|
Money as a transitional structure.No, I am not gone mad. By its characteristic, money is a "civic institution" and as such it has fundamentally a transitional structure. Depending on how money is perceived, it can be transitional to anarchy as we have it presently unfolding, or it can be transitional to infrastructural and industrial development. If it is transitional to anarchy the basic assumptions about money are erroneous. In other words, it doesn't meet the design objective to support the society and advance civilization. If the object of money is to create millionaires and gambling empires, then, it fails to meet the design objective and a transition into anarchy occurs. Moreover, this transitional state will continue to endure for as long as the erroneous assumption about money are maintained. By the same token, if the object of money is to support the development of society and civilization, its stability is assured, as the resulting transition is towards a structure of fundamental stability. This is basically how money works. The old saying that greed is good for commerce is an oligarchic advertising scheme that has nothing to do with reality; or that one must take risks and wager, in order to win. Such sayings are all fundamentally lies and open the gates to anarchy as every gambler has experienced. Development depends on reason. It does not depend on greed, risk, or wagers, but on scientific discipline. Scientific discipline prevents the supposed need for risk taking, as well as the need for concocting schemes for taking profit. Without this discipline, in spite of all the schemes in the world, there is no profit won for society and the schemes turn sour, the profits fade into thin air, and society decays. A brief comparison is useful here. Let us compare the value produced (added) by manufacturing, which amounts to app. 70% of the goods-producing sector of the economy, and let us judge by this comparison how the 'richest' nation in the world, the U.S.A. has performed over a span of forty years beginning in 1951. In 1951 the U.S. manufacturing sector generated $102 billion worth of value added production. At this time the interest on the national debt amounted to $17 billion, or 16 cents per dollar of value produced. In 1991 the U.S. manufacturing sector generated $1.331 trillion worth of value added production, while the interest on the debt had risen to a whopping $1.725 trillion. In other words, the debt service now claimed $1.29 for every dollar's worth of value manufactured by the nation, and 1991 was a good year in comparison to the years that followed.*(See The New Federalist, pamphlet Aug. 1994 The Coming Disintegration of The Financial Markets p.15) || - page index - || - chapter index - || - Exit - ||
|
