Ifølge kapitalistiske bankfolk er der ikke en industri i verden der ikke ville være bedre tjent, hvis staten stoppede med at blande sig. Statsstøtte og regler forvrider markederne og skader industrien siger de. De kan dog finde EN undtagelse, nemlig i banksektoren.
Hvis ikke staten sørgede for indskydergarantifonde og redningspakker til kriseramte banker, ville folk jo ikke turde at sætte deres penge i banken. Dette ville jo fuldstændig bremse markedet for indskud og lån, både for private og virksomheder. Se bare i Ukraine. Almindelige mennesker får udbetalt deres løn i kontanter, som de gemmer under sengen. I Ukraine har man prøvet at banker gik fallidt, og almindelige mennesker mistede hele deres opsparinger. Mennesker der har oplevet det, sætter aldrig deres penge i en bank igen. Tilliden er væk.
Tillid til finansmarkederne er sundt for økonomien. Så i de sidste 100 år har staten skabt kunstig tillid til bankverdenen ved at komme sektoren til undsætning, hver gang det går galt, og forbrugere til undsætning med indskydergarantifonde.
Er det ikke paradoksalt at statens indblanding i alle andre markeder i verden er negativ, men i banksektoren kan staten åbenbart spille en positiv rolle ved at skabe tillid.
Misforståelsen at staten gavner økonomien ved at skabe kunstig tillid til finansverdenen er roden til finanskrisen, og mange af dens forgængere. Aktionærer, banker og kunder har alle i 100 år taget mere risiko end hvad det frie marked ville tillade, fordi de har vænnet sig til IKKE at skulle betale den fulde pris når det går galt.
Jeg vil derfor gerne bede alle verdens regeringsledere om en gang for alle at udråbe: Aldrig nogensinde igen, vil vi redde en bank fra konkurs – ikke med en øre af skatteydernes penge. (De skal dog vente med dette til den nuværende krise er ovre… )
Hvad vil der så ske? Banker opstod jo i sin tid fordi folk var bange for at deres penge blev stjålet når de lå under sengen. Så det er åbenbart muligt at lave en bank, som folk har tillid til uden stats garanti. Det må være bankernes eget job at skabe tillid, ikke statens. For at få nødvendige indskud må banker så konkurrere om folks tillid ved f.eks at være gennemskuelige, have lav gearing, undgå investeringer i avancerede produkter, eller simpelthen have guld i kælderen.
Der vil opstå et nyt markede – markedet for tillid. Kun de banker, som kan overbevise folk om at de er sikre, vil overleve. De grådige, og risikable vil kunderne vælge fra. Brændt barn skyer ilden, med mindre staten kommer og puster. Vi har et finanssystem, hvor det brændte barn, med jævne mellemrum, løber jublende tilbage ind i ilden!
Hvis staten en gang for alle stoppede med at blande sig i banksektoren, ville bankerne få incitament til at gøre, hvad der er bedst for økonomien helt af sig selv. Over lang tid ville vi få en bankverden bygget på ægte tillid til bankerne selv.
Men hvad nu, hvis der kommer en krise alligevel? Hvis bankerne stopper med at låne penge ud, kan virksomhederne jo ikke holde hjulene kørende, og så spreder en kreditkrise sig jo til resten af økonomien. Skal staten så ikke træde ind og hjælpe? Nej, virksomheder idag opererer med marginale likvide reserver, netop fordi de regner med at banken ikke kan gå fallit, og at de altid kan få et nyt lån. Hvis virksomhederne i stedet vidste at deres bank kunne gå fallit ville de holde større reserver og derved sikre, at en krise i finanssektoren ikke kunne spilde ind i den almindelige økonomi.

Join the Conversation

27 Comments

  1. “(De skal dog vente med dette til den nuværende krise er ovre… )”
    Hmm, det kan jo tage mange år, faktisk så mange år at den næste krise når at komme.

  2. “(De skal dog vente med dette til den nuværende krise er ovre… )”
    Hmm, det kan jo tage mange år, faktisk så mange år at den næste krise når at komme.

  3. “De kan dog finde EN undtagelse, nemlig i banksektoren.”
    Ja, og det er et grundlæggende problem, at alle kan finde undtagelser. Og sjovt nok er det altid undtagelser indenfor noget, der har relation til ens eget arbejde.
    F.eks. synes Bent Hansen, at ambulancekørsel er noget helt særligt, for de kører jo med syge mennesker. Så det er sørme for vigtigt til ubetinget at overlade til markedskræfterne.
    Og så sent som i går hørte jeg på radioen en præst, som mente, at der burde være en autorisation for bedemænd. For som hun argumenterede, bedemænd er jo i kontakt med mennesker, der lige har mistet en pårørende.

  4. “De kan dog finde EN undtagelse, nemlig i banksektoren.”
    Ja, og det er et grundlæggende problem, at alle kan finde undtagelser. Og sjovt nok er det altid undtagelser indenfor noget, der har relation til ens eget arbejde.
    F.eks. synes Bent Hansen, at ambulancekørsel er noget helt særligt, for de kører jo med syge mennesker. Så det er sørme for vigtigt til ubetinget at overlade til markedskræfterne.
    Og så sent som i går hørte jeg på radioen en præst, som mente, at der burde være en autorisation for bedemænd. For som hun argumenterede, bedemænd er jo i kontakt med mennesker, der lige har mistet en pårørende.

  5. Opgaven består i, at forklare, hvorfor, en bank blot er en butik, med varer; og derfor skal være underlagt samme vilkår, som butikker i al almidelighed.
    For at gøre det nemmere, kunne man begynde med den lille opgave, at forklare det fæle ord “bankkrådgiver” som netop intet har med navnet at gøre, sml. “ejendomsmægler”.
    Falsk varebetegnelse/professionsbetegnelse skal frem i lyset; det er tragisk, så mange som hopper på, det kan kun være et resultat af Nannystatens opdragelse af borgere, der ikke kan tænke selv.
    Vi har skabt kvinder, som ikke giiiider sit eget afkom blot de tre første år, så selvfølgelig går det galt med selvstændigheden; og i forståelsen af hvad en bank er, og hvordan markedet, som en stor, men finfølsom bevægelse ødelægges af grovreguleringer.

  6. Opgaven består i, at forklare, hvorfor, en bank blot er en butik, med varer; og derfor skal være underlagt samme vilkår, som butikker i al almidelighed.
    For at gøre det nemmere, kunne man begynde med den lille opgave, at forklare det fæle ord “bankkrådgiver” som netop intet har med navnet at gøre, sml. “ejendomsmægler”.
    Falsk varebetegnelse/professionsbetegnelse skal frem i lyset; det er tragisk, så mange som hopper på, det kan kun være et resultat af Nannystatens opdragelse af borgere, der ikke kan tænke selv.
    Vi har skabt kvinder, som ikke giiiider sit eget afkom blot de tre første år, så selvfølgelig går det galt med selvstændigheden; og i forståelsen af hvad en bank er, og hvordan markedet, som en stor, men finfølsom bevægelse ødelægges af grovreguleringer.

  7. “Opgaven består i, at forklare, hvorfor, en bank blot er en butik, med varer;”
    Men det er en bank ikke da ingen andre butikker ligger inde med folks pensioner og opsparinger.
    Hvis min mekaniker går konkurs? Who cares. Men min bank? Shit thats bad.
    Dermed ikke sagt at jeg går ind for statsstøtte. Der må findes en anden model, men lad os ikke gøre det simplere end det er.

  8. “Opgaven består i, at forklare, hvorfor, en bank blot er en butik, med varer;”
    Men det er en bank ikke da ingen andre butikker ligger inde med folks pensioner og opsparinger.
    Hvis min mekaniker går konkurs? Who cares. Men min bank? Shit thats bad.
    Dermed ikke sagt at jeg går ind for statsstøtte. Der må findes en anden model, men lad os ikke gøre det simplere end det er.

  9. Nu er det så heldigt der er noget der hedder privat forsikring. Den væsentlige forskel fra nu ville derfor være at private forsikringsskaber skulle sikre at deres kunders banker var sunde i stedet for, at offentlige bureaukratier skulle gøre det. Kender jeg offentlige bureaukratier godt, så er dette en meget væsentlig forskel.

  10. Nu er det så heldigt der er noget der hedder privat forsikring. Den væsentlige forskel fra nu ville derfor være at private forsikringsskaber skulle sikre at deres kunders banker var sunde i stedet for, at offentlige bureaukratier skulle gøre det. Kender jeg offentlige bureaukratier godt, så er dette en meget væsentlig forskel.

  11. Kære Skovgaard
    Dit argument er de rødes, og tegn på, at den institutionelle hjernevask fungerer. Dit argument kan bruges på sygehuse osv.
    Jo, banker er butikker, og den kloge spreder sine investeringer.
    Selvfølgelig er der forskellige lovkrav til bankbutikker, lægebutikker og købmandsbutikker; men de er alle butikker.
    Indskydergaranti er en slags fællesforsikring og gælder alle banker for samme beløb. Spørgsmålet er om fællesforsikring er bedre end privat; og den afgørelse må ligge i lovkravene til forsikringsbutikker.
    Der er ingen tvivl om, at klare og simple rammekrav, til de forskellige butikker, er bedre styring, end statslig styring direkte.

  12. Kære Skovgaard
    Dit argument er de rødes, og tegn på, at den institutionelle hjernevask fungerer. Dit argument kan bruges på sygehuse osv.
    Jo, banker er butikker, og den kloge spreder sine investeringer.
    Selvfølgelig er der forskellige lovkrav til bankbutikker, lægebutikker og købmandsbutikker; men de er alle butikker.
    Indskydergaranti er en slags fællesforsikring og gælder alle banker for samme beløb. Spørgsmålet er om fællesforsikring er bedre end privat; og den afgørelse må ligge i lovkravene til forsikringsbutikker.
    Der er ingen tvivl om, at klare og simple rammekrav, til de forskellige butikker, er bedre styring, end statslig styring direkte.

  13. Jeppe Kirk Bonde overser efter min mening, at hverken almindelige mennesker eller professionelle bankansatte krediteksperter er i stand til at vurdere den reelle risiko for andre banker, da ingen uden for banken kender bankens eksponeringer, sikkerheder for lån osv.
    Ufuldstændig information vil derfor gøre det nærmest umuligt at etablere et velfungerende marked for tillid, hvis en høj-risikobank markedsfører sig som siker bank, vil ingen kunne gennemskue, om der er tale om falsk markedsføring eller ej.
    Dette er ikke et argument for offentlig intervention, men blot en påpegning af, at det meget let at sidde hjemme ved sit skrivebord med bøger af Rothbard og Mises på bordet og opfinde perfekte markeder, men enhver der er beskæftiget i den finansielle sektor ved, at finansielle markeder langt fra er perfekte, og at bl.a. manglen på information er et alvorligt problem.

  14. Jeppe Kirk Bonde overser efter min mening, at hverken almindelige mennesker eller professionelle bankansatte krediteksperter er i stand til at vurdere den reelle risiko for andre banker, da ingen uden for banken kender bankens eksponeringer, sikkerheder for lån osv.
    Ufuldstændig information vil derfor gøre det nærmest umuligt at etablere et velfungerende marked for tillid, hvis en høj-risikobank markedsfører sig som siker bank, vil ingen kunne gennemskue, om der er tale om falsk markedsføring eller ej.
    Dette er ikke et argument for offentlig intervention, men blot en påpegning af, at det meget let at sidde hjemme ved sit skrivebord med bøger af Rothbard og Mises på bordet og opfinde perfekte markeder, men enhver der er beskæftiget i den finansielle sektor ved, at finansielle markeder langt fra er perfekte, og at bl.a. manglen på information er et alvorligt problem.

  15. Jeppe Kirk Bonde overser efter min mening, at hverken almindelige mennesker eller professionelle bankansatte krediteksperter er i stand til at vurdere den reelle risiko for andre banker, da ingen uden for banken kender bankens eksponeringer, sikkerheder for lån osv.
    Ufuldstændig information vil derfor gøre det nærmest umuligt at etablere et velfungerende marked for tillid, hvis en høj-risikobank markedsfører sig som siker bank, vil ingen kunne gennemskue, om der er tale om falsk markedsføring eller ej.
    Dette er ikke et argument for offentlig intervention, men blot en påpegning af, at det meget let at sidde hjemme ved sit skrivebord med bøger af Rothbard og Mises på bordet og opfinde perfekte markeder, men enhver der er beskæftiget i den finansielle sektor ved, at finansielle markeder langt fra er perfekte, og at bl.a. manglen på information er et alvorligt problem.

  16. “Dit argument er de rødes, og tegn på, at den institutionelle hjernevask fungerer.”
    Nå for satan, og jeg som troede at jeg var nogenlunde liberal.
    “Dit argument kan bruges på sygehuse osv.”
    Det kan jeg ikke se!?

  17. “Dit argument er de rødes, og tegn på, at den institutionelle hjernevask fungerer.”
    Nå for satan, og jeg som troede at jeg var nogenlunde liberal.
    “Dit argument kan bruges på sygehuse osv.”
    Det kan jeg ikke se!?

  18. At lovkravene til åbenhed, soliditet mv. er for svage er jo ikke et argument mod at banker grundlæggende er og skal være butikker i et liberalt demokrati.
    Forsikringsselskaber og andre finansielle butikker har samme problem; og løsningen er selvfølgelig ikke mere statseje, men skrappere lovkrav om åbenhed, soliditet mv.
    Endelig er livet altså en risiko, og det skal folk lære, hvis vi da ikke skal have det totale samfund.
    At man pt forsøger at reparere krisen med samme midler, som skabte den, nemlig statslig intervention, er bare dybt tragikomisk.

  19. At lovkravene til åbenhed, soliditet mv. er for svage er jo ikke et argument mod at banker grundlæggende er og skal være butikker i et liberalt demokrati.
    Forsikringsselskaber og andre finansielle butikker har samme problem; og løsningen er selvfølgelig ikke mere statseje, men skrappere lovkrav om åbenhed, soliditet mv.
    Endelig er livet altså en risiko, og det skal folk lære, hvis vi da ikke skal have det totale samfund.
    At man pt forsøger at reparere krisen med samme midler, som skabte den, nemlig statslig intervention, er bare dybt tragikomisk.

  20. @ Torben Mark Pedersen:
    Pointen er jo netop at bankerne bliver nødt til at lægge deres regnskaber, eksponeringer, sikkerheder mm. ud offentligt, for at skabe den tillid der i realiteten er bankers virksomhedsgrundlag. Banker der ikke ønsker at offentliggøre disse informationer får ualmindeligt svært ved at overbevise folk om at det netop er deres bank der sikrer kundernes penge bedst.

  21. @ Torben Mark Pedersen:
    Pointen er jo netop at bankerne bliver nødt til at lægge deres regnskaber, eksponeringer, sikkerheder mm. ud offentligt, for at skabe den tillid der i realiteten er bankers virksomhedsgrundlag. Banker der ikke ønsker at offentliggøre disse informationer får ualmindeligt svært ved at overbevise folk om at det netop er deres bank der sikrer kundernes penge bedst.

  22. @Torben
    Når man har fingrene nede i dejen, kan man altid komme med en masse branchespecifikke forhold. Og det er da naturligvis sandt, at der er i den finansielle verden er en masse komplekse forhold, som de færreste kan gennemskue. Og det vil naturligvis være forfærdeligt for den, der mister en mindre formue, fordi en bank går ned.
    Men, men, men. Som LuckyLibertas er inde på, så er en bank altså bare en butik, og for at være lidt mere specifik, så kan man tilføje, at det er en butik, som bygger på tillid. Og det gør den, fordi man på forhånd ikke kan stå med produktet i hånden og vurdere det, og fordi man heller ikke kan gennemskue de interne processer, som butikken arbejder efter og derigennem få vished for, at det endelige produkt bliver ok.
    Men deri er banker langt fra alene. Der er mange andre butikker såsom skoler, hospitaler, autoværksteder, luftfartsselskaber, som er i en tilsvarende situation. Problemet findes også i høj grad indenfor industrien, hvor en ordreproducerende virksomhed er helt afhængig af, at den ordregivende virksomhed har tillid til, at den kan løfte opgaven. Her løses det nogle gange ved, at den ordreproducerende (frivilligt eller som krav fra den ordregivendes side) laver sig kvalitetscertificeret af et uafhængigt organ. En sådan ordning indebærer løbende kontrolbesøg, for at sikre, at virksomheden til stadighed lever op til kravene.
    Kunne man ikke forestille sig, at der på et frit finansielt marked som forbrugerkrav ville opstå forskellige certificeringsordninger, som en bank bliver nødt til at tilmelde sig, for at kunne opretholde kundernes tillid?

  23. @Torben
    Når man har fingrene nede i dejen, kan man altid komme med en masse branchespecifikke forhold. Og det er da naturligvis sandt, at der er i den finansielle verden er en masse komplekse forhold, som de færreste kan gennemskue. Og det vil naturligvis være forfærdeligt for den, der mister en mindre formue, fordi en bank går ned.
    Men, men, men. Som LuckyLibertas er inde på, så er en bank altså bare en butik, og for at være lidt mere specifik, så kan man tilføje, at det er en butik, som bygger på tillid. Og det gør den, fordi man på forhånd ikke kan stå med produktet i hånden og vurdere det, og fordi man heller ikke kan gennemskue de interne processer, som butikken arbejder efter og derigennem få vished for, at det endelige produkt bliver ok.
    Men deri er banker langt fra alene. Der er mange andre butikker såsom skoler, hospitaler, autoværksteder, luftfartsselskaber, som er i en tilsvarende situation. Problemet findes også i høj grad indenfor industrien, hvor en ordreproducerende virksomhed er helt afhængig af, at den ordregivende virksomhed har tillid til, at den kan løfte opgaven. Her løses det nogle gange ved, at den ordreproducerende (frivilligt eller som krav fra den ordregivendes side) laver sig kvalitetscertificeret af et uafhængigt organ. En sådan ordning indebærer løbende kontrolbesøg, for at sikre, at virksomheden til stadighed lever op til kravene.
    Kunne man ikke forestille sig, at der på et frit finansielt marked som forbrugerkrav ville opstå forskellige certificeringsordninger, som en bank bliver nødt til at tilmelde sig, for at kunne opretholde kundernes tillid?

  24. @LuckyLibertas
    “At man pt forsøger at reparere krisen med samme midler, som skabte den, nemlig statslig intervention, er bare dybt tragikomisk.”
    Hvis man vil se spøgelser……..

  25. @LuckyLibertas
    “At man pt forsøger at reparere krisen med samme midler, som skabte den, nemlig statslig intervention, er bare dybt tragikomisk.”
    Hvis man vil se spøgelser……..

  26. FIRST, THE WELL-KNOWN PROBLEM
    How can anyone defend this old and decaying financial system that creates wealth by making the majority poor? That are exploiting the unaware, the unsophisticated and the foolish. It is totally amoral, to believe that the “end justifies the means.” But Money naturally attracts itself to evil. It is this scripplers opinion that we are led by abject and career criminals, who also happen to be well connected to a network of global wealth siphoning financial systems.
    In fact, if you compare what is really wrong to what they say is wrong it is not an exercise of apples versus oranges. It is more like trying to compare a Pet Rock to a dinosaur. But now, we the people are right awake.
    The simplest truths are sometimes the hardest to recognize.
    War, Wars and more War have made the ‘powers that be’ and the Greedy Bankers their fortunes, and continue to do so.
    Anybody who benefit from War in any way, what-so-ever, financial, political, corporate, fame or position, ARE WAR CRIMINALS, who commit crimes against humanity, and should be stopped, and exposed whenever possible. Wars could clearly not be started if nobody financed them. Wars could not be started unless the power mongers decide to start them. Who do you think financed and decided to start the French revolution, the Russian revolution? The First World War? The Second World War? In fact in all the wars in the nineteen and twentieth century? In fact they financed both sides in the wars?
    More money has been made on war and the financing of it, than anything else in recorded history, and who benefited? Ask yourself this…. In all crimes the question is always ‘Who benefit’ (qui bono). The only real weapons of mass destruction are money, and Power. And the real criminals are the people who use their financial power to finance wars and destruction, and those who make money on other people’s misfortune.
    This sickening concentration of power by the corporate structures and politicians, and the sickening concentration and control of asset and wealth in the top corporate management and Banks is the very thing that are going to destroy our civilization. In fact they have destroyed it already. Anybody who thinks that they create something out of nothing thinks they are God and the bankers have this disillusion. Do you know that if you have 1 million Rand or more, more than your debt, you are amongst he riches 1% of people on earth?
    Below are some debatable numbers, however they are very close.
    At present the riches 10% owns 99% of everything. Explained in an other way; if you have 10 people and R. 100 to share, then One person owns R. 99 and the other 9 persons have R. 1 to share. Explained in another way, the Poorest 50 % of people have less than 10 cents to share.
    Multigenerational wealth is one of our biggest problems. With it, People get the feeling of entitlement and loose the creative drive to be productive. Multigenerational wealth is a sick and un-ethical Royal leftover.
    To make money with money is not creative per say, it is normally money invested in others hard work and creativity. In reality, if you make money with money you benefit from others sweat, toil and creativity, and they don’t get what they produced.
    By looking back into history we find that 1000 years ago approximately 1% of mankind was living a full and healthy life and in relative happiness. The rest was borne in pain; they lived their life in a lot of pain, and in pain they generally died, and very young at that.
    By 1900 aprox 20 % lived a full and healthy life, and by 1960 +/- 50 %, of mankind was sort of happy. Since then the % has dropped dramatically, and the only reason for this is the psychotic power and greed problems some people have. By 2009 only about 35 % lived a healthy and full life with some happiness.
    Money truly attracts evil. For instance, if a woman prostitutes herself she may receive a great sum of money, but who will pay her for keeping her virginity or her dignity? Or If you are a hit man, a large amount of money is yours if you kill your target, who will pay you if you would miss your target?
    Excess ownership (greed) and the degree of control of the life of others (power) that are so worshiped in the capitalistic system are in the process of self destruct. By privatizing public assets, capitalism has become corporatism, and corporatism by definition is Fascism, and will be recognized for what it is, a PSYCOHTIC, mental illness, a delusion of grandeur in those who benefit from it, and love it. It is a mental illness that is hurtful to the vast majority of mankind, as we so amply have seen.
    In the coming world system, after the collapse of the present monetary system, and after the world changes that are soon coming, it will become an established fact that power and greed in all its shades and appearances, is a un-natural and psychotic ailment based on total selfishness that always do harm to others.
    That the Power and Greed mongers are Psychotic mental cases, is clear, since they have absolutely no empathy for the suffering and hardship of the people they exert their power and greed from.
    Greed and power hunger are psychotic conditions that were tolerated previously, but is now clearly seen as a mental illness that were harmful to an awful lot of people. It is simply psychotic to want more than one can use, to live a full, healthy and comfortable life in happiness (without addictions).
    The way to contain this shallow mindset of power and greed is not necessarily to outlaw it, but put definite limitations on the total assets any private person can own and control.
    The problems is obvious, even to the slow and simple minded. Capitalism has now become like playing poker, the winner will take it all. Capitalism has truly shown itself to be a form of plunder. It is more predatory that a dictatorship. It is more unethical than Genghis khan and Attila the Hun, more hurtful than Pol Pot and Stalin put together, and less accountable than my pet gold fish.
    It was truly a stupid plunge into the ethical darkness of greed and power when capitalism was introduced by the ex-royals and their henchmen to maintain their power, when they lost their feudal dictatorship benefits.
    The communistic system metamorphosed into a system where the old money elite and their descendents, took control over the mob using political means. Everybody became equally poor except the ruling elite. The capitalistic system metamorphosed into a system of corporate Fascism and the elite took control over the mob, using financial and business means. Everybody become equally poor except the ruling elite. So, they are equal in many ways. As this continues, more and more wealth and power are ending up in fewer and fewer hands (The same hands). Everybody is becoming equally poor except the ruling elite. The socialistic system was a dream for the financial control freaks, where the people give up all their freedom willingly, and for the most part knowingly. The world elite had to totally disgrace communism as being unethical, (Which it was) to get people to worship and adore the equally crocked Capitalism, (which they do). In reality they are exactly the same, only the names and tools differs. The final result of both of them is that only a select few will control everything in the end, while the ‘mob’ gets screwed royally in both scenarios. True, isn’t? The winner takes all. The mob gets next to nothing. To day the top manipulators choose the low profile, they try to remain mostly hidden from view behind corporate structures, or in the many religions, or in the Banks in Basel in Switzerland, or in Dubai, Wall street, or in the City of London and in Royalty, etc. so as not to become a target when the dung hits the fan, and sadly, it will soon be flying, and they know it.
    They know that they simply over-did-it, and what is even worse, they don’t think that they will have to bear their own burden, that they are accountable, or have to harvest any of what they have sown and that some other sucker will. Well, well, they are sadly mistaken. For every action they have been part of, there will be an equal and opposite reaction, for sure. What kind of sick idiot would want to control the world, or most of the money in it? To the detriment of the many? What kind of mindset do they have? What kind of sick idiot would want to own everything, or most of it? To the detriment of the many?
    Let me tell you, only selfish psychopaths.
    Well there are plenty of them. And they are sick in their minds, and they are truly psychopaths. The people in this decaying western civilization, who are in power and their bankers, are truly sick in their minds. Just look around. Open your eyes. You properly don’t even know that you are being had? The end never justifies the means. And the leveling in our society is fast approaching, for sure.
    In the coming system, it will be an established fact that greed and power hunger are psychotic conditions, a mental illness that require help, guidance and at times some separation (Institution, Jail). Let me define psychotic,
    I quote from Scientific American:
    Superficially charming, psychopaths tend to make a good first impression on others and often strike observers as remarkably normal. Yet they are self-centered, dishonest and undependable, and at times they engage in irresponsible behavior for no apparent reason other than the sheer fun of it. Largely devoid of guilt, empathy and love, they have casual and callous interpersonal and romantic relationships. Psychopaths routinely offer excuses for their reckless and often outrageous actions, placing blame on others instead. They rarely learn from their mistakes or benefit from negative feedback, and they have difficulty inhibiting their impulses.
    Does this ring a bell somewhere??? Think politic.
    It is psychotic to want more than anyone can use, to live a full, healthy and comfortable life. It is also psychotic to control other people by using your wealth and position. They are basically all nuts. And they are, like serial killers, without doubt, detrimental and harmful to the “normal” people in the world. The greedy ones have killed a lot more people in their wars and disputes than any serial killer ever has, and that is a fact. They will soon be brought to justice for their psychotic decisions and actions. (By God, I hope they do).
    Greed and power hunger, like jalousie, is evil; it is simply the darkest branches of selfishness, and it is truly evil, real evil. When the human species evolve its consciousness a little further, we will look back in history on the Capitalistic/Fascistic system as the most predatory and destructive period of mankind’s development or call it the anti-renaissance. As Capitalism is failing, it will be this Scripplers pleasure to tear this dieing system apart and jerk every body’s chains by proposing a new and more ethical monetary philosophy, where everybody becomes equally rich, instead of equally poor, as is happening now, under both the Predatory Capitalistic system, as well as the quasi socialistic systems. It is also clear that the existent financial fundies who have manipulated, massaged and perverted this dieing Capitalistic system are the predators, and are therefore totally incapable of solving the problem they have created for other people in the first place.
    It is also clear, even for stupid people, that the top 1% people have no intension of alleviating the discrepancy, therefore the rest will do it for them, and they are not going to like it, but they blew it. And just like some rich people on the Titanic with Gold in their pockets, they will just sink a little faster. The western civilization is finish, what we have now is just some major ‘rigor-mortis’. And just like in the Roman, Aztec, Inca, Egyptian and Persian civilizations of old, this Capitalistic western failure will surely pass away. The present civilizations will go down in the annals of human history as abusive and unjust to its own people. Why and how we got to this predicament is not a matter of opinion any longer, we know it as a fact. The beauty of hindsight is that it is mostly 20/20. And don’t worry. Just read the writing on the wall. They simply squeezed the lemon to dead, and they didn’t make lemonade. The two most used ways to gain wealth under capitalism has always been by overcharging whatever you sell, and underpaying for what you get, basically, hence the nice guy always gets screwed and the bullies prosper. Most wealth has been made this way.
    Multigenerational debts will not exist in the new time. If somebody borrow, they alone are responsible. Not their Country and not their Children. And if somebody lends money to an African Dictator, (who steel the money and leave them in a Bank in Basel or Dubai) then don’t expect to get re-paid by the people of the country when the country change government or becomes a Republic or whatever. Ownership is also not a justification for wealth by any philosophical stretch. Genghis Kahn proved that. He stole it all. Possession does not indicate ownership. The creativity and productivity of an individual is the only real and honest justification for what he owns. People must clearly be paid for what they are worth, what they produce and create. Let the system crash, and start from scratch again. This is in short reality, so take note of this problem and lets look a the real answers.
    I call the solution Benign Economy (BE).
    (To BE, or not to BE, that’s the question).
    We should all ask ourselves the following questions and really be cognitive of the answers we get.
    How much Capital, Property, and other Assets? (CPAX) will a person need to live a full life, a creative and healthy life, and a happy life, in security, and in freedom and peace? While being totally harmless towards all other beings?
    Simple, isn’t it.
    Excess wealth, is simply if people have more than (CPAX) whatever the amount is decided to be? And ask yourself, why would anybody want more than that?
    And if they do, to the detriment of most other people, then they are clearly psychopaths. And these psychos have been running things until now, haven’t they? And now they are trying to fix the problem they themselves have created, don’t they? But they cannot.
    The inmates are truly running asylums and nuthouses
    Is that a smart thing for us to let them do? Well no it isn’t.
    So the solution is simple and clear, Benign Economics.
    This would remove all the fangs, but leave molars on everybody.
    Nobody’s money will be taken away. The people themselves have, say 2 years, to give away their excess wealth, and if they don’t do it, will it be done for them by others by any means possible for the common good. This new system will hopefully stop the psychopathic decisions of the greedy and power hungry, so that they do not do anything to the detriment of innocent people any more.
    If the (CPAX) amount is, lets say $ 20 million or whatever figure most people can imagine being fair and still be motivating to drive people of the old mindset. This amount will include the value of EVERYTHING any individual can own and control in any way whatsoever. But there is a catch: Nobody can own more, or have more, or control more than this. And if you do, you will have to give it to somebody else who has less. You cannot have more assets, or control more or be in charge of more wealth in any form, fixed or liquid. If you have the (CPAX) Maximum, then you can choose to retire or you can continue to create more wealth, which you then have to give somebody else or give it to the common Good (Your community). You can also work for the community as lawyers, Doctors, Councilors etc. for free, or for the less capable, less wealthy or less fortunate. Or you can give it to the Lonesome pussycat association. Or to whomever or whatever you chose, but you cannot keep it, or be in control of it. You have to spend it on others, or give it to others with no strings attached, or it will be done to you by others. The top 0.1 % of the riches people on earth, (about 6.5 Million people) owns or control 72% of all wealth on earth. The 2nd 3th and 4th riches men have a higher yearly income than all the GNP of all the countries in the developing world. I wonder how these people sleep at night? I dont even want to know what no. 1 earn yearly.
    They clearly, will not like BE, and will do all they can to se that this is not implemented in any way or form, but we must be realistic, the system we have now does not work satisfactory for more than 99% of mankind.
    If people dies, their wealth will go to their children, say topping up their wealth until they have (CPAX) the rest will go to the common good. This would stop the multigenerational mega wealth problem that is so detrimental to the majority of mankind, this goes for Kings, Queens and Popes as well, and they will have to fork out all but $ 20 million. Just imagine?
    The common good, will be things like health care, education, water, electricity, energy, housing, food without chemicals etc. If anybody refuses to comply and become harmless, they will be totally boycotted, isolated, avoided and separated from the rest of the humankind, and have all their community advantages removed. They become criminals. Real wealth is created by human labor and ingenuity applied to the resources of the earth using energy that derives from nature. Wealth ultimately comes from productivity gains. Those gains, in turn, hinge on advances in technology and on a more efficient allocation of global capital. You do not create wealth by manipulating the money market. You cannot create wealth by managing a bank, or owning a bank. If you make money on the stock market, some poor soul will have to work for slave wages so the company he works for, can have enough profit to pay the shareholders who themselves create nothing. This system sucks. The legal system does not create wealth in any way as well. By instituting the new law of “Harmlessness” you can delete most of the written laws on the books, as well as the Lawyers. The Law of Harmlessness will be the ultimate judge of everything. Wrap your mind around that one for a minute. What would be the contentious part of this would be the CPAX amount/figure. That, can of cause change from time to time depending on the value of money and the assets held by the poorest people in the community.
    The ultimate freedom of all individuals will be their freedom to do whatever they like, as long as they are totally harmless towards everybody else. The more freedom people want, the more responsibility of harmlessness they will carry. To be totally free does not mean that you can be a destroyer an anarchist or similar, because to be free also include allowing others to be free. Harmlessness is the common denominator that makes freedom and responsibility one. In this new system of harmlessness there will be no victim-less crimes, because if it is harmless it is victim-less as well. If it is victim-less it is harmless as well. Using this system (CPAX) everybody on earth will get close to equally rich within two or three generations. At present there is enough wealth and assets on earth to make every single adult on earth a millionaire, (in $) if that is what they want. Harmlessness is the answer, but that does not mean that we should not defend the innocents and less fortunate. You will have to put your foot down at times, and try to be a lot less gullible and trusting as well. Excess has a price. The more of it, the greater the price become. And our “civilization” has an ocean of it. Sooner or later there comes a time for payback. Things that can’t go on forever won’t, all the rest become self-evident. And now, that the testosterone have relaxed its grip, I am left scratching my ball—ness, pondering.
    I am right awake therefore I am.
    Rene’ Descartes

  27. FIRST, THE WELL-KNOWN PROBLEM
    How can anyone defend this old and decaying financial system that creates wealth by making the majority poor? That are exploiting the unaware, the unsophisticated and the foolish. It is totally amoral, to believe that the “end justifies the means.” But Money naturally attracts itself to evil. It is this scripplers opinion that we are led by abject and career criminals, who also happen to be well connected to a network of global wealth siphoning financial systems.
    In fact, if you compare what is really wrong to what they say is wrong it is not an exercise of apples versus oranges. It is more like trying to compare a Pet Rock to a dinosaur. But now, we the people are right awake.
    The simplest truths are sometimes the hardest to recognize.
    War, Wars and more War have made the ‘powers that be’ and the Greedy Bankers their fortunes, and continue to do so.
    Anybody who benefit from War in any way, what-so-ever, financial, political, corporate, fame or position, ARE WAR CRIMINALS, who commit crimes against humanity, and should be stopped, and exposed whenever possible. Wars could clearly not be started if nobody financed them. Wars could not be started unless the power mongers decide to start them. Who do you think financed and decided to start the French revolution, the Russian revolution? The First World War? The Second World War? In fact in all the wars in the nineteen and twentieth century? In fact they financed both sides in the wars?
    More money has been made on war and the financing of it, than anything else in recorded history, and who benefited? Ask yourself this…. In all crimes the question is always ‘Who benefit’ (qui bono). The only real weapons of mass destruction are money, and Power. And the real criminals are the people who use their financial power to finance wars and destruction, and those who make money on other people’s misfortune.
    This sickening concentration of power by the corporate structures and politicians, and the sickening concentration and control of asset and wealth in the top corporate management and Banks is the very thing that are going to destroy our civilization. In fact they have destroyed it already. Anybody who thinks that they create something out of nothing thinks they are God and the bankers have this disillusion. Do you know that if you have 1 million Rand or more, more than your debt, you are amongst he riches 1% of people on earth?
    Below are some debatable numbers, however they are very close.
    At present the riches 10% owns 99% of everything. Explained in an other way; if you have 10 people and R. 100 to share, then One person owns R. 99 and the other 9 persons have R. 1 to share. Explained in another way, the Poorest 50 % of people have less than 10 cents to share.
    Multigenerational wealth is one of our biggest problems. With it, People get the feeling of entitlement and loose the creative drive to be productive. Multigenerational wealth is a sick and un-ethical Royal leftover.
    To make money with money is not creative per say, it is normally money invested in others hard work and creativity. In reality, if you make money with money you benefit from others sweat, toil and creativity, and they don’t get what they produced.
    By looking back into history we find that 1000 years ago approximately 1% of mankind was living a full and healthy life and in relative happiness. The rest was borne in pain; they lived their life in a lot of pain, and in pain they generally died, and very young at that.
    By 1900 aprox 20 % lived a full and healthy life, and by 1960 +/- 50 %, of mankind was sort of happy. Since then the % has dropped dramatically, and the only reason for this is the psychotic power and greed problems some people have. By 2009 only about 35 % lived a healthy and full life with some happiness.
    Money truly attracts evil. For instance, if a woman prostitutes herself she may receive a great sum of money, but who will pay her for keeping her virginity or her dignity? Or If you are a hit man, a large amount of money is yours if you kill your target, who will pay you if you would miss your target?
    Excess ownership (greed) and the degree of control of the life of others (power) that are so worshiped in the capitalistic system are in the process of self destruct. By privatizing public assets, capitalism has become corporatism, and corporatism by definition is Fascism, and will be recognized for what it is, a PSYCOHTIC, mental illness, a delusion of grandeur in those who benefit from it, and love it. It is a mental illness that is hurtful to the vast majority of mankind, as we so amply have seen.
    In the coming world system, after the collapse of the present monetary system, and after the world changes that are soon coming, it will become an established fact that power and greed in all its shades and appearances, is a un-natural and psychotic ailment based on total selfishness that always do harm to others.
    That the Power and Greed mongers are Psychotic mental cases, is clear, since they have absolutely no empathy for the suffering and hardship of the people they exert their power and greed from.
    Greed and power hunger are psychotic conditions that were tolerated previously, but is now clearly seen as a mental illness that were harmful to an awful lot of people. It is simply psychotic to want more than one can use, to live a full, healthy and comfortable life in happiness (without addictions).
    The way to contain this shallow mindset of power and greed is not necessarily to outlaw it, but put definite limitations on the total assets any private person can own and control.
    The problems is obvious, even to the slow and simple minded. Capitalism has now become like playing poker, the winner will take it all. Capitalism has truly shown itself to be a form of plunder. It is more predatory that a dictatorship. It is more unethical than Genghis khan and Attila the Hun, more hurtful than Pol Pot and Stalin put together, and less accountable than my pet gold fish.
    It was truly a stupid plunge into the ethical darkness of greed and power when capitalism was introduced by the ex-royals and their henchmen to maintain their power, when they lost their feudal dictatorship benefits.
    The communistic system metamorphosed into a system where the old money elite and their descendents, took control over the mob using political means. Everybody became equally poor except the ruling elite. The capitalistic system metamorphosed into a system of corporate Fascism and the elite took control over the mob, using financial and business means. Everybody become equally poor except the ruling elite. So, they are equal in many ways. As this continues, more and more wealth and power are ending up in fewer and fewer hands (The same hands). Everybody is becoming equally poor except the ruling elite. The socialistic system was a dream for the financial control freaks, where the people give up all their freedom willingly, and for the most part knowingly. The world elite had to totally disgrace communism as being unethical, (Which it was) to get people to worship and adore the equally crocked Capitalism, (which they do). In reality they are exactly the same, only the names and tools differs. The final result of both of them is that only a select few will control everything in the end, while the ‘mob’ gets screwed royally in both scenarios. True, isn’t? The winner takes all. The mob gets next to nothing. To day the top manipulators choose the low profile, they try to remain mostly hidden from view behind corporate structures, or in the many religions, or in the Banks in Basel in Switzerland, or in Dubai, Wall street, or in the City of London and in Royalty, etc. so as not to become a target when the dung hits the fan, and sadly, it will soon be flying, and they know it.
    They know that they simply over-did-it, and what is even worse, they don’t think that they will have to bear their own burden, that they are accountable, or have to harvest any of what they have sown and that some other sucker will. Well, well, they are sadly mistaken. For every action they have been part of, there will be an equal and opposite reaction, for sure. What kind of sick idiot would want to control the world, or most of the money in it? To the detriment of the many? What kind of mindset do they have? What kind of sick idiot would want to own everything, or most of it? To the detriment of the many?
    Let me tell you, only selfish psychopaths.
    Well there are plenty of them. And they are sick in their minds, and they are truly psychopaths. The people in this decaying western civilization, who are in power and their bankers, are truly sick in their minds. Just look around. Open your eyes. You properly don’t even know that you are being had? The end never justifies the means. And the leveling in our society is fast approaching, for sure.
    In the coming system, it will be an established fact that greed and power hunger are psychotic conditions, a mental illness that require help, guidance and at times some separation (Institution, Jail). Let me define psychotic,
    I quote from Scientific American:
    Superficially charming, psychopaths tend to make a good first impression on others and often strike observers as remarkably normal. Yet they are self-centered, dishonest and undependable, and at times they engage in irresponsible behavior for no apparent reason other than the sheer fun of it. Largely devoid of guilt, empathy and love, they have casual and callous interpersonal and romantic relationships. Psychopaths routinely offer excuses for their reckless and often outrageous actions, placing blame on others instead. They rarely learn from their mistakes or benefit from negative feedback, and they have difficulty inhibiting their impulses.
    Does this ring a bell somewhere??? Think politic.
    It is psychotic to want more than anyone can use, to live a full, healthy and comfortable life. It is also psychotic to control other people by using your wealth and position. They are basically all nuts. And they are, like serial killers, without doubt, detrimental and harmful to the “normal” people in the world. The greedy ones have killed a lot more people in their wars and disputes than any serial killer ever has, and that is a fact. They will soon be brought to justice for their psychotic decisions and actions. (By God, I hope they do).
    Greed and power hunger, like jalousie, is evil; it is simply the darkest branches of selfishness, and it is truly evil, real evil. When the human species evolve its consciousness a little further, we will look back in history on the Capitalistic/Fascistic system as the most predatory and destructive period of mankind’s development or call it the anti-renaissance. As Capitalism is failing, it will be this Scripplers pleasure to tear this dieing system apart and jerk every body’s chains by proposing a new and more ethical monetary philosophy, where everybody becomes equally rich, instead of equally poor, as is happening now, under both the Predatory Capitalistic system, as well as the quasi socialistic systems. It is also clear that the existent financial fundies who have manipulated, massaged and perverted this dieing Capitalistic system are the predators, and are therefore totally incapable of solving the problem they have created for other people in the first place.
    It is also clear, even for stupid people, that the top 1% people have no intension of alleviating the discrepancy, therefore the rest will do it for them, and they are not going to like it, but they blew it. And just like some rich people on the Titanic with Gold in their pockets, they will just sink a little faster. The western civilization is finish, what we have now is just some major ‘rigor-mortis’. And just like in the Roman, Aztec, Inca, Egyptian and Persian civilizations of old, this Capitalistic western failure will surely pass away. The present civilizations will go down in the annals of human history as abusive and unjust to its own people. Why and how we got to this predicament is not a matter of opinion any longer, we know it as a fact. The beauty of hindsight is that it is mostly 20/20. And don’t worry. Just read the writing on the wall. They simply squeezed the lemon to dead, and they didn’t make lemonade. The two most used ways to gain wealth under capitalism has always been by overcharging whatever you sell, and underpaying for what you get, basically, hence the nice guy always gets screwed and the bullies prosper. Most wealth has been made this way.
    Multigenerational debts will not exist in the new time. If somebody borrow, they alone are responsible. Not their Country and not their Children. And if somebody lends money to an African Dictator, (who steel the money and leave them in a Bank in Basel or Dubai) then don’t expect to get re-paid by the people of the country when the country change government or becomes a Republic or whatever. Ownership is also not a justification for wealth by any philosophical stretch. Genghis Kahn proved that. He stole it all. Possession does not indicate ownership. The creativity and productivity of an individual is the only real and honest justification for what he owns. People must clearly be paid for what they are worth, what they produce and create. Let the system crash, and start from scratch again. This is in short reality, so take note of this problem and lets look a the real answers.
    I call the solution Benign Economy (BE).
    (To BE, or not to BE, that’s the question).
    We should all ask ourselves the following questions and really be cognitive of the answers we get.
    How much Capital, Property, and other Assets? (CPAX) will a person need to live a full life, a creative and healthy life, and a happy life, in security, and in freedom and peace? While being totally harmless towards all other beings?
    Simple, isn’t it.
    Excess wealth, is simply if people have more than (CPAX) whatever the amount is decided to be? And ask yourself, why would anybody want more than that?
    And if they do, to the detriment of most other people, then they are clearly psychopaths. And these psychos have been running things until now, haven’t they? And now they are trying to fix the problem they themselves have created, don’t they? But they cannot.
    The inmates are truly running asylums and nuthouses
    Is that a smart thing for us to let them do? Well no it isn’t.
    So the solution is simple and clear, Benign Economics.
    This would remove all the fangs, but leave molars on everybody.
    Nobody’s money will be taken away. The people themselves have, say 2 years, to give away their excess wealth, and if they don’t do it, will it be done for them by others by any means possible for the common good. This new system will hopefully stop the psychopathic decisions of the greedy and power hungry, so that they do not do anything to the detriment of innocent people any more.
    If the (CPAX) amount is, lets say $ 20 million or whatever figure most people can imagine being fair and still be motivating to drive people of the old mindset. This amount will include the value of EVERYTHING any individual can own and control in any way whatsoever. But there is a catch: Nobody can own more, or have more, or control more than this. And if you do, you will have to give it to somebody else who has less. You cannot have more assets, or control more or be in charge of more wealth in any form, fixed or liquid. If you have the (CPAX) Maximum, then you can choose to retire or you can continue to create more wealth, which you then have to give somebody else or give it to the common Good (Your community). You can also work for the community as lawyers, Doctors, Councilors etc. for free, or for the less capable, less wealthy or less fortunate. Or you can give it to the Lonesome pussycat association. Or to whomever or whatever you chose, but you cannot keep it, or be in control of it. You have to spend it on others, or give it to others with no strings attached, or it will be done to you by others. The top 0.1 % of the riches people on earth, (about 6.5 Million people) owns or control 72% of all wealth on earth. The 2nd 3th and 4th riches men have a higher yearly income than all the GNP of all the countries in the developing world. I wonder how these people sleep at night? I dont even want to know what no. 1 earn yearly.
    They clearly, will not like BE, and will do all they can to se that this is not implemented in any way or form, but we must be realistic, the system we have now does not work satisfactory for more than 99% of mankind.
    If people dies, their wealth will go to their children, say topping up their wealth until they have (CPAX) the rest will go to the common good. This would stop the multigenerational mega wealth problem that is so detrimental to the majority of mankind, this goes for Kings, Queens and Popes as well, and they will have to fork out all but $ 20 million. Just imagine?
    The common good, will be things like health care, education, water, electricity, energy, housing, food without chemicals etc. If anybody refuses to comply and become harmless, they will be totally boycotted, isolated, avoided and separated from the rest of the humankind, and have all their community advantages removed. They become criminals. Real wealth is created by human labor and ingenuity applied to the resources of the earth using energy that derives from nature. Wealth ultimately comes from productivity gains. Those gains, in turn, hinge on advances in technology and on a more efficient allocation of global capital. You do not create wealth by manipulating the money market. You cannot create wealth by managing a bank, or owning a bank. If you make money on the stock market, some poor soul will have to work for slave wages so the company he works for, can have enough profit to pay the shareholders who themselves create nothing. This system sucks. The legal system does not create wealth in any way as well. By instituting the new law of “Harmlessness” you can delete most of the written laws on the books, as well as the Lawyers. The Law of Harmlessness will be the ultimate judge of everything. Wrap your mind around that one for a minute. What would be the contentious part of this would be the CPAX amount/figure. That, can of cause change from time to time depending on the value of money and the assets held by the poorest people in the community.
    The ultimate freedom of all individuals will be their freedom to do whatever they like, as long as they are totally harmless towards everybody else. The more freedom people want, the more responsibility of harmlessness they will carry. To be totally free does not mean that you can be a destroyer an anarchist or similar, because to be free also include allowing others to be free. Harmlessness is the common denominator that makes freedom and responsibility one. In this new system of harmlessness there will be no victim-less crimes, because if it is harmless it is victim-less as well. If it is victim-less it is harmless as well. Using this system (CPAX) everybody on earth will get close to equally rich within two or three generations. At present there is enough wealth and assets on earth to make every single adult on earth a millionaire, (in $) if that is what they want. Harmlessness is the answer, but that does not mean that we should not defend the innocents and less fortunate. You will have to put your foot down at times, and try to be a lot less gullible and trusting as well. Excess has a price. The more of it, the greater the price become. And our “civilization” has an ocean of it. Sooner or later there comes a time for payback. Things that can’t go on forever won’t, all the rest become self-evident. And now, that the testosterone have relaxed its grip, I am left scratching my ball—ness, pondering.
    I am right awake therefore I am.
    Rene’ Descartes

Leave a comment

Din e-mailadresse vil ikke blive publiceret.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.