I mean, "some people have opined that the country’s founders could not have anticipated the power of the Internet," yet these were the same merchants, slave holders and lawyers (not one farmer, layman or mechanic at any of these Constitutional communes), who were descendants of officials and CEO's of the Dutch & British East India company corporations, and expelled Sephardim, as well as desecrators of England's monasteries during Cromwell's rule (see Freemason Washington's ancestors for example). They saw the dangers of concentrated powers and the need for privacy and free speech for their own brethren when Shay and the regulators led an uprising against Boston merchants and shut down the courts. Washington had to come out of retirement and fund two-chinned, fat, obese slob Benjamin Lincoln to quell the revolt.
John Adams was a farmer who specialized in composting manure. His family's former slaves were recognized as free and they were solid friends and lived in his home while he spent his time in Europe trying to raise money for the war effort. Thomas Jefferson's common law wife was his deceased wife's half sister and technically a slave. Jefferson always meant to free his slaves on paper too, but didn't get around to it before he died. So the situation was more complex than you describe. Benjamin Franklin was a printer, pretty close to being a mechanic, as the printing press was probably the most complex machine in use at that time. He was also a tinkerer.
I don't hold people responsible for their ancestors actions. Do you? If so, why?
Shays's Rebellion was the consequence of taxation and stupid monetary policy which has not been resolved to this day -- but could be. And I describe how in this article.
The US Patent Office has prohibited patent application filers from freely using the USPS. The US Patent Office was corrupted, for the benefit of Microsoft and IBM, by David Kappos, an IBMer who was installed at the US Patent Office, and was rewarded with a partnership in a prestigious NYC law firm and a teaching gig at Columbia and various other puffery-type things.
I appreciate your idea that getting to the source of the problem is where to start. In the mental health field, that's how people get well and stay well.
Well, there are some places I differ. All that the Constitution gave the public, in exchange for taking away the right of states to issue their own currencies, is post offices, postal roads and patent protection. Everything else in the Bill of Rights was a watered down, insipid project (as its author called it) to satisfy those States that refused to ratify without it. Here's my article on it: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-constitution-coup.
And Social Security is funded by the people. It's a pension fund in which the agreement keeps changing, of what date the contributor can access payments, what those payments will be. Post offices have been forced to keep 1.5 yrs, I think it is, of future payroll in reserve, something no other business is required to do. They fund themselves on junk mail, which is why we can't get rid of it. The corporations that run the US would like to end them altogether.
But the most important thing, which the Constitution stole, was the right to own our labor through issuing the money backed by the mortgages.
What do you mean by "right to own our labor through issuing the money backed by the mortgages"? Seems like we had the right to the fruits of our labor until the tax on income (which meant income on capital) was applied to income on labor.
In my book, How to Dismantle an Empire, I trace the origins of money to what David Graeber terms the coinage-taxation-slavery triangle. So taxation goes back to the start of coinage, which was never about trade. It was to force everyone to give material support to the army, who were paid in the coin of the realm, so they could conquer and enslave more territories. I'm not saying that centralized taxes are good, just that they've been stealing our labor for 3000 years.
Now, instead of fief lords issuing the coins, private bankers issue the credit. So along with the 30% you might pay on various forms of taxes, you pay 30% to the bankers for a mortgage they made up from thin air. This is how 94% of dollars are created.
If we, at a community level, had the exclusive right to issue the mortgages and the credit to repay them, we could make them tax-free when spent for local goods and services. That means that neither the 30% to private bankers or 30% to corrupt gov'ts would be extracted, and the credit would continue to circulate enabling people to make a living by serving the community.
I'm reading Graeber and Wengrow's The Dawn of Everything now. I look forward to learning more about Graeber's monetary theory. I suppose the Constitution ended individual states' rights to issue currency, but the Federal gov could issue Greenbacks, which functioned as a tax-free/debt free (and inflation free if not used for war) currency to stimulate the economy and build infrastructure.
These days so many people, like yourself, are versed in monetary theory and I agree this is the key to ending empire. There's hope.
Do you know anything about Dime's Square, World Peace and Peter Thiel? Apparently Thiel has been funding much of Sam Hyde's recent depravities through front companies, and since I live a few houses from their base of op, and have met them many times (always found them weird), I asked around and met a few past members of the crew, one who absolutely detested Hyde, and he told me they use Thiel's spyware to gather info on members they wish to hire.
He basically told me everything, all the people involved (several who worked for UNIT 8200), and said when he worked for Hyde and the crew they were able to know things about him that he posted online anonymously 10 years ago.
Hyde's recent run in with Roger Stone is another reason for anyone in New England desperate enough to think about working for Hyde, to stay well away.
It's crazy that Thiel actually has a relationship, even if monetary, with these types of people.
Thanks for that response, V.N. In my article comparing Bitcoin to my system, the caret (https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/bitcoin-vs-the-caret), I talk about the right of the Federal gov't to issue currency: "Bitcoiners seem to think that inflation is caused by the government printing money, but the Constitution only gives Congress the rights to borrow money, coin money, and ‘endow banks with the right to issue circulating notes.’ The federal government must pay foreign debts in precious metals. States and municipalities are forbidden to coin money or issue credit, or make anything legal tender other than gold and silver."
Hamilton made sure to transfer the debts for the revolutionary war to be repaid by the people in gold to foreign bankers, mainly Rothschild. And with the Federal Reserve Act, 'coining' money was interpreted to be pocket change, which is why dollar bills say Federal Reserve Note and not Treasury Bill. The Supreme Court upheld this absurd interpretation.
My book is most influenced by Graeber's Debt, but I don't know if I'd say he has a monetary theory. He was a fan of UBI and free education/ healthcare and other policies I'd say are more socialist than anarchist. From a friend's work, I recently looked at his death: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/david-graeber-fowl-play.
And then I have a few that look at The Dawn of Everything, which I loved:
I'm not worried about starlink, which actually used to be direct TV satellite Internet. It's limited in speed, capacity, and latency.
I'm for municipal local control of utilities such as the Internet.
During the California wildfires which happened in PGE and other privately owned utilities, the city/state/county utilities such as LA water and power and SMUD had almost no wildfires. They kept up to date with maintenance because they are not running for profits which are parasitic to executives and wall Street. Their profits go back to the municipality and upkeep.
There is one thing that confuses me about big tech social media.... They have section 230 protection which means they are not liable for what people write. However, this bullshit excuse that they can censor because they're private is ridiculous. In that case, they should be liable for everything and not have section 230 protection.
Hey, the phone company cannot censor you because they don't like you or what you're saying!
Hopefully with the push back on many fronts, judges will stop being idiotic in defending the right of censorship despite section 230 protection.
Yes, the confusion about whether or not social media platforms are publishers or common carriers (like phone companies) is intentional, perhaps. Social media platforms may have section 230 protection, but they do recommend and do rank up and rank down posts, so they curate, which makes them sort of like publishers. The best thing about the Internet is peer to peer interaction. We're better off without the publisher middle man interfering with our communication.
True! No need for a huge corporation to run a social or media website when it can be run easily for cheap on any hosting platform. I'm also flabbergasted at the censorship on Reddit.
It used to be the place to socialize outside of social media!
This article, published in December 13th, 2024 states: "Clearly, there needs to be a separation of business and state akin to the separation of church and state to stop the crony capitalism that is morphing into fascism." Serendipitously, one proposed just that on November 13, 2024 which everyone can find here ~ https://forum.policiesforpeople.com/t/policy-to-establish-the-separation-of-the-corporatocracy-and-the-state-addressing-corporate-personhood/17028
I don't know how I missed that proposal! Thanks for flagging.
I mean, "some people have opined that the country’s founders could not have anticipated the power of the Internet," yet these were the same merchants, slave holders and lawyers (not one farmer, layman or mechanic at any of these Constitutional communes), who were descendants of officials and CEO's of the Dutch & British East India company corporations, and expelled Sephardim, as well as desecrators of England's monasteries during Cromwell's rule (see Freemason Washington's ancestors for example). They saw the dangers of concentrated powers and the need for privacy and free speech for their own brethren when Shay and the regulators led an uprising against Boston merchants and shut down the courts. Washington had to come out of retirement and fund two-chinned, fat, obese slob Benjamin Lincoln to quell the revolt.
John Adams was a farmer who specialized in composting manure. His family's former slaves were recognized as free and they were solid friends and lived in his home while he spent his time in Europe trying to raise money for the war effort. Thomas Jefferson's common law wife was his deceased wife's half sister and technically a slave. Jefferson always meant to free his slaves on paper too, but didn't get around to it before he died. So the situation was more complex than you describe. Benjamin Franklin was a printer, pretty close to being a mechanic, as the printing press was probably the most complex machine in use at that time. He was also a tinkerer.
I don't hold people responsible for their ancestors actions. Do you? If so, why?
Shays's Rebellion was the consequence of taxation and stupid monetary policy which has not been resolved to this day -- but could be. And I describe how in this article.
Don’t go inside. Then there is no need to escape.
The US Patent Office has prohibited patent application filers from freely using the USPS. The US Patent Office was corrupted, for the benefit of Microsoft and IBM, by David Kappos, an IBMer who was installed at the US Patent Office, and was rewarded with a partnership in a prestigious NYC law firm and a teaching gig at Columbia and various other puffery-type things.
Details can be found in this bar complaint I filed against Kappos. https://techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Bar-complaint-David-Kappos.pdf
Anybody interested in responding can do so at ptoattackdog@gmail.com.
I appreciate your idea that getting to the source of the problem is where to start. In the mental health field, that's how people get well and stay well.
Well, there are some places I differ. All that the Constitution gave the public, in exchange for taking away the right of states to issue their own currencies, is post offices, postal roads and patent protection. Everything else in the Bill of Rights was a watered down, insipid project (as its author called it) to satisfy those States that refused to ratify without it. Here's my article on it: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-constitution-coup.
And Social Security is funded by the people. It's a pension fund in which the agreement keeps changing, of what date the contributor can access payments, what those payments will be. Post offices have been forced to keep 1.5 yrs, I think it is, of future payroll in reserve, something no other business is required to do. They fund themselves on junk mail, which is why we can't get rid of it. The corporations that run the US would like to end them altogether.
But the most important thing, which the Constitution stole, was the right to own our labor through issuing the money backed by the mortgages.
What do you mean by "right to own our labor through issuing the money backed by the mortgages"? Seems like we had the right to the fruits of our labor until the tax on income (which meant income on capital) was applied to income on labor.
In my book, How to Dismantle an Empire, I trace the origins of money to what David Graeber terms the coinage-taxation-slavery triangle. So taxation goes back to the start of coinage, which was never about trade. It was to force everyone to give material support to the army, who were paid in the coin of the realm, so they could conquer and enslave more territories. I'm not saying that centralized taxes are good, just that they've been stealing our labor for 3000 years.
Now, instead of fief lords issuing the coins, private bankers issue the credit. So along with the 30% you might pay on various forms of taxes, you pay 30% to the bankers for a mortgage they made up from thin air. This is how 94% of dollars are created.
If we, at a community level, had the exclusive right to issue the mortgages and the credit to repay them, we could make them tax-free when spent for local goods and services. That means that neither the 30% to private bankers or 30% to corrupt gov'ts would be extracted, and the credit would continue to circulate enabling people to make a living by serving the community.
I'm reading Graeber and Wengrow's The Dawn of Everything now. I look forward to learning more about Graeber's monetary theory. I suppose the Constitution ended individual states' rights to issue currency, but the Federal gov could issue Greenbacks, which functioned as a tax-free/debt free (and inflation free if not used for war) currency to stimulate the economy and build infrastructure.
These days so many people, like yourself, are versed in monetary theory and I agree this is the key to ending empire. There's hope.
Do you know anything about Dime's Square, World Peace and Peter Thiel? Apparently Thiel has been funding much of Sam Hyde's recent depravities through front companies, and since I live a few houses from their base of op, and have met them many times (always found them weird), I asked around and met a few past members of the crew, one who absolutely detested Hyde, and he told me they use Thiel's spyware to gather info on members they wish to hire.
He basically told me everything, all the people involved (several who worked for UNIT 8200), and said when he worked for Hyde and the crew they were able to know things about him that he posted online anonymously 10 years ago.
Hyde's recent run in with Roger Stone is another reason for anyone in New England desperate enough to think about working for Hyde, to stay well away.
It's crazy that Thiel actually has a relationship, even if monetary, with these types of people.
Thanks for that response, V.N. In my article comparing Bitcoin to my system, the caret (https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/bitcoin-vs-the-caret), I talk about the right of the Federal gov't to issue currency: "Bitcoiners seem to think that inflation is caused by the government printing money, but the Constitution only gives Congress the rights to borrow money, coin money, and ‘endow banks with the right to issue circulating notes.’ The federal government must pay foreign debts in precious metals. States and municipalities are forbidden to coin money or issue credit, or make anything legal tender other than gold and silver."
Hamilton made sure to transfer the debts for the revolutionary war to be repaid by the people in gold to foreign bankers, mainly Rothschild. And with the Federal Reserve Act, 'coining' money was interpreted to be pocket change, which is why dollar bills say Federal Reserve Note and not Treasury Bill. The Supreme Court upheld this absurd interpretation.
My book is most influenced by Graeber's Debt, but I don't know if I'd say he has a monetary theory. He was a fan of UBI and free education/ healthcare and other policies I'd say are more socialist than anarchist. From a friend's work, I recently looked at his death: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/david-graeber-fowl-play.
And then I have a few that look at The Dawn of Everything, which I loved:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/muskrat-love-and-anarchy
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/sex-and-power-battle-of-the-daves
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/when-mothers-ran-the-world.
Appreciate your kind reply!
I'm not worried about starlink, which actually used to be direct TV satellite Internet. It's limited in speed, capacity, and latency.
I'm for municipal local control of utilities such as the Internet.
During the California wildfires which happened in PGE and other privately owned utilities, the city/state/county utilities such as LA water and power and SMUD had almost no wildfires. They kept up to date with maintenance because they are not running for profits which are parasitic to executives and wall Street. Their profits go back to the municipality and upkeep.
There is one thing that confuses me about big tech social media.... They have section 230 protection which means they are not liable for what people write. However, this bullshit excuse that they can censor because they're private is ridiculous. In that case, they should be liable for everything and not have section 230 protection.
Hey, the phone company cannot censor you because they don't like you or what you're saying!
Hopefully with the push back on many fronts, judges will stop being idiotic in defending the right of censorship despite section 230 protection.
Yes, the confusion about whether or not social media platforms are publishers or common carriers (like phone companies) is intentional, perhaps. Social media platforms may have section 230 protection, but they do recommend and do rank up and rank down posts, so they curate, which makes them sort of like publishers. The best thing about the Internet is peer to peer interaction. We're better off without the publisher middle man interfering with our communication.
True! No need for a huge corporation to run a social or media website when it can be run easily for cheap on any hosting platform. I'm also flabbergasted at the censorship on Reddit.
It used to be the place to socialize outside of social media!