MISREPRESENTATION

The economy is essentially a concept in a constant state of flux … or,

TREAT OF THINGS AS THEY ‘ARE’

TO UNDERSTAND ‘TRUE ECONOMY’ AND WHERE  ASSETS, CAPITAL AND ANY FORM OF ‘TRUE MONEY’  ORIGINATES FROM – AND TO ALSO DETERMINE WHO IS THE TRUE CREDITOR

Consider this –

What is an economy?

A thing exists.

An idea is an impression of a thing that exists, made upon the mind.

An idea is an impression upon the mind of a thing that exists.

Correctly speaking, an idea is the impression made upon the mind of a thing that exists.

An idea, being the impression made upon the mind of a thing that exists, indicates or points to the thing that exists.

An idea indicates or points to the thing that exists.

The facts, therefore, we are to consider and account for are those things that exist.

The facts we are to consider and account for are those things that exist as we naturally find them, and not make of them what we will or try to change them.

The facts we are to consider are those things that exist and that also undergo their own changes.

A man exists.

A man has freewill provided to him by nature.

A man’s freewill is tempered by the necessity to not harm or injure anyone in order to exercise that freewill.

A man performs productive services.

A man’s productive services are brought into being in accordance with his ability and whims.

Men exercise their freewill when they engage in exchanging productive services with each other in accordance with their whims or freewill.

It is a man’s prerogative, rightly accorded to him by nature, as to whether or not he engages in the exchange of productive services.

Man, outside of necessity, rightly ‘chooses’ the extent or degree to which he employs himself in productive services and as to whether he will engage in the exchange of his production and to what extent. Idiomatically put – we don’t live to work, we work to live.

Man’s activities, that bring into existence his productive services or things, will undergo changes according to necessity and as he sees fit.

Therefore, man exists and his activities exist and rightly undergo natural change or are in natural flux in accordance with his whims or freewill.

What then is, the concept of economy that is in a constant state of flux?

The concept of economy is the idea impressed upon the mind, that indicates or points to – man’s existence and the existence of his natural activities in the provision of productive services and their exchange, and that these rightly undergo natural change or are in natural flux in accordance with man’s whims or freewill.

The facts we are to consider and account for are those things that exist as we naturally find them.

Having observed man’s natural state with respect to the provision of productive services and the exchange thereof, any prescription we provide to facilitate man in his endeavours ought not to disagree with ‘the facts we are to consider and account for as those things that exist as we naturally find them’, and above all with regards to man, that accord most importantly to freewill; without which, man would be but a slave.

The concept of economy then, when prescribed, is not to unduly distort man’s natural and ‘just’ inclinations but to indicate and therefore reflect, without undue interference, man’s activities with consideration to only his productive services and their exchange as he naturally sees fit to make of them as he will – and nothing more.

From the foregoing, we can see man ‘rightly’ makes to others his own representations of his own production on his own behalf and without interference, in accordance with his freewill. Each man engages in his own personal affairs with another on, of course, the basis that he harm or injure nobody in so doing, in order that he rightly and correctly expresses his freewill according to his own dictates and no other – for all men are equally born to nature with freewill. Forcibly subjecting another’s freewill to your ambitions would be the height of hypocrisy and folly and must be recognised as such.

Our prescription to indicate true economy as we find it must reflect, ‘justly’, man’s natural right to make his own representations according to his whims or freewill.

When those representations of a man’s work in the form of productive services or things are unable to be provided immediately in exchange for the productive services or things of another party, then it may be agreed between them that a promise of delivery at a later date will suffice in order to effect an immediate exchange.

There is an obligation to perform therefore owing. This ‘debt’ or obligation is the performance of work to be done towards the provision of the ‘actual representations’ in the form of productive services or things, for the benefit of the other party as creditor.

There is an indebtedness or debt owing, as, an obligation to perform.

Debt therefore is not just conceptual, as though created from thin-air. It truly exits in a promissory obligation to perform for the party who is owed that performance. And that can only be for the ‘true’ creditor who gave up some-thing  or property in exchange for an obligation to perform. The obligation to perform being the debt. There is equal consideration given by both parties as ‘value’, otherwise known as ‘valuable consideration’.

Once the obligation to perform has been fulfilled in part or in whole then there is no longer a debt of a promise or obligation to perform, in part or in whole. That promise to perform or that obligation to perform is naturally extinguished. There is no longer a need to continue with an obligation to perform that has been performed, in part or in whole. It has been completed or ‘fulfilled’.

It can be said of this promissory obligation ‘to perform’, that it ‘must’ be naturally retired on its completion or ‘fulfilment’, in part or in whole. Only that that remains to be performed need be performed, all else having been ‘justly’ and naturally retired on performance.

Those ‘actual representations’ then, in the form of productive services or things, that have been fulfilled through performance need not and should not be made available any longer – as completion or fulfilment of performance, namely the obligation to perform as promised, in part or in whole has been achieved and honoured. Only that that remains to be performed need be performed, all else having been ‘justly’ and naturally retired on performance.

Therefore, ‘retirement’ from providing representations is the natural and just action to be taken – the principle being the same, without exception, were it to extend to all other situations where an obligation to perform had been ‘fulfilled’ and honoured.

A CLOSER EXAMINATION

It will be readily seen that performance is required to be able to provide for ‘actual representations’ in the form of productive services or things, in line with the truth that ‘something cannot emanate from nothing’.

This will be understood to mean that for their validity, representations in the form of  ‘something’, cannot emanate from the ‘nothing’ of non-performance – this, of course, is in accordance with the self-evident truth that ‘something cannot emanate from nothing’. Such a state of affairs would be the prerogative of God and not of man whose very being and actions are bound to nature and all that ‘exists’ in nature, and that are accorded their operations by nature’s God or natures observable laws.

Therefore, were it to be the case that the party as debtor owing the promise to perform provided, in-advance of performance, the ‘actual representations’ in the form of productive services or things to the full satisfaction of the creditor for the obligation owed, then to demonstrate the validity and probity of the exchange, performance would still be required from the debtor in order that the true position of the debtor’s exchange accorded to the truth – that representations provided in the form of ‘something’, in-advance of performance, could not emanate from the ‘nothing’ of non-performance, for there to be agreement with the ‘actuality’ of that which ‘exists’ as a genuine position in nature.

(It must always be remembered that there are two parts to an obligation to ensure its ‘complete’ fulfilment – the first part being the contributing performance towards producing ‘actual representations’ in the form of productive services or things, and the second part being the productive services or things themselves, which are as a consequence of performance produced and delivered).

So, were it to be the case that a debtor delivered representations as productive services, in-advance of the actual ‘performance of having to do the work still owing’ for those representations,

and,

that any ‘subsequent representations’, in the form of productive services or things, that were produced as a consequence of the debtor having to fulfil ‘the performance of having to do the work still owing’ for the representations delivered in-advance,

and also,

to further ensure that the creditor was fully and totally satisfied that ‘the performance of work still owing’ did in fact occur,

were this to be the case, it would be found that those ‘subsequent representations’ in the form of productive services or things would be the property of no one.

Such ‘subsequent representations’ would not belong to the creditor for the reason that the creditor had been provided, in-advance, ‘actual representations’ in the form of productive services as ‘early’ satisfaction for the fulfilment of part of the debtor’s obligation. Nor in turn would these ‘subsequent representations’ belong to the debtor, for reason that the other part of the debtor’s  obligation, ‘to still perform by doing work’, would attach itself only to the representations that were provided in-advance, for which ‘performances of work still owed’ would as intended satisfy and meet those ‘representations made in-advance’ without extending the ‘performances of work still owed’ any further than the ‘representations of productive services made in-advance’.

The foregoing explanation would be reasonable with regards to the debtor’s position of having to fulfil his obligations. The debtor’s position of having to perform work on the one hand to be able to obtain and deliver productive services or things for exchange on the other hand, would conform to the facts as they are – that in the physical world, ‘matter or energy can not be added to or taken away’, but merely transferred so that it remains constant throughout nature or throughout the universe.

With this in mind, the debtor’s position of having to perform work, would be in conformity with the self-evident truth – that, for all things made up of matter or energy to remain constant throughout nature, ‘something cannot emanate from nothing’. If this were not the case, the universe or nature, as it is found ‘to be’, could not ‘exist’.

Therefore, the matter or energy that went into the representations delivered in-advance of work having been done to bring them into existence, would need to come from somewhere. And that can only be from the energy the debtor gave up, by performing work to be able to provide them. If the debtor had not already done so, then he would need to give up that energy as work, otherwise the productive services or things delivered in-advance could not validly exist. This would be in line with the self-evident truth that ‘something cannot emanate from nothing’.

On a more practical note, this would be a way to ensure that the representations in the form of productive services the debtor delivered in-advance were genuinely owned by the debtor. In any dispute as to their ownership or origins the debtor could demonstrate, through the work that the debtor was presently doing without reward, that in fact, it would be this work, that the debtor would be presently performing without reward, that is intended to meet the obligation towards the productive services that were delivered in-advance.

To be clear, it must be remembered that the creditor’s position of having received ‘actual representations’ in the form of productive services or things, is one of being provided representations in-advance without the debtor having done anything towards their provision. This being the case, the other part of the obligation, the promise to perform owed by the debtor, which is the promise to do work, would still have to be met for the creditors satisfaction and benefit, as a promise to be kept and a promise that accords with the truth, that ‘something cannot emanate from nothing’.

WHAT HAS BEEN DETERMINED

In such circumstances, where representations are provided in-advance of performance, those ‘subsequent representations’ produced as a consequence of having an obligation to still perform, would be the property of no one, neither the creditor whom had already received representations early or in-advance, nor the party owing ‘the obligation to perform’ and therefore obliged to perform as the debtor – because as a debtor, that debtor provided the representations in-advance and ‘without performance’, and is therefore duty-bound and obliged to perform ‘without reward’. If this were not the case, the debtor would otherwise be effectively receiving property for free from the creditor, to whom he owes a performance. Property was provided to the debtor in exchange for the debtor’s full performance. Without the debtor doing work as payment towards the representations he delivered in-advance, it would mean that the debtor would obtain ‘something for nothing’ from the creditor, who gave up property in exchange for an obligation to perform or an obligation to do work. This would not agree with the ‘natural’ situation as it would be found in existence or as it would ‘exist’ in nature. It would amount to a perversion and would therefore be an injustice.

THE SAME PRINCIPLES APPLY REGARDLESS OF THE FORM REPRESENTATIONS TAKE

Therefore, it can be seen from the actions of the parties involved in an exchange, that if performance by the debtor had not yet been made towards representations which, regardless of the ‘form’ they took, were provided in-advance, those ‘subsequent representations’ produced as a consequence of having an obligation to still perform, would have to be retired from ‘circulation’ or use, since they would not belong to anyone. That is to say, since they would not belong to anyone, such representations would have to be simply withdrawn or ‘retired’, meaning, destroyed. The ‘retirement’ or destruction of these ‘subsequent representations’, regardless of their ‘form’, would be the ‘natural and just’ action to take.

When we again consider, those representations of a man’s work in the form of productive services or things that are unable to be provided immediately in exchange for the productive services or things of another party, and it is agreed between them that a promise of delivery at a later date will suffice in order to effect an immediate exchange, then we can see, deduce and accept that the promise to perform would therefore be a sufficient an obligation to consider it as being ‘just as good as’ taking the place of the actual representations in the form of productive services or things, that a commitment had been made towards for later delivery or collection.

Now, it is these promissory obligations to perform, that allow for ‘alternative’ representations; as evidence of having done the work towards providing the ‘actual representations’ in the form of productive services or things as promised for exchange – with the mere formality of their collection or delivery having to take place.

Again, it can be these same promissory obligations to perform that allow for ‘alternative’ representations as evidence of work which will be done, towards productive services or things as promised for exchange, that are and can be considered ‘just as good as’ the actual things themselves in which they are put in the place of, and of which the collection or delivery of the ‘actual representations’, that is the things or property, would be a mere formality at an agreed later date.

Money are ‘alternative’ representations as evidence of performance, or work done, as promised.

Money are also ‘alternative’ representations as evidence of performance, or work that will be done, as promised.

Money, therefore, are not the ‘actual’ representations in the form of productive services or things themselves, but can be used in place of them as ‘alternative’ representations, evidencing or proving the work done or the work that will be done in the fulfilment of promises to perform towards contributing to ‘the pool of wealth’ from which exchanges can be made for the benefit of the ‘true’ creditor.

Those same ‘alternative’ representations, that is money, as proofs of the fulfilment of a performance to provide ‘actual representations’, in the form of productive services or things, are then for the benefit of the ‘true’ creditor who gave up some-thing in exchange and are not for anyone else – especially are they not for a printer-publisher who merely prints or publishes on request such evidences, and most certainly does not give up any-thing or any property in exchange as equal value or valuable consideration that shows his own efforts as proof of his working or having worked towards providing the actual thing or the actual property that had been exchanged for ‘a promise to perform’ in the first place.

The concept of economy ‘must’ be the idea impressed upon the mind that indicates and reflects ‘the truth’ of what exists in nature and therefore in ‘fact’. It must indicate the truth of what ‘is’ and not of what we would like it to be or ‘is not’. Take of things as they ‘are’, for a prescription of economy to indicate ‘the true economy of man’, and not as you want them to be – mere wishful thinking as mere ‘assertions’ of what evidently does not fall under our ‘observations’. Such a state of affairs would be an unacceptable distortion and would contrive to contort our very acts to its ‘unnatural’ dictates of fiction.

If we are to find that an economy is distorted then we are obliged to ask, for whose benefit would that be for?

To Conclude –

What is left to be said to a people therefore, is, ‘you must not fail to grasp the absolutely ‘natural’ necessity of having to provide and present your own representations, without interference, together with the natural opportunity correctly provided to you to be able to fulfil or make good on your promises to which those representations attach and correspond. This would be the only ‘just’ means of ‘naturally’ reflecting your private affairs, without interference from a third party whom by definition ought not to be involved whatsoever in any of your personal dealings – to which, as freewill accords – you chose to engage in. By this very means, your personal affairs remain your own and are not subject to distortion.’

SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES

Who would imagine that ‘something wicked this way comes’ refers to economic growth.

It must not be forgotten that the growth that is talked about with its innumerable economic measures to demonstrate its alleged benefits, is growth that resides in a context which does not describe ‘the true economy of man’  in accordance with his natural condition and freewill, but resides in ‘a distorted description of the economy of man’.

In this context, growth can only seek to conceal the distortion imposed upon ‘the true economy of man’ and therefore distort and redirect his freewill demonstrable away from ‘self-reliance and self-sufficiency’ into one of dependency.

Growth that not only resides in distortion but is built on its foundations ought not to be called growth at all since its only object would be to mask the very distortion that stifles man’s true inclinations provided for him by nature.

By what name then is growth to be unmasked as an accomplice to distortion.

Consider for a moment that distorting ‘the true economy of man’ necessarily calls for deceptive or incomplete terms which make hidden the true nature of the imposed distortion on ‘the true economy of man’.

Now, all conjurors rely on the ability of successfully creating diversions to ply their trade,  and there is no-better-a-diversion with regards to false or ‘distorted economy’ than that of growth. It mesmerises the unsuspecting with its ‘prospects and promises’ of bounty to come. These ‘prospects and promises’, growth holds out temptingly within reach, are offers of better times ahead given in seemingly detailed measured scrutiny in a myriad of ‘if only…’ possibilities of every shape and form.

Were it to be that simple then, we would need only to look to the details of the ‘prospects and promises’ that growth had to offer charted before us, as opposed to the foundations on which growth were staged or seated upon.  Surely a classic case of not being able to ‘see the forest for the trees’.

The almost ‘being able to’ taste and touch better times to come while the conjuror has the temerity to ‘pick-pocket’ you and relieve you of your wealth for which you will show him your appreciation with rounds of applause is the ultimate diversion ‘so-called growth’ offers.

For man’s hopes to be placed in the hands of ‘distortion’ and its veil of growth, would not only be preposterous but, would with ‘certainty’ bring about a tragic end to those who have not eyes to see nor ears to hear and sadly at the same time engulf everyone else besides.

The true and full name then, by which growth is to be called in its unmasking is ‘The Growth Towards Your Destruction’.

This then, is growths task. It is growths task to entice, engage and compel you into believing that the sweet fragrant dishes of delectable prospects that lie ahead are within reach if only you hold-out  and weather-the-storm, for a good fattening-up in better days to come.

‘Everything to be had’ is just around the corner it bellows.

Alas, false prospects indeed.

Under the present systems of distortion, so-called growth that prospers man does not encourage prosperity but quite the reverse. That is to say, it becomes a mathematical certainty that all prosperity and growth towards prosperity ceases, and all economies of all countries terminate.

A clear and unequivocal graphic description of the processes that lead to the destruction of all economies can be found here:

[Note.- Begin 2:32 minutes into video No.3 (PART 01C – INTRO) and continue…]

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=4F0FC0AC39B3086A                                                                   

 

‘How deserving a gift freewill must be 

To those who no not its measure 

To wonder why it is 

They have no lasting pleasure’

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s