WHAT IS Mathematically Perfected Economy?

Concluding arguments demonstrate "economies" subject to currencies which are interest-bearing debt, ultimately terminate themselves under insoluble debt.

Mathematically perfected economy is the singular solution to the irreversible multiplication of debt inherent to central bank "economies."

Expeditious adoption of mathematically perfected economy is vital to averting not only the incredible toll of oppression inflicted across the world by so-called central bank systems, but the ultimate state of insoluble debt inherent to every such system.

No more can we expect or enforce just representative government, than we understand and are determined to prevail in justice.

If we approach a street vendor to buy our lunch, then upon receiving our lunch by trading with the vendor an equal measure of our own production, both parties will be satisfied with the commerce they naturally intended. Their object was trade of commensurable value; and by no unnatural intervention whatever is their trade impeded.

If however a third party intercedes as we pay the vendor, demanding we pay this party as well for nothing whatever, any reasonable person is quick to realize the impropriety. Would this be acceptable anywhere in proper commerce? Would the broad imposition of such a process properly characterize self-determined government?

Would it either be an acceptable power of separate entities, privileged above the common populace by a government ostensibly representing the populace?

How could such intervention be tolerated across all trade? How are some of us to be distinguished with such privileges of intervention, rather than all? Who is to intervene so, and to what degree?

If some are to acquire of our production without our consent, then how many, how much — to what limit?

Who should prefer to be a producer then, than a taker? And ultimately, who at all would prefer to toil at production, only to be robbed of it?

A just society is marked across its breadth by the desire to take no more than it contributes to prosperity.

A society which deviates from the principles of justice engenders struggle between taker and producer. In whatever strife ensues, far more is spent contemplating and scheming to take, taking, contemplating and attempting to defend production, and retaining what is vital to further production, that in the end they may altogether spend many times the original efforts intrinsic to the very production they squabble over, only to split the lunch in twenty.

Justice is the elimination of every social disorder and inconsistency. Justice thus is even a matter of optimizing the processes of justice. If the struggle for justice against the intervening party costs more than a lunch, no justified lunch is affordable but to those prepared to spend many lunches.

A society thus burdened in the costs of every lunch, can suffer to the extreme from the contest to acquire unjustly of production. Despite every possible capacity, the failure to enforce economic justice across all commerce precludes the full prosperity of the productive.

In contrast to subjection to such unqualified taking, just reward — being an exchange of agreed equivalents — is the very central concept of true free enterprise. Unjust intervention is the antithesis of free enterprise and justice.

Many years ago, a reasonable projection of industrial-social trends indicated we should now hardly find ourselves well occupied. The thought however was not we would be so amiss in determining how to occupy ourselves well. The expectation was that a country respecting how things truly work, how things can only work, and how things work best, would reap the ever greater benefits of continual advancement in industrial productivity.

We have forsaken both the singular principles of justice, and the paramount obligation to enforce representation in every single respect of justice.

There are some who advocate entirely without qualification, that "economy" is too complex to perfect by basic mathematic processes. Yet perfect economy is no more than paying for our lunch as we would, across the breadth of social intercourse. The same rules which apply to one proper transaction merely apply to all.

Anything more convoluted is uneconomical. Anything imposing any extrinsic cost whatever is uneconomical.

The seeming complexities adorning contemporary usury therefore are meant instead to hide intervention upon proper economy. Production is not multiplied by "finance." A circulation subject to interest has no power to produce.

The many ways for takers to acquire without contributing production only mean that at the cost of producers, production is shared among the non-productive.

No one can fault a transaction where the involved parties agree their exchange is justified. If each agree what they trade is right, then as far as concerns what sector of the economy is affected, no iniquity is imposed upon economy.

Thus to perfect economy is to eliminate taking beyond what is agreeable trade. Across the breadth of a just economic system then, the accumulations of each member of society are equivalent to their production.

If a currency is only a medium of exchange, it has no power to impose injustice whatever. Agreeable trade is only expedited by units free to represent any production whatever.

If society convenes government for mutual benefit, then in providing to expedite commerce by a currency, government's task is determining the fundaments of circulation as reflect just, unimpeded production and trade.

The issues are merely how much currency to circulate, how the circulation is acquired, and how it is paid. In rendering just, real economy, no extrinsic cost whatever is imposed on any transaction conducted.

In the case then of purchasing our lunch from the vendor, perfected economy is simply to allow the involved parties to exchange straightforward whatever sum of currency befits them.

In just trade, all of us acquire always so many units of production as equivalent to our own. If one producer offers his production in return for the future production of another, the second party owes the first a debt of just so much production.

Thus where a home builder offers a home for the future production of the ultimate home owner, just government issues the circulation to the home builder. He is paid for his production. The purchaser's debt then is to society — which has adopted the facility of finance for the mutual benefit of providing for further production without extrinsic cost.

Only such a note, representing and directly connected to the remaining value of the very production it represents, is immutable in value. The value of "money" cannot be changed across an economy comprised solely of such a circulation.

As just trade is to pay for production with equal production, then neither is it appropriate to increase such obligations to repay beyond the original value of the home.

If we were to pay more for any reason whatever, then the circulation would be depleted in the process of paying every such debt. More than the original cost of the home, introduced to circulation to repay the builder and to provide for the owner to be to pay for the home in like units of representation, is subtracted from the circulation in every instance of debt. In turn it would be necessary to borrow again the deficiency, merely to maintain a circulation providing for the commerce necessary to pay the multiplied original obligation. No further asset even is produced as collateral for debt multiplied beyond original obligation.

How do we uphold this principle of trade for equal production in fulfilling our promises to pay?

We pay according to consumption. In the case of a home which might exist long after we occupy it, we can only properly pay for that home as we consume of it.

This means that in the case of a $100,000 home with a hundred year lifespan, we pay $1,000 per year for the home — or $83.33 per month 1.

Mathematically perfected economy is a currency not subject to interest, comprising a debt financing all permissible enterprise, paid by each and every debtor exactly as they consume of the associated production.

There is no inflation or deflation 2, as the currency in circulation is always equal to the current value of existent production across however much of the economy is supported by a circulation.

Neither the value of money or assets are altered by changing proportions of circulation to indebted assets or services. The value of the money is always consistent in quantity — both in earnability and spendability — with the remaining value of the indebted assets which exist, for which it was issued, and which constitute its immutable value.

The remaining circulation is always sufficient to pay off debt. Further production therefore is not impeded by a deficient circulation, deplenished by paying more than what circulation was introduced 4 to finance the production.

Debt is not multiplied beyond the circulation or remaining value of indebted assets. To pay debt obligations exceeding the remaining value of indebted assets sets off a perpetual cycle of re-borrowing and multiplication of debt. Merely to maintain a circulation, we must borrow again so much as we have paid beyond the original circulation which was equal only to the unmultiplied debt.

Neither production or consumption are impeded by imposition of extrinsic cost. In every transaction, production is traded for equal production 3.

So long as we make such a circulation available to production, no impediment, limitation, or inequity whatever are imposed upon production or commerce. Production and commerce are fully expedited only by a completely liquid and effectual currency.

Mathematically perfected economy is no more than a singular prescription, dissolving unjust intervention.

Do the risks of "lending" justify usury? How do we avoid the detriments of non-repayment?

In cases of non-repayment, the only actual costs to society are the cost of the circulation and the ramifications of violating the underlying principle of equal trade.

Properly qualifying the credit-worthiness of debtors, and securing debt inclusive of the costs of collecting payment eliminate these costs entirely. Reclamation is ultimately impossible on the other hand, under a system which multiplies debt to what is impossible to repay or collect. Remedial principles have all the greater potential to reclaim recoverable costs under proper economy.

Central bank "economies" impose ever greater impediment to payment as they multiply debt in proportion to commerce. Ultimately, servicing debt becomes impossible.

To fund consented government so as we pay as we are truly provided, taxes likewise must be levied according to distribution of assets or services.

The same rules of financing commerce apply to the financing of government-provided assets or services. To fund a system of roads, the funds are merely published and paid to the producers of the road system. The circulation is increased according to the increase in existent production. A debt is registered, equal to the value of that production. The debt is paid off according to its consumption (rate of depreciation). There is no inflation or deflation, or multiplication of debt (and costs of government). The debt can thus be paid without further borrowing — and without initiating a cycle of perpetual further borrowing, and multiplying debt.

The road system is paid for according to the distribution of its usage. The costs of education for instance would be paid per student participation in provided schooling. The costs of a road system would be distributed over an annual period for instance by calculating the depreciation of the system. As we pay one-hundredth of the cost of a home with a hundred-year lifespan per year, we pay one-fiftieth of the cost of a road system with a 50-year lifespan, annually. One fiftieth of the original cost of the road is thus distributed among the year's users, proportionate to their usage.

In the case of an education system, we would pay per child or per class. To most economically distribute the costs of a road system, we would tax a consumable such as fuel or tires — the consumption of which reflects proportionate usage of the system.

Every citizen is not required to report how much they traveled the roadways. Those who elect not to use the road system are not compelled to pay for it. Those who elect not to participate in public education systems failing to meet their standards, are not compelled to pay for those systems, to their detriment.

Taxes thus must be levied as directly reflects usage. No just government should intend to do otherwise. What purpose is a system which hides the nature and thus the sum of taxations, or re-directs funding to purposes never intended? Proper taxation minimizes the burdens of responding to tax methods. Proper taxation alone openly reflects and fairly distributes the costs and purposes of every specific tax.

Mathematically perfected economy therefore is bereft of the contemporary taxes on property, labor, income, inheritance, or profit. The spending on consumables reflecting rendered government service is the only true reflection of rendered service — and therefore the only proper instrument of distributing taxation.

If manifested through mutually consented government, society elects to expedite trade by way of a currency, why would society charge itself interest for its currency, paying to itself what it charges — negating any prospect of benefit?

Actually, "we" do not: The purported representative governments of the world have "somehow" granted the incredible power to profit from all commerce by the mere nature of the currency, to a few privileged, private corporations. Each are known variously and deceitfully as "The 'Federal' 'Reserve'", "[mere] 'Bank' 'of' [Country Name]", etc.

Is there an acceptable power of separate entities, privileged above the common populace by a government ostensibly representing the populace?

What is the nature of these parallel systems then? How is it they are retained by purported representative governments about the world? How is their very nature never challenged by "the mainstream" "media"?

The world-wide imposition of central banking systems has but one purpose, and that is to profit from all commerce, while providing no bona fide service whatever. Obviously, the powers and influence these instruments multiply from the production of the subject countries, comprise the greatest potential to oppress in present history. What is the extent of their oppression?

A wise person would naturally question how a proper "economic" system would cost its subjects to the extent they pay their entire lifetimes for homes built by but a few months' of work. A wise country would question together how a proper economic system could possibly jeopardize all commerce together. A wise world would question the consequences of world-wide debt multiplied perpetually in proportion to commerce.

Interest 5 is the instrument by which a central banking systems profit from commerce. But in increasing debt beyond the original circulation, the obligations comprised by debt subject to interest deflate a circulation to a degree requiring further borrowing, merely to maintain a circulation.

A central banking system therefore, with its currency subject to interest, perpetually multiplies debt, and the interest taken on debt, in proportion to commerce.

Given the nature of such a currency, and the fact the few usurers can hardly consume so much production as periodic interest 6, the multiplication of debt in proportion to given commerce is irreversible in any and every such system.

This alone portrays the ultimate usurpation of all profitability from commerce, and the ultimate collapse of every such system under system-imposed insoluble debt. Once the costs of servicing the ever multiplying debt exceed the revenue of commerce, the system can only collapse under insoluble debt 7.

In the re-borrowing of payments against principal and interest as a new sum of debt increased so much as periodic interest, the mere process of maintaining a vital circulation perpetually multiplies debt in proportion to commerce.

The process of multiplying debt and the profit of central bankers thus progresses at an ever escalating rate. Successively greater sums of debt mean greater periodic interest — which is the very increment by which debt is further multiplied.

This ever more impoverishing cycle of paying out of circulation what is originally introduced and having to borrow the deficiency as greater debt merely to maintain a circulation, is what Thomas Jefferson meant when he explained, If the American People EVER allow the banks to issue their currency, then by inflation and deflation, the banks and bank-owned corporations which will grow up around them WILL deprive the people of all property, until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

Every currency subject to interest predicates a maximum possible lifespan of the subject "economy."

That maximum possible lifespan is defined by an ultimate moment when the costs of servicing irreversibly multiplied debt exceed the capacity of commerce to survive the multiplied costs.

The ultimate terminal state approaches at an ever escalating rate, as commerce attempts to maintain a circulation by borrowing back ever greater payments against principal and interest as a subsequent sum of debt, increased so much as periodic interest.

"Interest," as a form of charging for the use of money then is distinguished from the charges levied by all other commerce in that interest perpetually multiplies debt — and profit, powers, and oppression of the usurers.

The only costs of servicing debt engendered by proper economy are qualifying the credit-worthiness of debtors, and accounting for payment. These are the only proper costs of a circulation adopted by public consent.

The terminal state of a central bank economy approaches irreversibly. The system itself multiplies debt perpetually in proportion to commerce. The only true solution is mathematically perfected economy.

Under usury, ultimate failure is unavoidable. Ever greater impediment to prosperity is imposed every day. Wages are of ever less benefit. Wages are ever less affordable to industry. The $800,000 mortgage is hardly accruing any equity on a $35,000 home built in 1963. The very homes we produce have already been paid for many times over. Short term debt exceeds practical limits. Across the system, consumer and business alike are 'financed' to the brink of insoluble debt. The production of the subject society is ever less affordable to the society itself. Profitability is ever more eroded. Ever more political influence is wielded in defiance both of public mandate and the natural goals of self-determined society. Foreign nations are impoverished as the central banks spread their graft. Government is ever more usurped. Necessarily, "government" becomes an ever-more-entrenched enemy of the people. Deaf ears bother not even to greet us. Government, as protector of the usurer, builds its fortress against the people — and as the subject system inherently becomes ever more instable, ultimately the mere failure of one seemingly insignificant sector can trigger the failure in turn of the entire system.

In the first years of the Reagan Administration, I furnished models calculating the maximum possible lifespan of any "economy" subject to "interest." The models simply circulated the currency as predicated by debt, interest, dissolution of debt by bankruptcy and consumption of production by the "financial" system, and by the obligations of debt, growth, and production. In theory, the modeling method is as accurate as the managerial data it operates upon. Data reflecting the expected managerial factors projected a maximum possible lifespan under the so-called Federal Reserve System falling somewhere in the range of 2010 to 2020 AD.

The progress toward an ultimate state of insoluble debt however has been accelerated by Alan Greenspan's purported war on "inflation." ⁸

But as we define "maximum possible lifespan" as a moment when the costs of servicing all debt exceed the capacity of commerce, the maximum possible lifespan is impractical to achieve. The real, manifested end to such a lifespan is brought about when significant sectors of the "economy" can no longer service their debt and costs of sustenance together. Ultimately, even as small sectors fail, their inability to pay for delivered resources is highly apt to put other nearly-as-marginalized commerce across the brink of insoluble debt. In the end, a mere ripple can bring the entire system down.

Proper economy would sustain all prosperity. Under nature, the prosperity of mankind is limited only by the availability of natural resources, and our ability and intention to incorporate those resources into production.

Mathematically perfected economy alone imposes no impediment to prosperity whatever. Mathematically perfected economy alone imposes no degree of failure whatever.

The proportionate potential for prosperity under mathematically perfected economy is readily extrapolated. The proportionate costs of debt are reflected across every financed expenditure. If under usury the mortgage on a $100,000 home with a hundred-year lifespan is $1,000, the $83 mortgage on the same home under mathematically perfected economy means your money goes 12 times as far. But financed to the brink of insoluble debt, we would also have many times so much spendable circulation.

At the brink of system-wide insoluble debt, it is assumable an intelligent public determined to enforce representation would settle for nothing less. After all, mathematically perfected economy is only fair trade.

"A country voting each for the self determines a subclass few of them will truly belong to, prevailing at the cost of the rest. Even a country voting for the good of all determines a good country only if it votes so well. It is incumbent on the wise to spread word of real solution."

PLEASE promote mathematically perfected economy by forwarding our newsletters to your address book, and by publishing PFMPE URLs to forums, newsgroups, websites and newsmedia. Where an ostensibly representative government and media serve oppression, everyone not participating effectually in solution is an accessory to the consequences.

What are you people? Another morph of Marxism. Your very convulated definitions of the meaning of the word "Justice", indicate to me that you really don't know what justice is.

JUSTICE, in any form and for any human endeavor, dos not need a tome to define. Four words will define it accurately and you don't know them. Post junk like this on the wierdo sites.

If any of you easy-winded "definers of justice" care to disprove a single issue here, I'll gladly take you on.

As for the purely rude remarks, I do note all are without substance whatever.

Marx?

Amidst just such a struggle against the imposition of a central banking system as we face now, Thomas Jefferson said, If the American people EVER allow the banks to issue their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and [bank-owned] corporations which WILL grow up around them WILL deprive the people of all property UNTIL their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

The original is a bit "windier," as I've condensed it a bit here.

YOU must be the children who have not woke up.

IF ANY OF YOU BRILLIANT EXAMPLES OF EXACTLY WHAT'S WRONG WITH AMERICA HAVE ANYTHING TO CONTRIBUTE, WHY IS ALL THIS SO BEREFT OF SUBSTANCE?

MAKE SURE YOU'RE EQUIPPED WITH THE TESTOSTERONE TO WRITE ME PERSONALLY, BECAUSE IF ANY OF YOU WHO HAVE WRITTEN SO FAR THINK YOUR 2 CENTS (IF THAT) IS WORTHY OF ATTENTION, IT CERTAINLY ESCAPES ME YOU HAVE A SINGLE GOOD REASON TO THINK SO!

"In other words," it's QUITE REMARKABLE any of you think your words are more worth paying any attention at all.

"We pay according to consumption. In the case of a home which might exist long after we occupy it, we can only properly pay for that home as we consume of it. This means that in the case of a $100,000 home with a hundred year lifespan, we pay $1,000 per year for the home — or $83.33 per month 1."

The resources (labor, materials, and the stored production of the investor) are consumed when the house is built ... not when it is lived in. Production drives life ... not consumption.

After reading this, I realized that the labor I invested in reading your post wasted approximately 17 minutes of my time. It was wasted because I did not receive a just return in the form of greater enlightenment for the time which I invested.

I am paid $17.22 per hour, so I would like my $4.87 back.

If they were consumed, they would no longer exist.

The home is consumed over its lifetime; and if inflation and deflation are to be eliminated, and if we are to pay for exactly what we consume (I suppose you would prefer to pay more, or you think producers can be properly rewarded if we pay less?), THEN WE PAY FOR WHAT WE CONSUME AS WE CONSUME OF IT — which is to pay over the lifespan of the consumption.

No other schedule of payment whatever maintains a circulation always equal to the current value of existent production.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.