Thread: a society changing idea...for the better?

Well basically what you've done there is refused to give back the money you borrowed from somebody; if everybody did this I guess it would precipitate an economic meltdown. Well done.

they couldnt arrest everyone

That's what the FEMA camps are for.

Lol, well it is pretty impractical to imagine enough people rallying for any cause together . Were so divided.

That said, there's nothing like a real economic depression to unite people to do crazy things! I mean, didn't Americans already do something like this back in the great depression? Entire neighborhoods stopped paying their mortgage, not out of choice mind you, they literally had no money. The banks would foreclose and put up their house for auction. Since the whole neighborhood was suffering, they united together and neighbors bought each others houses from the banks auctions. How's a $5 house auction? Lol.

It would take something epic, huge, and life threatening to get enough modern people to fight against the system.

Alternatively, you could build a cob home and live simply. One of the philosophies behind cob building is to be mortgage free, and to get back to our roots where people knew how to house themselves. Also, the cob book Im reading makes some good arguments against the established system.

For example, modern houses are so expensive most people will spend most of their adult life paying off their mortgage, with the interest making them pay for their house three times over. At the same time, you never actually own your house. The bank owns your house until you are done paying. After spending DECADES to finally OWN your house, it's old and already needs major repairs. Modern houses have a short life span, especially in comparison to cob houses which can last generations. If not a millennium or more.

As for cars, well I haven't figured that part out. Maybe we all need to go for a walk more often? I see people here who struggle just to walk across a parking lot.

Or how about student loans? How about we rebel against our student loans until our income reflects the promise of higher education?

I don't have a car payment, I own my car outright and have for the last 5 years. I got a used car and bought it with cash. I don't own a house, so I don't pay a mortgage.

Originally Posted by Xei

Well basically what you've done there is refused to give back the money you borrowed from somebody; if everybody did this I guess it would precipitate an economic meltdown. Well done.

where did the money come from that they lent us? basically from the tax payers i think if you follow banker bailouts.

Originally Posted by juroara

Lol, well it is pretty impractical to imagine enough people rallying for any cause together . Were so divided.

That said, there's nothing like a real economic depression to unite people to do crazy things! I mean, didn't Americans already do something like this back in the great depression? Entire neighborhoods stopped paying their mortgage, not out of choice mind you, they literally had no money. The banks would foreclose and put up their house for auction. Since the whole neighborhood was suffering, they united together and neighbors bought each others houses from the banks auctions. How's a $5 house auction? Lol.

It would take something epic, huge, and life threatening to get enough modern people to fight against the system.

Alternatively, you could build a cob home and live simply. One of the philosophies behind cob building is to be mortgage free, and to get back to our roots where people knew how to house themselves. Also, the cob book Im reading makes some good arguments against the established system.

For example, modern houses are so expensive most people will spend most of their adult life paying off their mortgage, with the interest making them pay for their house three times over. At the same time, you never actually own your house. The bank owns your house until you are done paying. After spending DECADES to finally OWN your house, it's old and already needs major repairs. Modern houses have a short life span, especially in comparison to cob houses which can last generations. If not a millennium or more.

As for cars, well I haven't figured that part out. Maybe we all need to go for a walk more often? I see people here who struggle just to walk across a parking lot.

Or how about student loans? How about we rebel against our student loans until our income reflects the promise of higher education?

Your house is never truly yours, even after you pay it off, if you count property taxes. and i like your idea about students loans but about the cars, i say just keep them. stop paying the bill. screw the banksters.

Originally Posted by Xei

Well basically what you've done there is refused to give back the money you borrowed from somebody; if everybody did this I guess it would precipitate an economic meltdown. Well done.

also xei, the banks get all the profits then when their gambles dont work out they get to socialize their losses. its bullshit. not to mention the fact that most of the banks only had $1 for every $40-$60 they lent out. what they hell was going on? they screw us (and you as well in england) whenever it is convenient for them.

In order to add human will, one must first have will to add.

What do you think Plato was about? or Christ, or Confucius? The Scripture, human judgment?

What do you think my work has been about?

If you want to change the world, you have to at least provide the tools by which a person can learn to develope their own will by.

Otherwise, a heap of people will always be just a heap.

Doing what one pleases and willing a thing is not the same thing. If one does not even know the difference, well, they will never accomplish anything of any lasting value.

Lucid dreaming itself is such a tool, perhaps one of the greatest. However, if you don't even have the sense to know how to use it, or even what it is for, it wont do you any good either.

There are standards in human psychology to be discovered and deployed, just like standards in measurement. They are linguistically based. How well you think determines how well you will do.

The metaphor about the mark on the forehead and on the hands is just such a metaphor, and, your ability not to see it, should tell you how far away you are from understanding even simple things.

It is simple mindedness to think one can craft a social structure when they cannot even craft themselves.

Originally Posted by poopman

also xei, the banks get all the profits then when their gambles dont work out they get to socialize their losses. its bullshit. not to mention the fact that most of the banks only had $1 for every $40-$60 they lent out. what they hell was going on? they screw us (and you as well in england) whenever it is convenient for them.

So why did you borrow from them? That was your decision.

You can't borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars from somebody and then say, 'I don't like your practices so actually I think I'll keep this money', it's ridiculous. It's not yours. Why on Earth do you think you have this right?

Originally Posted by Xei

So why did you borrow from them? That was your decision.

You can't borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars from somebody and then say, 'I don't like your practices so actually I think I'll keep this money', it's ridiculous. It's not yours. Why on Earth do you think you have this right?

i dont have a mortgage. but the money is not real. it is created out of thin air. they get it for free. what right do they have to create money?

What right do you have to steal the created money?

Originally Posted by poopman

not to mention the fact that most of the banks only had $1 for every $40-$60 they lent out. what they hell was going on?

It's called fractional reserve banking.

thats called imaginary money

People don't realize that if more than 10%(some banks this goes as low as 1%) of people in any given bank withdraws their money at one time, they wouldn't have any money left to give back. Banks rely on the fact that at any given time only a tiny percentage of people with money in their bank, will actually want it. Most banks operate at dangerous levels of available money.

Originally Posted by juroara

thats called imaginary money

In Layman's terms, yes.

Originally Posted by Alric

People don't realize that if more than 10%(some banks this goes as low as 1%) of people in any given bank withdraws their money at one time, they wouldn't have any money left to give back. Banks rely on the fact that at any given time only a tiny percentage of people with money in their bank, will actually want it. Most banks operate at dangerous levels of available money.

Moral of the story: Rob a liquor store instead.

Originally Posted by Xei

So why did you borrow from them? That was your decision.

You can't borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars from somebody and then say, 'I don't like your practices so actually I think I'll keep this money', it's ridiculous. It's not yours. Why on Earth do you think you have this right?

I agree with this one hundred percent. Fortunately a bank isn't 'someone'. It manages to be simultaneously a fictitious and rapacious entity. I see no reason not to rob it blind if it's practical and convenient to do so. It's not like you're actually robbing anything from a real, living organism.


On the whole, I think that it's a great idea. Perhaps it would precipitate an economic meltdown but so what. It's a corrupt system now, the worst that could happen is that a corrupt system would replace it. Somethings gotta give eventually.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

I agree with this one hundred percent. Fortunately a bank isn't 'someone'. It manages to be simultaneously a fictitious and rapacious entity. I see no reason not to rob it blind if it's practical and convenient to do so. It's not like you're actually robbing anything from a real, living organism.

Legally, an incorporated bank is a person . And in any case, the bank is owned by real, living organisms who would be directly impacted.

On the whole, I think that it's a great idea. Perhaps it would precipitate an economic meltdown but so what. It's a corrupt system now, the worst that could happen is that a corrupt system would replace it. Somethings gotta give eventually.

Except that in the mean time anarchy would ensue with many people dying and mass poverty. When the USSR (and it's centralized economy) collapsed in the early 90s, Russia's life expectancy fell by a decade and their economy still hasn't fully recovered 20 years later.

There are better ways of instituting change if we want to see it in our lifetime.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Legally, an incorporated bank is a person . And in any case, the bank is owned by real, living organisms who would be directly impacted.

Right. It's owned by shareholders which, as keepers of wage slaves, are very low down on my list of priorities. Honestly if I saw the typical billionaire burning I wouldn't piss on him to put it out.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Except that in the mean time anarchy would ensue with many people dying and mass poverty. When the USSR (and it's centralized economy) collapsed in the early 90s, Russia's life expectancy fell by a decade and their economy still hasn't fully recovered 20 years later.

This is true but given that this is likely to happen with the collapse of the oil economy anyways, I'm not sure that it constitutes a large enough negative to detract from the overall worth of the proposal.

Civilization in general is founded on delusions to numerous to discuss in this format. The delusion that we can grow at a rate faster than the sun feeds energy into the ecosystem is one. Another, more directly related to the topic at hand, is that ownership exists. If some billionaire wants to tell me that I have to pay for access to land that that slimy motherfucker's never even looked at then I call that delusion. Granted, it's written into our laws that he has the right (another questionable notion) to do this sort of thing but there is neither a mandate from nor a god to mandate that this is the way it is supposed to be. It's essentially feudalism and I see no reason to accept it.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Legally, an incorporated bank is a person . And in any case, the bank is owned by real, living organisms who would be directly impacted.



Except that in the mean time anarchy would ensue with many people dying and mass poverty. When the USSR (and it's centralized economy) collapsed in the early 90s, Russia's life expectancy fell by a decade and their economy still hasn't fully recovered 20 years later.

There are better ways of instituting change if we want to see it in our lifetime.

such as? we are all open to ideas.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

I agree with this one hundred percent. Fortunately a bank isn't 'someone'. It manages to be simultaneously a fictitious and rapacious entity. I see no reason not to rob it blind if it's practical and convenient to do so. It's not like you're actually robbing anything from a real, living organism.

Except for all the people who have money in said bank.

The worst about banks is that in good times they are totally free to risk the money to profit more and yet burrow money from government as they like, who is ordinary people in essence -- or should be. It's like they are another class of humans, the enlightened ones, and can do as they please.

Originally Posted by Awakening

The worst about banks is that in good times they are totally free to risk the money to profit more and yet burrow money from government as they like, who is ordinary people in essence -- or should be. It's like they are another class of humans, the enlightened ones, and can do as they please.

Such is fractional reserve banking, and central banking in general.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Except for all the people who have money in said bank.

How so? If I take out a hundred thousand dollar loan and don't pay it back, the next person in line can still withdraw their money. What have I stolen from them?

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

How so? If I take out a hundred thousand dollar loan and don't pay it back, the next person in line can still withdraw their money. What have I stolen from them?

Not in fractional reserve banking. Banks only keep a fraction of their deposits on hand. If someone deposits money, the bank will use some of that money to lend out to someone who wants a loan. The bank expects a return on that loan. If they didn't get their money back (aka, if you default on your loan), the bank has lost money. If this happens often enough,like during a bank run, the bank cannot finance any withdrawals. That's a very rough explanation. So really, if you're just taking out loans and not paying them back, you're sort of robbing a real, living organism of his money.

The blame goes both ways though. One way to you, who likes to default on their loans, and the other to the system of fractional reserve banking.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Not in fractional reserve banking. Banks only keep a fraction of their deposits on hand. If someone deposits money, the bank will use some of that money to lend out to someone who wants a loan. The bank expects a return on that loan. If they didn't get their money back (aka, if you default on your loan), the bank has lost money. If this happens often enough,like during a bank run, the bank cannot finance any withdrawals. That's a very rough explanation. So really, if you're just taking out loans and not paying them back, you're sort of robbing a real, living organism of his money.

Well that's a rather fragile system then isn't it? This is intimately related to the delusion that our growth can out pace the sun's input as it is largely fractional reserve banking that has made this possible. They are essentially giving out money that they don't have and that doesn't rightfully exist (Not that money has any rightful claim to existence in the first place).

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

The blame goes both ways though. One way to you, who likes to default on their loans, and the other to the system of fractional reserve banking.

I don't see that I would have any blame in the situation at all. I took fictitious money from a fictitious entity and didn't give it back. It is the banks that put themselves in the situation by exploiting the need of the individual in order to make a profit. If the people needed their money bad enough, I would recommend that they roll up on the bankers house with the appropriate arms and take it out excessive and decadent wealth to be found there. Once that is depleted, there is no end to the amount of oil, tobacco and arms companies along with their associated billionaires to share the wealth as well.