Dissecting the Parasitocracy

[OROBTC]

Example: The Bank Account

Public illusion. A commercial-bank 'deposit' is as good as money.  You will get all your money back, any time you want.

Reality. 'Deposits' are really loans to the bank which lends them to borrowers, some of whom may never pay them back.  Another danger is that savers may ask for their money at any time, while loans by the bank tend to have longer-term maturities.

I think I just had an epiphany. This is what bitcoiners have been saying all along! If you want to disrupt the banks then do not make deposits to them. What you should do is "deposit" them where you have total control of your money! Buy BTC. Well it is not really "buying", what you are actually doing is converting fiat to BTC. So do it now and encourage the people around you to do it too. Enough with the BS of the banks.

Well, here is another way to look at the matter, Wind_FURY.  If you just hold on to your CA$H, not depositing it in the bank nor buying Bitcoin, you accomplish the same main purpose -- keeping your money out of the bank.  BTC does have certain advantages (and disadvantages) that make it a different asset, IMO.

The same could be said for gold.  Gold does have one other feature, namely that once you have receive your gold, you already have been paid!  That's not really true with US$, in that you still must spend them in order to get something you want.  If you want gold, then any gold you own is free of "counterparty risk" (other than thievery).  Buying gold also keeps your money out of the bank.

[1715194286]

1715194286

[1715194286]

1715194286

[1715194286]

1715194286

[BobK71]

Now that we know the government is controlling fiat to its own advantage, what is the way forward?

Even if the whole world start spending bitcoins, the elites can still create a controlled inflation.

IMO there really is no way around it -- people have to wake up and demand that the theft stop.

[BobK71]

Wow,pretty long post.You have to write a book about this topic.

The post is nice,but you sound a little bit like a communist. Just kidding.

Elites really use the governments to gain more power and more profits.This isn`t a secret.

"Parasitocracy" is a nice term by the way, i like it.

Thanks.  I do have to improve my style a bit!

[zimmah]

Politicians should be put on minimum wage.

The system is an 'open conspiracy.'  Instead of secrecy, it relies on a combination of state power and ignorance by the public.  The only sustainable way to a healthy and just system is for the public to wake up

Sadly, most people nowadays are stubborn and misinformed about many things.

And they also think 'conspiracy' is synonymous to 'batshit crazy theory'. While some conspiracy theories are retarded, doesn't mean all conspiracy theories are made up (or at least, not entirely untrue).

People think they're doing fine. But they're not fine. It's like the frog in hot water, that's turned a few degrees hotter very gradually, until it eventually boils.

[BobK71]

...
Elites really use the governments to gain more power and more profits.This isn`t a secret.
...

True, it's not a secret.  While it's one thing to know the system is manipulated, the knowledge is useful only if we understand precisely how it's manipulated.  That is the only way to undo the manipulation without ending up with something even worse than before (such as socialism or fascism, etc.)

That was what I tried to accomplish.

[BobK71]

I think I just had an epiphany. This is what bitcoiners have been saying all along! If you want to disrupt the banks then do not make deposits to them. What you should do is "deposit" them where you have total control of your money! Buy BTC. Well it is not really "buying", what you are actually doing is converting fiat to BTC. So do it now and encourage the people around you to do it too. Enough with the BS of the banks.

This points to why the elites almost can't stand the current state of affairs.

The way the system was designed, bank interest was always significantly positive (and of course inflation was even higher,) so people were pushed to put money in the bank while the system was stable (and the state would bail out some banks, provide deposit insurance, etc. to prop up public confidence in the banks.)

With bank interest at zero, the whole scheme is not working as designed.  The longer this lasts, the more chance of a financial cataclysm that will further expose the system to public opinion.

[dc1a0]

There's one big problem with the public waking up. That is, they don't want to because that would require them to start taking responsibility themselves.Most of the people I've talked to simply don't want to do it; whether it was an option within the broken system that would allow them to still ignore much of the responsibility or not. I don't think many are going to wake up until something happens and they're forced to, However, by then, it will be too late and it will take a lot more effort to get out of the hole they find themselves in.

I should know, I found myself in such a hole after telling the "wrong" groups of people where to go, and it seems I'm still a very long way from getting out of it.

[BobK71]

Sadly, most people nowadays are stubborn and misinformed about many things.

And they also think 'conspiracy' is synonymous to 'batshit crazy theory'. While some conspiracy theories are retarded, doesn't mean all conspiracy theories are made up (or at least, not entirely untrue).

People think they're doing fine. But they're not fine. It's like the frog in hot water, that's turned a few degrees hotter very gradually, until it eventually boils.

The interesting thing here is that all the information and knowledge are freely available.  All you have to do is connect the dots.

The way I connected the dots could theoretically be problematic, but this has gone through a lot of debate online with knowledgeable experts and insiders (who don't hesitate to pounce with their expertise!) and so I'm fairly confident.

My sense is that quite a few of the top people know, but won't talk about it on their own.

[BobK71]

There's one big problem with the public waking up. That is, they don't want to because that would require them to start taking responsibility themselves.Most of the people I've talked to simply don't want to do it; whether it was an option within the broken system that would allow them to still ignore much of the responsibility or not. I don't think many are going to wake up until something happens and they're forced to, However, by then, it will be too late and it will take a lot more effort to get out of the hole they find themselves in.

I should know, I found myself in such a hole after telling the "wrong" groups of people where to go, and it seems I'm still a very long way from getting out of it.

If you're referring to taking responsibility for your life under a true market economy, all I can say is, you can't force people to do anything -- all you can do is vote for a system with the right incentives (which also, BTW, protect people who do live responsibly.)

If you're referring to taking the civic responsibility to protect the public against powerful insiders, having state-free money would precisely make it unnecessary to keep track of what the elites are up to, every minute.  I'm convinced that, if there is any involvement with money by the state, the elites will eventually make things complicated enough that the public can't figure out what they're up to, regardless of how educated the public are, and what system we start with.

[Wind_FURY]

Example: The Bank Account

Public illusion. A commercial-bank 'deposit' is as good as money.  You will get all your money back, any time you want.

Reality. 'Deposits' are really loans to the bank which lends them to borrowers, some of whom may never pay them back.  Another danger is that savers may ask for their money at any time, while loans by the bank tend to have longer-term maturities.

I think I just had an epiphany. This is what bitcoiners have been saying all along! If you want to disrupt the banks then do not make deposits to them. What you should do is "deposit" them where you have total control of your money! Buy BTC. Well it is not really "buying", what you are actually doing is converting fiat to BTC. So do it now and encourage the people around you to do it too. Enough with the BS of the banks.

Well, here is another way to look at the matter, Wind_FURY.  If you just hold on to your CA$H, not depositing it in the bank nor buying Bitcoin, you accomplish the same main purpose -- keeping your money out of the bank.  BTC does have certain advantages (and disadvantages) that make it a different asset, IMO.

The same could be said for gold.  Gold does have one other feature, namely that once you have receive your gold, you already have been paid!  That's not really true with US$, in that you still must spend them in order to get something you want.  If you want gold, then any gold you own is free of "counterparty risk" (other than thievery).  Buying gold also keeps your money out of the bank.

Well yes but the problem with that is the storing of cash and/or gold. But let us talk about gold for this purpose because paper money is nothing more like an IOU that is entrusted banks promising us that it has the said value.

But anyway back to gold. As you said gold is free from counterparty risk but how are you going to store it? You also cannot carry it around with you all the time. This is where the genius of satoshi comes in. Thru technology he knew he can create a new asset that is free of counter party risk, totally controlled by the user and the transactions can also be verified by the users themselves.

[Kakmakr]

I don't mean to take away from your effort, this is a great post, you've obviously put some thought into it, however your theory is fundamentally flawed. It looks great on paper but in practice the system it would give rise to wouldn't be any different from the current one.
You start with the assumption that there is something wrong with the current system and then proceed to identify the faulty element(s). The problem with this is that you're viewing the whole thing in God mode. By that I mean that you've taken yourself out of the picture, you're looking at everything with a critical eye (admittedly with good intentions). While making yourself the exception (perhaps unintentionally?).
The ones you blame are but reflections of yourself, although it is hard to see this if you're caught up in trivialities like wealth and power right from the start.
An honest 'system' is impossible to achieve simply because honesty is not a trait of human nature. It doesn't matter how much you twist and turn, how much you theorize and improve upon your theories, you will always end up at square one. Even if you decentralized power, everything would still remain the same.
But perhaps your goal is only to obtain a meatier/fairer slice of power?

Good question.

Certainly, none of us should be relied on to be honest at all times, and especially when a lot of money is at stake.  But the whole point of democracy, free markets, due process, and other ideals of the Enlightenment is surely to make it so we *don't* have to rely on people being honest, especially at the top, as much as possible.  I'm suggesting that we add managing money to the list of prohibitions against the state.

But it does seem you might have a deeper point as well...  If so please let me know.  There's also the 'imperialist' argument, that if one government refuses to inflate financial assets, it will be replaced by one who will, whether from inside or outside the country.  Would that fit into your view too?

If you take away the management of money away from the state, who do you task to do this? In any organization, private or public, corruption and theft are present. We are dealing with human greed and a lust for power and control. Bitcoin kind of solve that problem with the protocol restrictions and the consensus and public participation, but the developers in charge is still the weak points. < These people can still be bribed and influenced >

What solution are you putting on the table to take out the human element out of this? 

[BobK71]

If you take away the management of money away from the state, who do you task to do this? In any organization, private or public, corruption and theft are present. We are dealing with human greed and a lust for power and control. Bitcoin kind of solve that problem with the protocol restrictions and the consensus and public participation, but the developers in charge is still the weak points. < These people can still be bribed and influenced >

What solution are you putting on the table to take out the human element out of this?  

Money should be treated as any other commodity, whose value is totally determined by the marketplace.  This regime has already been tested with great success during the Italian Renaissance and the Scottish 'free banking' era (not due to an enlightened public but due to accidents of geopolitics.)

This is not necessarily (and probably won't be, thankfully) a return to 'hard' money.  Savers could have great confidence in a script I issue in my garage, provided that whatever venture backs that script is determined to be a good bet by the market.  When capital's value and confidence is determined by state-free supply and demand, capital tends to flow in productive directions and savings tend to be safe.

With the right incentives, banking can play its role as financial innovator and a great engine of growth, without destabilizing the economy.

It's only modern economists who tell us money has to be managed by some central authority.  (The same economists who unanimously endorsed the gold standard in its day, and unanimously condemn it today -- both times saying just what the elites want them to.)

It is true that we still won't get total honesty.  Bitcoin has money 'stolen' from 'hacked' exchanges, but if you leave most of your savings on an exchange, you probably should lose it to learn a life lesson!  We can't guarantee honesty, but we can set up the right incentives, which will go a long way.

In the big picture, it's quite possible what the public lack is simply a kind of rough understanding.

In a more philosophical sense, it remains to be seen whether a population not well versed in the conceptual tools required by monetary and financial thinking can ultimately hold to account an elite determined to skim off the cream of their labor and destabilize everything in life.  A blanket rule that imposes simplicity might work, but at this philosophical level all we have are opinions, and nobody knows.  So I'd say let's give it a try, and a really good try.  If we decide to give up, on the other hand, we have to be very, very careful to examine our motivation, in case it's really a form of expedience (not necessarily personal, but possibly over short-term issues in the economy.)

[BobK71]

This is not necessarily (and probably won't be, thankfully) a return to 'hard' money.  Savers could have great confidence in a script I issue in my garage, provided that whatever venture backs that script is determined to be a good bet by the market.  When capital's value and confidence is determined by state-free supply and demand, capital tends to flow in productive directions and savings tend to be safe.

With the right incentives, banking can play its role as financial innovator and a great engine of growth, without destabilizing the economy.

BTW, one of the funniest episodes of modern finance was during the South Seas bubble, not long after the founding of the Bank of England.  Money flowed into all kinds of equities (driven indirectly by the state's power to inflate debt), including one venture where investors were explicitly told they would not know what they were getting into, just 'an endeavor of great advantage.'

[dc1a0]

There's one big problem with the public waking up. That is, they don't want to because that would require them to start taking responsibility themselves.Most of the people I've talked to simply don't want to do it; whether it was an option within the broken system that would allow them to still ignore much of the responsibility or not. I don't think many are going to wake up until something happens and they're forced to, However, by then, it will be too late and it will take a lot more effort to get out of the hole they find themselves in.

I should know, I found myself in such a hole after telling the "wrong" groups of people where to go, and it seems I'm still a very long way from getting out of it.

If you're referring to taking responsibility for your life under a true market economy, all I can say is, you can't force people to do anything -- all you can do is vote for a system with the right incentives (which also, BTW, protect people who do live responsibly.)

If you're referring to taking the civic responsibility to protect the public against powerful insiders, having state-free money would precisely make it unnecessary to keep track of what the elites are up to, every minute.  I'm convinced that, if there is any involvement with money by the state, the elites will eventually make things complicated enough that the public can't figure out what they're up to, regardless of how educated the public are, and what system we start with.

My apologies for the late reply, I lost track of this thread and just discovered the link "Show new replies to your posts" at the top.

In a way, I was actually talking about both. If the people I have discussed these types of things with are any indication, the majority of people just don't want to take responsibility for their lives as it is easier to be taken by a sweet lie than to deal with the truth. As for voting, I'm not sure that works any more when the only choices you are given are curry with shit in it, or shit with curry in it.

As for dealing with powerful insiders, or in my case even people who know how to work a broke system, you would be surprised how much your quality of life can be damaged because they were the wrong person to tell what they could go do with their self. That's exactly what got me interested in state-free money.

[BobK71]

My apologies for the late reply, I lost track of this thread and just discovered the link "Show new replies to your posts" at the top.

In a way, I was actually talking about both. If the people I have discussed these types of things with are any indication, the majority of people just don't want to take responsibility for their lives as it is easier to be taken by a sweet lie than to deal with the truth. As for voting, I'm not sure that works any more when the only choices you are given are curry with shit in it, or shit with curry in it.

As for dealing with powerful insiders, or in my case even people who know how to work a broke system, you would be surprised how much your quality of life can be damaged because they were the wrong person to tell what they could go do with their self. That's exactly what got me interested in state-free money.

No worries!

I believe a lot of your issue with responsibility is par for the course for imperial decline.  Over the decades, the system has 'bribed' various constituencies, including most of the Western electorate, into accepting it.  One of the major type of bribes is unearned wealth, in the form of generous safety nets, good jobs from economic and financial distortions, etc.  In a sense, these people believe in sweet lies because they actually lived them for a while.  Eventually, of course, all the chickens come home to roost (and they tend all to come at the same time!)

We are very close to, if not already at, such a time.  The financial deception at the heart of the system has forced the elites to accept Chinese currency manipulation over the last two decades in order to effect the needed artificial support for Western-issued money and other assets.  This has basically emptied out good Western middle class jobs and is the cause of the rise of political extremism as well as financial instability.

I am sorry, but I can't seem to understand your comment about powerful insiders.

[OROBTC]

...

The Parasitocracy also includes (IMO) a large class of liars and grifters.  TPTB now claim to be "looking out for us" when, of course, they are merely looking after themselves.  This has been going on a long time here in the USA, a convenient starting point for this line of thought would be President Andrew Jackson.  Jackson claimed to be a friend of the Native Americans, that he was looking after them like a father, when he was stealing their lands for the benefit of himself and his land-speculating cronies...

Jackson was the real founder of the Democrat Party.  The D-Team claims to speak for the poor, especially African-Americans, while their plight has never improved.  Not even after 7+ years of our first African-American president, and Obama had complete control of Congress for a few years.

Reference (and highly recommended): Hillary's America (Dinesh D'Souza)

[BobK71]

...

The Parasitocracy also includes (IMO) a large class of liars and grifters.  TPTB now claim to be "looking out for us" when, of course, they are merely looking after themselves.  This has been going on a long time here in the USA, a convenient starting point for this line of thought would be President Andrew Jackson.  Jackson claimed to be a friend of the Native Americans, that he was looking after them like a father, when he was stealing their lands for the benefit of himself and his land-speculating cronies...

Jackson was the real founder of the Democrat Party.  The D-Team claims to speak for the poor, especially African-Americans, while their plight has never improved.  Not even after 7+ years of our first African-American president, and Obama had complete control of Congress for a few years.

Reference (and highly recommended): Hillary's America (Dinesh D'Souza)

I don't think any modern politician has a clean past (well, maybe a few do, like Jimmy Carter -- but then no one would work with him.)

Since Andrew Jackson caused the central bank to be buried for seven decades, I wouldn't be surprised if most of his negative press is payback from its advocates.

The slogan is always public good, while the reality is always a very personal 'good!'

[BobK71]

But anyway back to gold. As you said gold is free from counterparty risk but how are you going to store it? You also cannot carry it around with you all the time. This is where the genius of satoshi comes in. Thru technology he knew he can create a new asset that is free of counter party risk, totally controlled by the user and the transactions can also be verified by the users themselves.

Counterparty risk is the famous problem, but the real problem is that paper issued by the elites of the state-bank alliance is guaranteed to be debased over the long term precisely because these elites have the power to prop up its value for a while.  The problem is the incentives for these people to abuse their power.

In a truly free market, counterparty risk would be properly priced into the asset's value, so you get what you pay for.

Unfortunately, in today's world any asset with counterparty risk is directly or indirectly propped up by the elites with state power, and is over-valued, and that's the only reason why we're forced to hide under assets with no counterparty risk.

[BobK71]

Well, I guess this is the first post-Trump comment...

Speaking of Trump, perhaps my dire warnings of 'political extremism' has been outdone by reality!

[OROBTC]

...

I'm in Russia now (St Pete via cruise ship with lousy wifi).

Things here are at least a tad better than described by our Fake News Media, but a one day visit means little (other than my stint as a desk-jockey Cold War participant decades ago when they were the USSR).

Putin is not a lovable guy, but he has huge support here, and America would be wise to make deals, good deals, with him.  The sanctions and Russia-bashing are stupid beyond words.  We can do business with this man.

BTW, St Pete is the only cruise port I have EVER visited where you had to go through a passport control, even on a shore excursion.  But, beyond question Russia <> USSR.


EDIT: Putin is reputed to be the richest man in the world (more than Gates and Buffett combined).  He is a parasite too, few clean hands among people who claw their way to the top of any big organization.