XPost: alt.politics.socialism

Things are worse than what many people who critisize Central Banks as the
main cause of modern problems seem to think. Land (soil, trees, rivers,
the weather, _a place)_ is the starting point of all economics. Work
starts point blank, stick in the ground. There are no investors,
money doesn't even exist. This is here it already went wrong. In a
*civil* -ization, any sort off, you are supposed to be on the _same
side_ ultimately. Economics is friendly competition for a greater
good. Economics is not war, should not be war.

What does a _civilization_ do in the stone age: everyone will be allowed
to head into the woods and do what they need to do. Everyone gets access
to the river bank. In the stone age this is a given, and difficult to
prevent. If you get into an argument you walk away for a day and may never
see those people again. There you find: *free land.* The starting point
of the economy is always open to you. There are very few people. Trade
can already flourish in this environment, and reportedly did. This
is how humanity learned about trade. The land itself was not part of
it. Basically everyone had access to land, even though the quality was
not always the same.

Everything changed when people started farming, and this is where it
all went wrong already. They should have done the civilized thing and
given _everyone_ a right to land, and every generation again everyone
should have their right to a place honored, for free. In this kind of
an environment, trade flourishes and free initiative comes up from the
bottom non stop. Small businesses can have extremely low or even zero
fixed costs. They cannot even go bankrupt. Compare this to opening a
boutique shop in a busy city center.

This is where everything went wrong, this is where the disease is. It
is in the ignorance of the people to not allow _each other_ and everyone
their children, constantly and forever the right to an equal share of the _land._ With the starting point of the economy being messed up, what was
to come of this was going to be the symptoms of the underlying disease.
This disease is thousands of years old.

The final stage of production and trade, the final aim, is money. Money
is the most refined product. Land itself is the start of all economics,
and money is the end. This disease of unfairness and ignorance in
the management of land, the fantasy that land would work in a market,
this war of all against all, has now burned through the entire economic process. It starts with land centralization and landlessness, both of
course are one and the same thing. This is the start of the underclass,
the slavery class, and the master class, the bosses, the Dictators,
the exploitation.

In the middle of the problem you get dictatorial companies, well suited
to extract maximum value out of landless masses, and in the end you get
massive capital build up in the hands of the few, who set up parasitic investment and loan operations. This latest group eventually manages to overtake the State, take over basically everything, and these days they
have set up Central Banks. This is of course not the end either, but it
is a form of the ultimate economic power to be allowed to create the most refined economic product (money) in infinite quantities for your private
gains. You could say that this is the ultimate form of economic abuse.

It is however still a symptom of an underlying disease, and that is the
failure to understand how land works in the era of farming. How does
it work then ? On top of a distribution of land by right, you can and
I think should have a market in land rent. You can rent your land out,
provided you can always get it back. You must always have the ability
to go back to your land. The good this does is so much, it would take
me another page to sing the praises of this model.

For starters anyway: small businesses do not require any investment,
small businesses do not go bankrupt, and nobody is unemployed by
definition. Even though having land does not equal success, at least
it gives people opportunity. Sitting on the sidelines is a 100% waste,
a total loss. If you have land you can at least still do _something._
You can also just do the same as ever, and search for a job at some
company who wants to hire you. This time you have land to share. It
makes you more powerful, also in the job market.

I have already heard all the supposed arguments against it, and it is
quite tiring to deal with the shallowness with which these arguments are
thrown up. Favorites are: we don't all want to become farmers (a phony argument, nobody said that), or such a system cannot adapt to changes in population (also phony, it depends on how you implement it). Meanwhile
the quite complicated system we have now, where land is often not at all available to people who want it, is completely ignored. As if things are working well in the system we have. No, things do not work well, at all.

It is however Game Over time. Humanity has had more than enough time to
get serious and civil. They chose not to, and now in the age of nukes
they still don't care. Humanity has failed. Perhaps the best that can
happen to humanity, with its stone age mindset and inability to adapt
to a farming life, let alone a high technological life, is to indeed go
back to the state which their minds never left. The Stone age. Humanity
belongs in the Stone Age, where it is _unable_ to deny each other basic freedoms. The violence of humanity also belongs in the stone age. We don't
need violence, we have all the tools we need to defeat any animal. We
only risk our own survival with continued violence.

Humanity is a flat out full bore failure, although it could have been
worse. Maybe it is fair to say that if humanity needed to score at least
a 6 on the development scale of intelligence and civility to make it as
a farming species, on a scale from 0 to 10, then maybe humanity scores
.... something like a .... pff I don't know ... a 3 or a 4 ? Not as
bad as it could be, but significantly not good enough, a margin which
will not easily be made up for. I think this situation implies natural consequences, a natural correction where the violence that should not
have been anymore, the centralization that should not have been anymore,
will do their natural thing, resulting in humanity being put back in
the Stone Age.

That is the lucky outcome, by the way. There are two worse outcomes:
extinction and high technological hell forever (the aim of our ruling
class, they think they will be the masters of that hell; serious i'm not
joking at all, everyone with a kill chip in their head and then they will
fight each other for the power as usual, and then off to other planets
to enslave and exploit whatever they can find, this nightmare scenario
is what they live for).

There is also the 4th option, and that is to finally get it right. For
Jewish people this is comparatively easy, and it is also relatively easy
for probably quite a few American Indian tribes, because they have ideas
or even laws in this direction already. They lived it already. Sadly,
Israel ruined themselves by also not keeping to their Torah. As far as I
know, Israel was the largest scale example of land distribution, with
the stricted laws around it. This makes it easier for Israel to stop
their ignorance and get serious. For now, Israel is fully in the grips
of a Stone Age mindset, save for a few I guess, too few.

There are a tiny few examples of land distribution left, if that is
still operational, in certain special kinds of Kibutzim. It is difficult
to understand, why humanity can build such fantastic technologies, and
then be so mindless when it comes to fairly simply issues of economics.
If someone is scared or feels powerless, that would be one thing, but
why the dishonesty. You can at least admit something like: yes that
is true, that would be the way to do it, it would be interesting if we
had an experiment or something for starters.

Ah experiment, example. Who was that supposed to be ? Israel ... Where
are they, where is their Torah ? Their Torah is snug and safe in some
beautiful Yeshivah, crowned and wrapped with care. Does anyone seem to
care what it says about economics ? Land distribution or even loans ? It
does not look that way. I guess the outside stitching on the garment of
the Torah scroll is more important than what it reads in terms of laws.

Who will die because of this state of affairs ? Who will *not* die might
be a better question, on the brink of a nuclear world war.

--
Economic & political ideology, worked out into Constitutional models,
with a multi-facetted implementation plan. http://market.socialism.nl

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)