Glennn

• Answered Questions: 2
• Posts: 9,656
• Location: A backstreet
• Occupation: Backstreet debater

It is obvious the "system" does not work. The reason for this is that, built into the system is a mechanism designed to ensure the survival of the system. In fact, the system is nothing but a self-perpetuating and self-actuating mechanism. And as such, it will not take into account the flesh and blood issues of the human condition when solving its own internal and external problematic imbalances.

In a capitalist society, a human is simply part of an equation whose value is based on personal economic viability. In the interest of its own survival, this system will parasitically drain the very host it is presumed and intended to serve--the public domain. The past bailouts of insurance companies, banks, and car companies using public funds (taxes) certainly bears this out.

What is it when a government requires its citizens to replace the money lost by these for-profit entities? Certainly, a case could be made that corporations are now a branch of government, or government is now a branch of corporation. Either way, the result is the same; people starve and die because the rescue of fellow humans from such things as exposure, disease, and malnutrition is not in the best interest of the system. If there is such a thing as the Beast of Revelations fame, then money is that beast. Nothing moves and no one eats without the corresponding flow of tokens (money).

An exchange system is all fine and well, but what do you call an exchange system that allows for the disenfranchisement of humans?

Interestingly, when the chief money-handlers/changers fell into hard financial times after somehow mis-managing and losing six-hundred billion dollars, they didn't face financial or personal ruin; they just created further financial and personal ruin for the already-strapped-for-cash taxpayers by telling them to kindly replace the money they themselves lost. To add insult to injury, the taxpayer is also told to put the replacement dollars into the hands of the very same people who lost the first bag of money.

And these money-handlers were so pompous in their acquisition of these funds that they actually said they would take more of our money only on the condition that there would be no oversight by anyone but themselves when it comes to what they will do with it. In essence, as ridiculous as it sounds, they were threatening to not take our money if we didn't close our eyes and turn around and count to ten after handing it over to them. At any rate, they got our money.

User has not yet added friends.