Fractional Law Making and Moral Debt

[iOWNme]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URwNVfJGsGs

http://www.seewithyourmind.org/index.php/political/34-fractional-law-making-and-moral-debt


Fractional Law Making Politician's over expand the Law supply through a fractional law making system.This inflation in the law supply leads to a devalue in the law. When law's are fractionally expanded they become more and more immoral and unjust. When citizen's are forced to live surrounded by degenerate law's their moral's become devalued as a result.

These fractional law's are a paper illusion.

Fractional Law Making creates a Moral Debt in society.

[General of Darkness]

Tag

[Santa]

Very thought provoking correlation.

[gunDriller]

the exponentially growing number of laws guarantees that we're all guilty of something.

yet there is serious diminishing returns from the extra laws. they do little to benefit the general public.

the other factor is that "politically connected" citizens and other groups that routinely receive "get out of jail free" cards, are allowed to commit the same crimes that are made illegal for the general public, but with impunity.


this system of selective enforcement of a massive legal code, that itself has diminishing returns = US gov., with the frequent support of state & local governments.

the net result - citizens who are often good people raised with a strong moral code see that it doesn't apply, and give up.


for example, why shouldn't i shoplift at Safeway if they sell me a cell-phone that doesn't work, and refuse to give me my money back ?

[Hypertiger]

The net producers are the fractional reserve and the net consumers are the credit derivatives that are supported by them.

[Golden]

The net producers are the fractional reserve and the net consumers are the credit derivatives that are supported by them.

Could it not be said both are complicit and compromised. That each knowing or unknowingly acts illegally in their own capacity?

It is my understanding our lies are never settled. (Past+Present=Future)
Hence, the facacta and the shmata. LOL

[Horn]

I thought they had a hard enough time of passing a buck...

http://ipwebdev.com/campaign/cg6.html

[iOWNme]

Very thought provoking correlation.

Thank you.

It truly is amazing how they have corrupted the Law, just like the money. When i first had this epiphany, I was blown away by how many similarities there are between the two. The over printing of Law's, the devalue of the Law's through inflation, and the moral debt that is accrued by these immoral and unjust Law's.

Just like i laid out in the video, when we left Common Law and the Gold standard, we literally left reality.

[Uncle Salty]

Good food for thought. Here are some of mine.

FRN's work really well in the unit of account and medium of exchange functions of money. They only fail in the store of value function. Fiat will never disappear and digital is here to stay as long as we have computers and electricity. So, FRN's are really only one third defective as money. An honest money system would just need to address the store of value deficiency and fiat is good to go! Hard money is dead and will never return. Not with 7 billion people on the planet who want convenience. Just figure out store of value in a world of fiat. Some have, you know.

Common Law works really well in a simpler time. But, are drunk driving laws bad? You can drive around drunk and never hurt anyone, so some might argue, why give tickets and criminalize drunk drivers if there are no victims? Others would argue that some victimless actions are worthy of being crimes. Where the line is drawn is the question. So let's say everyone agrees that criminalizing drunk driving is a good idea even though there is no victim. We agree because drunk driving will eventually lead to victims and it is better to prevent those as drunk driving has no real value for society.

Then some will try and apply that same standard to gun ownership by citizens but will only see the potential victims of gun ownership by citizens and not see the potential victims of a defenseless society against an armed government. And this is where it gets a bit more tricky. Weighing the costs and benefits that are more difficult to judge.

Debt jubilees have their place. We need a law jubilee. Start out again with common law and add judiciously.

[palani]

Culpa est immiscere se rei ad se non pertinenti. It is a fault to meddle with what does not belong to or does not concern you.

[Glass]

Common Law works really well in a simpler time. But, are drunk driving laws bad? You can drive around drunk and never hurt anyone, so some might argue, why give tickets and criminalize drunk drivers if there are no victims? Others would argue that some victimless actions are worthy of being crimes. Where the line is drawn is the question. So let's say everyone agrees that criminalizing drunk driving is a good idea even though there is no victim. We agree because drunk driving will eventually lead to victims and it is better to prevent those as drunk driving has no real value for society.


There is no need to draw the line. Nothing has occured to require the interference of another person. The whole of the problem is described succinctly in your paragraph as quoted. It's people not minding their own business. It's people making other people do what they want them to do without any right to do so. It's people who don't mind their own damn business that is the problem.

[Serpo]

Just remember..............................we know whats best for YOU...................

[Horn]

Great vid premise and comparison and, Sui Juris

[Uncle Salty]

There is no need to draw the line. Nothing has occured to require the interference of another person. The whole of the problem is described succinctly in your paragraph as quoted. It's people not minding their own business. It's people making other people do what they want them to do without any right to do so. It's people who don't mind their own damn business that is the problem.

So would you view a law against drunk driving a valid law even though there is no victim?

[Uncle Salty]

There is no need to draw the line. Nothing has occured to require the interference of another person. The whole of the problem is described succinctly in your paragraph as quoted. It's people not minding their own business. It's people making other people do what they want them to do without any right to do so. It's people who don't mind their own damn business that is the problem.

So perhaps a law of life imprisonment with no parole from drunk drivers who get into accidents? That way you punish when there is a victim and the punishment is so harsh as to act as a deterrent?

[Santa]

I like the idea of a Law Jubilee. That way I can go out and hang all the God damned liars. :mad:

But seriously, hyperbole aside, that was one of the best video narrations I've heard.

[Hypertiger]

People have no power to make or break LAW,

All that people can do is make and break rules and call rules LAW.

But if a rule attempts to break LAW...LAW will break the rule.

The so called Lawmakers have zero ability to do such.

They just fool the ignorant masses into thinking they do.

[Skirnir_]

Fractional law making politicians over expand the law supply through a fractional law making system.This inflation in the law supply leads to a devalue in the law. When laws are fractionally expanded they become more and more immoral and unjust. When citizen's are forced to live surrounded by degenerate laws their morals become devalued as a result.

These fractional laws are a paper illusion.

Fractional law making creates a moral debt in society.


I revised the quote in the original post because its author cannot capitalise nor correctly place his apostrophes, and I will not denigrate my posts with such things.

He is taking two things he does not like - fractional reserve banking, and excessive regulation - and making spurious comparisons between the two. The mechanics of fractional reserve banking have nothing to do with over-regulation aside from the fact that they are iterative processes. He can think what he pleases about laws on paper, but the gang of thieves that enforce them is very real.

It is a paper tiger at best, poorly written prattle at worst.

[iOWNme]

I revised the quote in the original post because its author cannot capitalise nor correctly place his apostrophes, and I will not denigrate my posts with such things.

He is taking two things he does not like - fractional reserve banking, and excessive regulation - and making spurious comparisons between the two. The mechanics of fractional reserve banking have nothing to do with over-regulation aside from the fact that they are iterative processes. He can think what he pleases about laws on paper, but the gang of thieves that enforce them is very real.

It is a paper tiger at best, poorly written prattle at worst.

Damn all of these compliments in one post, and I didnt even graduate from High School!

So there is no comparison to be made between the dollar/gold connection and the human/law connection? I beg to differ. I laid out very clearly how many similarities there are. I thought there was an interesting connection from a philosophical point of view NOT a literal one. Maybe you just like to nitpick, and point out where others are wrong? Maybe it was all of my custom artwork that distracted you from the main theme of my video? I can understand......

Gold is tangible right? Humans are tangible right? Can the State freely create gold or humans as much as they want? NO. But they can create paper all day long, and paper is a fiction.

I really dont mind people who disagree, as i like to learn and see other sides. But dont you think you could have communicated your thoughts a little more constructive?

I have an idea, you create something from nothing using an original thought and post it here for us. I promise i wont be too harsh on you. LOL


Thanks to the others who posted constructive criticisms, and to those who enjoyed my creation.....

[iOWNme]

I like the idea of a Law Jubilee. That way I can go out and hang all the God damned liars. :mad:

But seriously, hyperbole aside, that was one of the best video narrations I've heard.

I hope your kidding. One of the hardest things to do is record your own voice. LOL Its is very hard not to sound to happy, to sad, to angry, to crazy, etc. Not to mention nobody likes the sound of their own voice. I did tweak it a bit, to throw the NSA off.

:)

[iOWNme]

People have no power to make or break LAW,

All that people can do is make and break rules and call rules LAW.

But if a rule attempts to break LAW...LAW will break the rule.

The so called Lawmakers have zero ability to do such.

They just fool the ignorant masses into thinking they do.

I totally agree.

The premise of my video was not to be a literal explanation, but more of a philosophical one. (I cant believe i have had to explain that) And yet if these 'Rules' were always connected to representing an injured human being, the State would be restricted in its ability to over expand these 'Rules'. Thus forcing the State to be chained down by Law.

[BrewTech]

I revised the quote in the original post because its author cannot capitalise nor correctly place his apostrophes, and I will not denigrate my posts with such things.



I'd venture to say your the olny one hear that gives a shit...

I'm surprised (or maybe not) that there are actually people on this board that claim to respect you with a pompous BS attitude like that.

[palani]

Thus forcing the State to be chained down by Law.
I suppose you mean the government being chained by Law rather than the State. After all, if you are not the State then who else?

As to the premise, money represents lawform. If you intend to go through life relying upon government to establish credit for you then you had best rely upon them to establish your lawform as well. The two are intimately connected. Slaves use credit, gentlemen use silver whilst the State must rely upon gold (with a little silver mixed in).

[dys]

Personally I think the correlation is valid and I'd even go so far as to characterize the relationship as symbiotic. The qualities that contribute to this are the parasitic nature of the fractional reserve system, and the inevitable quest for yield by the players involved. At some point the law of diminishing returns takes over. As HT would say: "the top sucks from the bottom."

dys

[Horn]

Maybe it was all of my custom artwork that distracted you from the main theme of my video? I can understand......

Since you're taking complaints,

I would like to give the pasteboy judge character a D- for proportion & detail. :)

At the very least he should be twice as wide...

[messianicdruid]

"It is a fault to meddle with what does not belong to or does not concern you."

While law does concern us, the meddling [ rule-making ] is just that.

Nietzsche put in words the delusion of mortem divinium, insisting on consideration of the consequences { as few others subsequently would }, warning that we would need to be lighting a lamp in the morning, wondering how to we were to find the horizon without the concepts of up and down, the growth of philosophy disguised as science, the unmitigated acceptance and foolish desire for the unknown. Self-automatons leaping off the edge without knowing the depth of the pool, or even if it contained liquid.

Exceptionalism for the brilliant, beautiful or wealthy {arrogant?} who were encouraged to follow their own "inner law" was a terrible exemption unleashed on all; since the poor, ordinary and destitute would consequently suffer oppression at their hand.

As Heidegger put the problem, "If God as the suprasensory ground and goal of all reality is dead, if the suprasensory world of the ideas has suffered the loss of its obligatory and above it its vitalizing and upbuilding power, then nothing more remains to which man can cling and by which he can orient himself."

We live with his failure to bring about a naturalistic source of value in the vital impulses of life, simply because of not having the capacity to see both the beginning and the end, even when cautioned to look for it.

"I praise, I do not reproach, [nihilism's] arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!"

And where cometh strength? Not in politics or economics, I can assure you.

[Santa]

I hope your kidding. One of the hardest things to do is record your own voice. LOL Its is very hard not to sound to happy, to sad, to angry, to crazy, etc. Not to mention nobody likes the sound of their own voice. I did tweak it a bit, to throw the NSA off.

:)
I wasn't sure the narrator was you, Sui. Really good job. Solid vocal inflection. Clean and clear pronunciation. The graphics are excellent.
The lack of music actually increases it's message. Good choice. There's something about silence between words that can make them more potent. From an artistic standpoint it's simply excellent. I'm impressed.


when we left Common Law and the Gold standard, we literally left reality.

Philosophically, this is an interesting comment that I happen to agree with, at least in the sense that "reality" is a point or position within existence, and this position we think of as reality can be shifted. Or, as you suggest, we have literally left reality.

But to assume that by leaving reality, we then exist in UN-reality strikes me as somehow incorrect.

If reality is merely a position within existence, then what's happening is our position of cognitive understanding within existence
is shifting. A fundamental paradigm shift is occurring, because what we collectively think of as reality is our paradigm.


Can the State freely create gold or humans as much as they want?

This is another interesting point.
Assuming we're collectively in another position of reality within existence, I postulate that "yes indeed," the state, GOVCORP. can, or at least will soon be able to create, or at least make tangible more than enough gold to make it essentially as worthless as paper.

There's already technology available to extract vast quantities of the element from seawater and deep seabeds.
Considering the exponential rate of information and knowledge we're just beginning to feel, I give it no more than a few years.

I'd even postulate that GOVCORP may soon be able to manufacture humans. Or at least a facsimile thereof. They may already exist.

Minus the human soul, that is.... Pseudo humans, or post humans.

We're so fucked! >:(

[iOWNme]

I suppose you mean the government being chained by Law rather than the State. After all, if you are not the State then who else?

As to the premise, money represents lawform. If you intend to go through life relying upon government to establish credit for you then you had best rely upon them to establish your lawform as well. The two are intimately connected. Slaves use credit, gentlemen use silver whilst the State must rely upon gold (with a little silver mixed in).


Yes, i used the term 'State' to encompass all forms of 'Government'.

I do find your next statement quite intriguing. Gold/Silver were 'established' by Government as lawful money, and I see how that worked out. Although i do agree with your premise, it just seems there is always another side. But the Constitution does say Congress can emit 'credit', again another interesting anomaly.

I find the connection between how the way the Fractional Reserve Banking system works, and how the Law making system works to be almost identical in theory. They both function in a completely different form than they were intended to. Both were engineered to be chained down to reality. Both were made to have permanent restrictions built into them. Both were created to help man, NOT enslave him.

And when they both run into trouble, they either just print more money or make more Laws and POOF! They magically change reality and fix the real world problem with fiat solutions.

[palani]

Yes, i used the term 'State' to encompass all forms of 'Government'.

Best view the state as a separate entity than the government. Government can manifest itself in any of a number of different forms yet the entity it serves remains the same. The state (that would be YOU) might decide to be self-governing if capable of such a feat or it might consent to participate in a lottery called an election to agree to go along with the will of the majority.

Your connection to the government presently manifesting control is through the Department of Secretary of State. This is YOUR guy.


I do find your next statement quite intriguing. Gold/Silver were 'established' by Government as lawful money, and I see how that worked out. Although i do agree with your premise, it just seems there is always another side. But the Constitution does say Congress can emit 'credit', again another interesting anomaly.

Gold and silver were established by the People who set limits upon government through the Articles of Confederation and the U.S. constitution. This particular limit was upon the several States only and not upon the federal government. As long as the feds have credit (people accept their paper) the system will work. But under common law the maxim is:


If anything is due to a corporation, it is not due to the individual members of it, nor do the members individually owe what the corporation owes.


I find the connection between how the way the Fractional Reserve Banking system works, and how the Law making system works to be almost identical in theory. They both function in a completely different form than they were intended to. Both were engineered to be chained down to reality. Both were made to have permanent restrictions built into them. Both were created to help man, NOT enslave him. Contract is the source of law. Reason is the source of any action.


And when they both run into trouble, they either just print more money or make more Laws and POOF! They magically change reality and fix the real world problem with fiat solutions.

Another common law maxim:

Qui vult decipi, decipiatur. Let him who wishes to be deceived, be deceived.

Sometimes a little deceit is necessary because when commerce stops bullets start. As long as I can figure out how to let someone else deal with the deceit and I avoid the necessity of defending myself I would rather not gamble that which I cannot afford to lose.