to help crush it.”
Study some math and history. Economics is math. History is not subjective; revisionism and omission can’t change reality.
There is no way to Peace. Peace is the Way.
Thank you Dave.
I'm not here that often anymore and don't necessarily comment when I am. Occasionally I respond to a comment that is just too absurd to be ignored. At one time I frequented this site and commented regularly. I was censored and banned so frequently for advocating activism that I reduced my visits and am now here rarely.
If by DU you mean Democratic Underground, I don’t recall having done much reading or posting there. I don’t generally pay much attention to anything using the name of either alleged “party”. I haven’t seen my moniker used by others. I don’t know if I’m the only ColdWarBaby out here but I suppose it’s very possible there are others.
There is a site where I’ve commented a bit called Dissident Voice. Am I seeing DV but reading DU?
Anyway, thanks again for the props. CD looks a little different now. I still see a lot of names I remember. It remains to be seen if they’ve lightened up on the censorship.
There is no way to Peace. Peace is the Way.
Wow!I saw this too and wanted to say it the way you did so well. Nice job Michael.
All progressives have to read Michael Parenti's articles and books. His analysis is a Marxist one and his ability to explain the real world is second to none.
-----------------------------------------
Remember the butchery in Gaza by the IDF.
On the "People For A New Society" website (http://www.hwforums.com/2201) which articulates a highly democratic alternative, the most frequent comments are, "I agree with what you say, but what can we do?"
We need to take a page from successful grassroots organizations who advocate MEETINGS, discussions, questioning, and learning.
Got a living room?
This new form of Communism is chock full of black holes, and if someone thinks it will work they are deep in the looney bin.
Love
Zero
You should try actually reading the article, Zero. Parenti didn't propose any form of "Communism." He is merely pointing out the faults of capitalism. If you are referring to NJDave's link, that also is not about a "new form of communism," but a discussion of democracy.
Solution or eradication of a method of exploitation imposed by an unassented form of currency which can only multiply debt into terminal debt is hardly communism; it is in fact a vital, incontrovertible, and indispensable right of a republic.
If you want to argue holes in mathematically perfected economy™, you best come up with a hole, rather than a "bad name."
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Assuming you do indeed have a form of economics that will not inherit the flaws of it's predessor.
Have you been able to put this new idea into practice at all or is it still in formulation?
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
It's biggest hole may be that it's intent is to improve the problem. But I defer my judgement for now I do not feel I have put enough into it as of yet.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Visit our forums to discuss these issues to their end. Our main site articles (and blogs) address practically every issue you can imagine. In our forum, people ask what they don't understand, or for elaboration on fine points. Mathematically Perfected Economy™ derives from a proof of singular solution (that is, there is no bona fide alternative); and was here long before any of the eleventh hour unqualified solutions.
http://www.perfecteconomy.com (main site)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/index.php (forum)
http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/ (blog)
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
Excellent article.
The following conservative economic policies have failed, any further promotion of these policies should be rejected, and these current policies should be reversed:
- free trade
- tax cuts
- deregulation
- exclusively private enterprise
- current corporate governance laws
Indeed, this historic moment begs us to question the basic premise of capitalism that as John Maynard Keynes once said "is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work for the benefit of all." But Parenti has failed to identify the essence of the irrational and amoral system that is capitalism. It is not private ownership of the means of production, but private ownership of the means of non-production, namely, banks. Or more specifically, the central bank, The Fed. And the essence of the banking elites' power is their protected monopoly as the sole legal arbiters of debt and credit. With this power they have instituted a privatized currency subject to interest - the true engine of the concentration of wealth. Since a currency subject to interest creates inherent, irreversible and ultimately terminal debt, this can be seen as the essence of our monetary system's trend toward self-destruction. Again, the core problem is that we have a privatized monetary system subject to interest.
That a currency subject to interest terminates itself in insoluble debt has been proven mathematically by Mike Montagne, who's solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (MPE) therefore prohibits interest. As I wrote to Mike privately awhile ago, the essence of his solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy™, is at once an economic principle and an ethical one. The principle is that of non-intervention; a principle which is found at the heart of Democratic Theory. His is the economic corollary to the conception of civil liberties which seeks to guarantee for each individual all those freedoms which are consistent with the same guarantee for every other individual. In its economic manifestation it can be stated as follows (Mike's definition of MPE): It is every prospective debtor's right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.
From this perspective it should be abundantly clear that bankers as usurers and faux creditors have no place in a democratic society. They are neither desirable nor necessary. They should be no more welcome than slave owners, political dictators or murderers. They have no right to insinuate themselves into economic relations as the only legal arbiters of debt and credit. But having done so, they have impaired every other freedom inherent to the democratic ideal and continue to prevent a truly free market economy from taking shape.
see www.perfecteconomy.com
Very well said (and I work for a bank).
At a very basic level, most of the problems in the world seem to be caused by people who want to live off of the production of others instead of relying on their own labor.
q
Part 1/2
Jim,
You articulate your thought so well.
It's funny how all this stuff works. Many years ago, against routine objections from every quarter, I was pointing out that we have a plutocracy, an usurpation by imposition of a central banking system; that we have lost a republic. Now, not only do you find the term plutocracy everywhere (you have to have the concept of multiplication of debt to qualify its application), you have adulterers (here) demonstrating their poor grasp of the issues at hand by decrying that the plutocracy has usurped a democracy. We are a republic; and while both are classes of self ruling publics, a republic is a far cry from a democracy — a *very* far cry.
There are only two fundamental issues in a monetary system subject to interest (volume and cost of circulation), and only one issue in a perfected economy (volume of circulation). The present circumstances are readily understood in their entirety, to every detail, from a reasonable inquisition of the nature of a currency such as has been imposed upon us. Particularly and most importantly, a circulation subject to interest inherently and irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to a vital circulation, to the degree that it is necessary to maintain a vital circulation, and that we must do so by re-borrowing principal and interest paid out of the general circulation, as subsequent sums of debt, perpetually increased so much as periodic interest. What we pay against principal does not pay the sum of debt down, to the degree that we must re-borrow it as a new debt, equal to the prior resolved debt. What pay against interest of course then increases the sum of debt to the degree that we must re-borrow this too to replenish the circulation. Thus the sum of debt inherently and irreversibly increases so long as we maintain a vital circulation, by ever greater increments of ever greater sums of periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt.
All the irregularities of the imposed system of exploitation descend from the interest attached to the circulation. For instance it is mathematically impossible to solve inflation and deflation owing to interest, because we must pay more out of circulation than originally represents the value of the associated property.
Every implementation of a system subject to interest has a finite lifespan which we can even forwardly calculate for any rates of interest and circulatory growth, simply by borrowing back obligated periodic interest into the future, until a sum of debt is accumulated which can no longer be serviced from the circulation. Because that inevitable sum of debt exceeds our capacity to service debt; because this destroys any credit-worthiness to borrow further; and because we must yet continue to re-borrow what principal and interest we remain obligated to pay out of circulation against the existing sum of debt *if we are to maintain a vital circulation*, this inevitable, terminal juncture explains the disappearance of money, inability to justify borrowing further ("credit crisis"), and ultimate failure of industry.
Every President since and including Gerald Ford has been presented proofs of inevitable failure and singular solution to all the resultant issues. In the early 1980s, the Reagan Administration asked if I could project the ultimate failure. In turn I provided them with computer models (complete with source code which you can still download from our pages, run the same numbers, and come up with the same projection) which not only forecast Reagan's tripling of federal debt, but which, with exceeding accuracy forecast the accumulation of debt to now, [conservatively] projecting systemic failure under a terminal sum of debt at approximately 2010 AD.
In the work I published in 1979, an immediate and costless solution to all the issues was worked out — an unrefuted proposition which since 1975 we've called "mathematically perfected economy™." In our page, "If I Were President..." I show a) how to arrest the present monetary failure in a day by suspending all payments against debts originating in the central banking system; and b) then how to establish mathematically perfected economy™ in little longer.
To summarize, mathematically perfected economy™ solves 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation, engendering inevitable systemic failure at a finite system lifespan defined by an inevitable, terminal sum of insoluble debt... by eradicating interest and paying debt at an obligatory schedule no less than the rate of depreciation or consumption of the related property.
What does this mean? It's best understood by an example.
In the case of a $100,000 home with a 100-year lifespan, the cost of the home ($100,000) is paid off at the overall rate of $1,000 per year, or $83.33 per month. Little wonder how many tens of thousands of homes would be going into foreclosure then under mathematically perfected economy™, or how far more liquid we would be immediately, with no bailout, virtually no cost whatever.
As if we can only think to cut off our noses to spite our face, many people turn away immediately, declaring/questioning, "Who would loan us money if the money is not subject to interest?"
You're right. No one would. But no one would have to, either.
Sioux Rose
MIKE: It sounds like l00% altruism, too. Where are administrative fees in this scenario, the mechanisms to maintain the records of say the monthly mortgage payment? How does that fit into this calculus?
Rather than a central bank, I envision a software application, validating credit-worthiness by the obvious mathematic bounds, plus whatever further restrictions a public may want to impose upon itself. I've written about this extensively in answering to questions in our forum, so you'll see answers to many further questions there (please join and ask, as your questions and their answers will be helpful to others).
In any case, "let's say" (hmmm) that we want to do away with so called Social Security not only because it's unsustainable, but because its a further vehicle for stealing from us (the funds have been robbed to cover other federal deficits). Let's also say that the public wants therefore to enforce saving a whopping 50% of all earnings for the first 25 years of working lifespan, that the savings *under a monetary system which maintains the value of money* can sustain the same persons over an average of another 25 years. So this much is deducted from their earnings automatically and saved in a special account, leaving what can be spent elsewise. So we agree on a formula for how much food costs to allow for and so forth, and further deduct the costs of servicing current debt commitments, to determine automatically what debt they can service further.
So for instance they just took a drive to Florida and decided to buy a second home; and this $200,000 home is going to cost them $175/month for 90 years. The application verifies their creditworthiness in seconds, credits the builder with $200,000 by issuing the debtor's promise to pay, which then, like now, is circulated as currency because it represents the like $200,000 value of the home.
So this takes seconds, costs virtually nothing, doesn't even require paper/metal currency, and the payments are automated forever. To provide for the use of cash, we could provide automated tellers, charging whatever it costs to maintain them, and assigning this cost of course to the issuance of cash. Whatever book-keeping charges cost is distributed across the system likewise -- practically costing us nothing whatever for all this combined.
Rates of depreciation will probably not be linear. But the prescription for solution of inflation, deflation, and multiplication of debt by interest remains the same. Automated payments simply observe the formula for depreciation.
In any case, overall then we have no inflation or deflation, because the only money which comes into circulation represents the existing/remaining value of the related asset across the entire lifespan of the money, and the whole system altogether. There is no multiplication of debt by interest, because we effectively issue our own (certified) promises to pay, without interest. The real creditor is not at risk, because the remaining value of the property can at all times be redeemed in circulation; likewise all remaining debt is at all times collectable in the remaining value of the related property. This of course then is the only system which preserves the value of money across its lifespan, because it is the only prescription which *perpetually* preserves a 1:1 ratio between circulation, remaining value of related property, debt, and redeemability of the currency.
One further thing we do in mathematically perfected economy™ is allow equity to be immediately converted into circulation. This further solves the inability of a deficient circulation to sustain the upper limit of trade. While this potential may seem only theoretically valuable, in fact it alleviates even the least unnatural restriction of liquidity in lesser trades as well. But as a consequence of this virtue, it is also possible in mathematically perfected economy™ to trade all wealth at once... something which is impossible in generic systems.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
NO REGULATION!
PS Sioux Rose,
I should point out that there is no need for regulation at all, because the incumbent schedule of payment and publicly assented rules for certifying credit-worthiness are the sole vehicles of regulation. There is no human intervention. There is no productive apparatus owned by the state. It's not socialism; it's merely the one and one only form of currency which sustains truly free enterprise.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Sioux Rose
MIKE: It's poetic for its sheer genius and ultimate egalitarian/utilitarian value. Of course leaving out ALL the henchmen who are to banking what vultures are to nature will prove the problem. I thank you for taking so much of your precious time to clearly articulate the basics of this concept and its potential execution.
Do you have a place for insurance in this model? Nature has been restless lately, what with tornado outbreaks, floods, hurricanes and tropical storms, she takes a cut of property values from time to time, too. (I am not trying to be glib, I think this is a factor worthy of consideration, particularly as per the linear scale of property depreciation that you've include in this model.)
For everyone who contributed today in this forum, it's been refreshing. No name calling, a lot of shared respect, and quite a bit of intelligent thinking all amicably shared. Bravo!
Sioux Rose wrote: "Of course leaving out ALL the henchmen who are to banking what vultures are to nature will prove the problem."
Yes, it's just that simple actually... and you're most welcome.
Sioux Rose wrote: "Do you have a place for insurance in this model? Nature has been restless lately, what with tornado outbreaks, floods, hurricanes and tropical storms, she takes a cut of property values from time to time, too."
Great and just question. Yes, absolutely. Only *real* insurance. That is, if you build your home in a flood or hurricane zone, you share the costs with others of like risks. No investment and all the usual contemporary obfuscation of wealth and attempted unearned profit to provide "insurance" by exploitation. Simply shared costs, as in a cooperative is the right way to do it. But this isn't a feature or obligation of mathematically perfected economy™. It's just how I would do insurance, and how I believe an intelligent public would want to do insurance.
After all, *production* and innovation are the only things which increase the pool of wealth. The idea for us to abandon is unearned profit, which of course depends on the leverage of exploitation.
So I expect 2 consequences of such an implementation of insurance in conjunction with mathematically perfected economy™. First of all, we can afford to build stout, well engineered homes which can withstand tornadoes, hurricanes... and so forth, because our production only costs us an equal measure of production. The second thing is that the costs of insurance are minimized, because the replacement costs are minimal as well.
How then would this work out?
Let's take our $100,000 home with a hundred year lifespan, and revise it to fit a hurricane zone scenario. Let's say it costs another $50,000 to build that home to withstand anything which mother nature might throw at it. Still lasts 100 years.
So this practically hurricane proof house costs us $1,500 per year instead of $1,000, or $125 per month instead of $83.33.
Now let's say that 1 out of every ten homes in the whole hurricane belt of the country is destroyed during its like 100-year lifespan; and so the average age of the house which is blown down is 50 years. So (figuring depreciation linearly -- which makes it high), the average value of the home at blow-down is $75,000. So we divide this by 10 to get the cost of shared insurance among all such homes, leaving $7,500 of additional cost to finance in our hurricane-proof hurricane belt home.
This makes the cost of the insurance $75 per year or $6.25 per month.
So this ever stronger home runs us $1,575 per year, or $131.25 per month.
Of course, doing the same for new commercial construction, you can imagine how much more liquid and secure we'd be both under mathematically perfected economy™.
Thanks to everyone as well for the civil tones and intelligence of this forum. This is a good group.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
A simple math question:
If one pays off a $100,000 home at $1,000/year, would'nt it take the homeowner at least 100 thousand years to pay it off? If your system could guarantee me a hundred thousand year lifespan, I am a convert!
Exactly, Tom. See said expression of the lifespan.
We only solve inflation and deflation (defined as increases/decreases in circulation per represented property) by maintaining a schedule of payment equivalent to the rate of consumption of all related wealth. So, in each case, financed property is paid off over the course of its lifespan. No one gets anything for nothing: We are paying for the production of others with equal measures of our own production, as we consume of the production we take possession of.
If the lifespan of the home is 50 years then, it costs us $2,000 per year, or $167 per month. The natural rate of depreciation over the lifespan of the related property *must* equate to the rate of payment in order to solve inflation and deflation.
Obviously then, this would affect construction. What costs more? A $90,000 home with a 50-year lifespan; a $100,000 home with a 100-year lifespan, or a $110, home with a 200-year lifespan. Well the latter of course costs more overall, but far less per year of service. The overall rate of payments for each are $1,800/yr (50-yr), $1,000/yr (100-yr), and $550/yr (200-yr lifespan).
See our forums for initial (newbie) questions. Our main site articles lay it all out. The article, "If I Were President..." outlines how to arrest monetary failure in a day, and establish mathematically perfected economy™ in little longer.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
That's 100 years, Tom (not your 100,000, which would be $1 per year). Otherwise... the rest follows as I replied.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
I find it interesting that the word interest is being bound to monetary gain in this scenario, circumscribing it's value to such a narrow limit as to being appealing to none who care about the greater good.
It would be in all of our interst to have everyone in our world within possesion of at least the necessary basics of life, liberty and justice as is right by nature and her greater laws.
This fact alone would end all wars, of what value is that?
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Part 2/2
How so?
As Jim says, mathematically perfected economy™ is every prospective debtor's right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.
That is, the only reason you think you are "borrowing" "money" from "a creditor" is you have allowed a pretend creditor to merely publish your promise to pay (note) to the real creditor (who accepts your promise in return for their property). Pretending earned wealth is at risk, and with this purportedly justifying interest while the pretend creditor actually deprives the real creditor of interest (disproving the proposition on that count as well), you're simply paying for your own promise to pay.
Mathematically Perfected Economy™ thus certifies your credit-worthiness and issues a standard currency just as we are familiar with then. It does this through a common foundry, with no need for regulation whatever (mathematically perfected economy™ is itself the only regulation), and of course, without interest and subject to an obligatory schedule of payment, which together comprise the 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 multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation, engendering inevitable systemic failure at a finite system lifespan defined by an inevitable, terminal sum of insoluble debt.
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
Mike,
Thank you for that concise summary of your theory. I have bookmarked your web page and intend to explore it at greater length.
Are you familiar with LETSystems? A local money system in which money is created by the user's promises to pay back into the system, and in which interest, and other means of profiting from the money itself are forbidden. http://www.gmlets.u-net.com/
In light of our government's unwillingness to deal with this issue, do you think that extensive implementation of LETSystems would be a practical way for the average citizen to deal with this problem at a grassroots level? If not, do you have any other suggestions?
Katherine
National Initiative for Democracy: Creating a Government BY THE PEOPLE
ni4d.us
Yes, Katherine.
Way back in the 70s, and into the 80s, people who heard of mathematically perfected economy™ wanted to erect local implementations. I have been approached by many of these over the years for my blessing; and many others have risen in the wake of the first, not knowing anything (evidently) about my work. I was also asked by the arrested minters of coin associated with Mr. Ron Paul for their blessing. You'll even find links to my early (pre official web) or more recent (official internet) pages on some of their sites.
I have not given my blessing. Why?
As you see, it is not possible or practical to save a whole "economy" subject to interest by even however many small subsystems or contending/competing systems. Why not?
Because wherever those systems must coexist with any implementation of interest whatever, then so long as the system is dependent on the interest-bearing circulation, debt inherently and irreversibly multiplies in proportion to the whole system even, as the need to service the interest-bearing debt consumes ever more of the circulation.
It is not possible then to save ourselves by hoping we can build independent, isolated islands of commerce, insulated from the terminal effects of interest, but yet coexisting with interest implementations.
I am aware nonetheless that even after receiving my rejections so long ago, that many of these purported alternate economies claim success. What they mean by "success" however is that people *do* in fact exchange their production by them. Well, that was an obvious and easy goal from the beginning, but not the goal which counts. The goal which counted, which is sustainable, and which sustains the justice we desire in every case is mathematically perfected economy™. The present failure proves that. What little these alternative systems emulated my principles is futile if the whole system does not deploy them, completely excluding interest/usury from the equation.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Sioux Rose
JIM & MIKE: I'd suggest avoiding small planes for a while. Your stuff is HOT.
Yes, and hundreds of thousands of copies of my website have been downloaded for free over the years... which is a bit of an insurance plan, as well as ensurance that mathematically perfected economy™ is inevitable.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
I think it must be recognized that it was quite unusual, daring and progressive for the creators of the U.S. Constitution to provide the extent of democracy that they did, namely, the House of Representatives elected more or less on a proportional basis. As a national system it was unheard of at the time, and neither was such a thing as the Bill of Rights and at least the semblance of a judicial system at least capable of delivering the possibility of justice on an individual basis. Even in Europe today this is still not entirely the case.
Naturally, history has clearly show that that Americans are more interested in smashing this foot-in-the-door than opening the door even a little bit wider. This is especially the case when in comes to the job of so-called national security and the protection of property though the imposition of various concocted moralities provides a strong counterpoint, second fiddle-wise.
That said, Parenti's vision of the monster devouring itself is apt. Where, for instance, are the plans to manufacture simpler less expensive cars that can be sold without the need for complex plans to bolster the risky credit necessary to purchase them? Where are the plans to expand housing and reduce rents, or make changes in the forclosure and bankruptcy laws which would prevent banks from dictating mortgage re-negotiations? What about plans to grow wages or to institute wider measures of evidence-based medicine into our health care systems? What is going to be done about collapsing public transport systems in our cities? The problem of corruption and waste in the Pentagon- always a favorite issue during the campaigns- when is Congress actually going to do something about it besides issuing another report? To get even more specific- what about a recent CBO report that "infrastructure spending" as now envisioned by leaders in Congress and Obama himself are unlikely to "stimulate the economy" in a way that has a chance of pulling us out of recession any time in the near future.
And how bad is this recession, apart from lost opportunity for the mega-rich to expand their fortunes, tax credits and off-shore acounts? People are losing their jobs but for the rest of us-nothing really has changed- same old struggle, same hassles, same lack of understanding and help from "above".
Sioux Rose
JOHN: Good points. How many Katrina-style-altered New Orleans type cities (tent cities filled with the newly-rendered homeless) will this gun-bearing nation tolerate? THAT is yet to be seen and may answer some of your otherwise rhetorical questions.
Nothing is changing with Mr. Obama.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lloyd-chapman/obama-stimulus-plan-break_b_159134.html
President-elect Obama's refusal to take decisive action to stop the diversion of up to $100 billion a year in federal small business contracts seems to be a direct contradiction to everything he has said about taking "dramatic action" to "put people back to work."
On February 22, 2008, Barack Obama released the following statement:
"It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants."
The statement was made in response to more than 12 federal investigations, which found billions of dollars in federal small business contracts had been diverted to Fortune 500 corporations, their subsidiaries and thousands of other large businesses in the United States and Europe.
"New boss just like the old boss"
every spirit that wishes to incarnate here takes up residence inside their mother's womb, a necessary haven in which to undertake the construction of their bodies per DNA code...they are completely reliant upon the very molecules of this very planet, delivered through their mother's body, as the building blocks with which to work on their own...seen from this perspective, polluting and toxifying the molecules that this planet contains forces each spirit to unavoidably incorporate said altered molecules into their developing bodies, which can cause all kinds of horrific deviations, some known, others yet to be...this is why I am against industrialization, whether termed 'green' or no...not only are we destroying the only planet we have to live upon, but we are, in a very real, physical sense, preventing future souls from the opportunity to enjoy a healthily-constructed brain and body with which to begin the ever-more difficult experience of living here...in fact, if one understands that the number of molecules that make up our very real mother planet (in every sense of the word) is finite, it quickly becomes clear that every molecule we alter to the point that it is no longer part of the living cycle is one less that is even available for incarnation...we are actually reducing the number of living things the planet can create and support...when does this activity become immoral? when do comfort, commerce and entertainment cease to be legitimate reasons for the destruction of the mother of all? what right do those spirits already incarnated here have to deny others the same?
Huh?!
While your ecological perspective is cogent, I must disagree that there are disembodied "spirits" awaiting incarnation. Cartesian dualism should have died hundreds of years ago.
I appreciate your response...do you feel there is a moral component to our ecologic behavior, then, or not?
I think that, yes, there is a moral imperitive to stop fouling our nest. Unfortunately, I am quite pessemistic about where we presently stand in that regard. Your thoughts?
I am so concerned about our future, and so certain that our current industrial path leads to nothing but our utter destruction, that I am willing to risk the embarrassment of desperation...
my first play would be to elevate human consciousness on a global level via the naturally-occurring mind-altering substances this planet offers, including cannabis, the opiates, and select mushrooms...in fact, I would suggest that the human brain is unable to achieve\maintain these necessary altered states of consciousness without such assistance, and that, further, we are meant to explore them, as they are to our benefit...many of us do this already, but with a necessarily limited focus, due to the obvious consequences of such activities under our current system...
secondly, we need to come to grips, somehow, with the fact that our current system of government is not representational, and cannot be made so...where does this take us? An underground society? As Leea and Poet, in particular, were discussing in another thread, this sounds radical, but one must confront the fact that the status-quo opposition controls virtually all of our fundamental systems, and maintain that control via weaponry and the financial\legal\judicial\penal systems..my hope may quite possibly and arguably be viewed as naive, or prayer-like, but it would be that the 'community' would begin to explore, in particular, different avenues of living, focused on the basics: shared shelter, availability of healthy water and food, and a much more natural approach to health...I believe it is fundamental that the individual re-acknowledge their own role in their own survival...even the concept of small farms includes the notion that some are working to feed others...I would suggest each entity should accept their need for nourishment as their own to satisfy, and work toward re-creating an environment in which that is not only possible, but the accepted way...to my mind, this fundamentally requires the de-creation, if you will, of what we have created, and the re-creation of the natural environments we have destroyed...while some of you may argue we have already passed the point where this is even possible, I am absolutely ready to adopt virtually any philosophical position that might allow me to go to bed at night, not feeling as I do now, which is that the planet is x worse off than it was 24 hours ago, but, rather, that humanity, as a whole, has come together in the last 24 hours to begin moving in the opposite direction, by stopping the destruction and beginning the clean-up and regeneration...if a religious or moral perspective is not sufficient to spur such a change, and my suggestion of mass use of mind-enhancing substances is rejected, then I ask all readers here: what rationale(s) might you propose that might convince humanity, as a whole, to reverse the industrial tide?
I am aware of how this sounds, but, again, in my opinion, conventional thinking is not working, and neither is the concept of 'jobs', and we are hurtling toward our doom, new president or no...
Unconventional thinking, while it risks backlash from the more conventional among us, requires no apologies. Not in my book anyway. I have to run out the door now, but I will briefly suggest that alterred states of consciousness are possible through disciplines such as meditation or yoga. I don't oppose substance use (I'm a cannabis fan myself), but it's not the only path. Gotta go (hurtle toward our doom...)
dubet, your above expression is very compelling to me for a variety of reasons. There is a book called "The mind in the cave" that presents the theory that the basis for our conscious development was through the use of mind altering drugs used in sacred ceremonies by our spiritual leaders or shamans to see a view otherwise beyond our grasp.
This tradition of using drugs to "percieve" may at this point be a genetically encoded trait carried within our humanity that is an intrinsic part of our nature, and perhaps often an underused trait in our time. No longer needing "mind altering substances" we instead have our imaginations to guide us. I think science is often guided by imagination, but who knows, scientists did develope many of our current "legal" mind altering drugs.
Then again I still drink coffee and that is a mind altering drug even if to a lesser degree than many.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Sioux Rose
DUBET: Your argument is compelling for the fact that so much depleted uranium, not to mention the genetically altered materials are now part of said "molecular" chain. If you are familiar with the story of Christ multiplying the fish and the loaves to feed hundreds seated on a hillside, it mirrors the pheneomena produced by a number of live and deceased gurus of India. My point is that matter and energy can be interchanged.
The ancients were not aware of the 3 outer planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. Around the time of the discovery of each one, a new energy system manifested through as an invention coming through an awakened inventive human mind. I mention this as I believe another planet will be "discovered," and it's my hope that a parallel new energy system will simultaneously ensue. This one, I pray, will have the capacity (like certain vital foods that pick up "free radicals in our blood streams") to separate the tainted "wheat" from the "chaff," so that perhaps all the assembled toxic material can be placed into containers and never again let loose to compromise nature, ecosystems and the progeny of the future.
Did you know Sioux that oxygen is actually a poison to our body that we evolved to buffer with the absorption of vitamin C. The greater intelligence in life to overcome all obstacles to it's expression may be the very foundation of change.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
It might be that because the spirit never does incorporate the material deviations that we have an eternal promise to overcome them in time.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea