rn- follow-up:economics, civilization, Malthus

2000-03-04

Jan Slakov

Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 21:24:59 -0800
From: Ed Deak <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: rn: Paul Isaacs on propaganda, economic disaster

At 11:05 PM 02/03/2000 -0400, Jan Slakov wrote:
>Paul, thank you for these crisp and pertinent insights!
>all the best, Jan
>********************************************************************
>From: Paul Isaacs <•••@••.•••>
>Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 00:25:54 -0500
>Subject: Re: rn: Znet: Right/Wrong reasons for opposing China's entry into WTO
>
>On 29-Feb-00, Jan Slakov wrote:
>
>{ snip }
>
>>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 20:49:44 -0800
>>From: CyberBrook <•••@••.•••>
>>Subject: Opposing China's Entry into the WTO
>
>>The Right and Wrong Reasons for
>>Opposing China's Entry into the WTO
>>by Robin Hahnel  
>
>>www.zmag.org (the very useful ZNet Site)
>
>{ snip }
>
>>The Administration has argued that while partly true, the behavior of the 
>>Chinese government is improving, and a policy of "engagement" is 
>>more likely to advance the cause of democracy and human rights 
>>in China than a hostile policy of trying to isolate China from the 
>>civilized world community.
>
>Say what? "The civilized world community"? Is this a slip of the tongue or an
>outright statement that China is not "civilized"? Is this an inadvertent
>example of just how deeply propaganda affects our mental processes?
>
>Paul Isaacs
>*************************************************************
============================================================================
==========

>From Ed:

Paul,

Do the Chinese have smart bombs and stealth bombers? I don't think so. Which
means that at our present level of global intellect they are not
"civilized". After all wasn't Hitler also bringing civilization to the
Russians when he attacked them in 1941. Incidentally, I have heard him say
so on the radio at that time. 

Cheers, Ed.

See also below.............re, interests.
============================================================================
Note from Jan: I think this remark of Gandhi's fits in very well here!

When asked once what he thought of Western Civilisation, the 
Indian spiritual and political leader quipped:

 " I think it would be good idea".
*************************************************************************
>From: Paul Isaacs <•••@••.•••>
>Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 02:06:46 -0500
>Subject: Re: rn- re: film "Missing", China & WTO, death penalty rally & vigil
>
>On 29-Feb-00, Jan Slakov wrote:
>
>{ snip }
>
>>****************************************************
>>Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:07:32 -0500
>>From: chatski carl <•••@••.•••>
>>To: •••@••.•••
>>Subject: Re: rn: Znet: Right/Wrong reasons for opposing China's entry into
>> WTO
>
>>Even this last post on the subject is not clear enough.
>
>>The WTO is a frank transfer of power from governments ( good or bad ) to
>>corporations.  This is the real definition of fascism .. A sham government
>>and real power in the hands of corporations.
>
>>'Liberal' capitalism is not stable, it will either evolve to
>>socialism(The radical elimination of class,market,wage slavery,etc.)
>>OR, it will evolve to fascism.
>
>>WE DO NOT WANT CHINA OR ANY!! GOVERNMENT TO CEDE ITS POWER TO THE
>>CORPORATIONS.  Is that clear enough.
>
>>- Carl
>
>It is my suspicion that any "economy" that contains "interest" payments has to
>expand exponentially to remain stable.
>
>The mathematical definition of exponential is that in any given period of time
>the amount of the quantity in question increases in proportion to the amount
>of the quantity already possessed. That is also exactly the definition of
>interest bearing "investments".
>
>If the "economy" does not grow exponentially in order to provide the cash for
>interest payments, the money comes directly from the people who are indebted.
>The consequence is a rapid runaway in which those few who were marginally more
>wealthy quickly become vastly more wealthy at the expense of everyone else.
>
>The result is a mathematically determined rapid social collapse no matter what
>form of economy or government is in place. Globalization is the last desperate
>gasp of an economic empire in its final days.
>
>We have, in my view, ceded our power to compound interest and the resources of
>the planet are simply no longer enough to shield us from the consequences.
>
>Paul Isaacs
============================================================================
 Paul,

Many thanks.......Finally somebody's beginning to wake up to the fact that
our present globalization mania is nothing more than the widening of the
base of the money pyramid scam. As I've been warning for years. The minute
the feeding of the pyramid stops the system will collapse. This is why the
so called "growth" is so important to them.

But there's more to it than just interests. In real "trade" goods of equal
value change hands and the profit is the satisfaction of the possession of
wanted goods.

In "commerce", when goods are sold at an added on profit inflation is
created exactly the same way as you explain in connection with interests,
which are also profits added on the top of trade values.

The global trading system is basically a closed room. If we lock a number of
people into a room and they start selling their goods to each other at
profit, where will the last ones in the line get the money to pay the
inflated prices? It is an impossible situation, yet being taught at all
universities as good economics. This is the cause of the growing poverty
gap, but our masterminds haven't figured it out yet.

How long can such a system last? 

Cheers, Ed  (Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC, Canada)
*********************************************************
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 16:42:22 +0600
To: •••@••.•••
From: "Wendell W. Solomons" <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Paul Isaacs on propaganda, economic disaster

At 23:05 02/03/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Paul, thank you for these crisp and pertinent insights!
>all the best, Jan

>From: Paul Isaacs <•••@••.•••>
>Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 02:06:46 -0500

>The result is a mathematically determined rapid social collapse no matter
what
>form of economy or government is in place. Globalization is the last
desperate
>gasp of an economic empire in its final days.
>
>We have, in my view, ceded our power to compound interest and the
resources of
>the planet are simply no longer enough to shield us from the consequences.
>
>Paul Isaacs

Greetings!

The famous Malthus, a pastor and a teacher at the old East India
Company college in Haileybury, said it saliently.

People multiply geometrically, Malthus said, whereas food supply
increases arithmetically. Malthus found the fault in the mechanism
of mathematics.

                             *

Paul uses the term 'economic empire' and that helps us
distinguish between (a) mathematics and (b) the influence
of money cartels.

Today we are openly in an unipolar world. The tent pole that keeps
the interest empire stand is the Federal Reserve cartel. In a world
of competition it likes to issue, without any competing bids since
1913, the dollar to the U.S. government.

When the pirate ship is bought (worth about $ 300 m) then the galleon
will join the AUDITED fleet of merchantmen - the Bank of England,
Bundesbank and so on. The motive for culling other currencies (the
Yen, Euro) and inducing debt in poor nations will then be gone with
the wind. We might not have required a build up of rallies (such as
Nov 30th in Seattle or April 16th in D.C.,) to the level of the
Vietnam war.

|  | / |  When I hear 'economics'
|--< >--|  I pull out my Mauser ...
| / |  |  Writer Arthur C. Clarke when
|   |   |  Russian reforms were mentioned
|   |   |  by •••@••.•••

<,<<.<<<`<<<<<,<<<<<<`<<<.<<<o>>>>,>>>.>>>>>>>>`>>>>>>,>>>>,>

Malthus, Thomas Robert (1766-1834), British economist, born near Guildford, 
Surrey, England, and educated at Jesus College, the University of Cambridge. 
Malthus became curate of the parish of Albury in Surrey in 1798 and held 
this post for a short time. From 1805 until his death, he was professor of 
political economy and modern history at the college of the East India 
Company at Haileybury.

Malthus's main contribution to economics was his theory of population, 
published in An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798). According to 
Malthus, population tends to increase faster than the supply of food 
available for its needs. Whenever a relative gain occurs in food production 
over population growth, a higher rate of population increase is stimulated; 
on the other hand, if population grows too much faster than food production, 
the growth is checked by famine, disease, and war. Malthus's theory 
contradicted the optimistic belief prevailing in the early 19th century, 
that a society's fertility would lead to economic progress.
-> -> Malthus's theory won supporters and was often used as an argument
-> -> against efforts to better the condition of the poor.
<excerpt from MS Encarta >