The Lost Science of Money, pt. 1 - Stephen Zarlenga (FULL)

[Haudenosaunee4]

"Mike Montagne a mathematician & the author of Mathematically Perfected Economy addressing certain flaws in the Secret of Oz " alleged " economic monetary solution.

Mike also asks Bill Still, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Ellen Hodgson Brown, Stephen Zarlenga for a debate on his radio show broadcast on TNS radio.There is no other solution.Regulation can only temper an inherently terminal process.If you're not promoting Mathematically Perfected Economy Then you condemn us to monetary failure......"

[SuperBillego]

@Haudenosaunee4 Right on, Mike has the solution, the rest are plagiarists with their own agendas, probably paid by the banking elites to co-opt and further obfuscate the issue of interest.

[Haudenosaunee4]

@SuperBillego is it not strange that on September 28, 2011 someone posted @ gnosticmediaDOTcom this info under the [ Peace Revolution episode 012: Origins of Money / A Virtual Round-Table Discussion ] but never received a response !? i would like Jan to apply the Trivium = BullShit Detector to this situation & have Mike Montagne on to present the Facts ! ........

[martyblueyes]

Politicians and banks are the real reason behind this great Kleptocracy we call America. It's not a liberal or a conservative issue, but a human issue. If the poor paying up to the rich is a liberal agenda, I don't know many libverals or poor who would get in line to sign up.

[AustrianLens]

This liberal hack lost me as soon as he said that one of the mandatory steps to reform the monetary system is to include infrastructure spending? It also sounds as though he doesn't refute any of Marx's ideas except for his concept of money. Turning the Fed over to the Congress will not solve anything. Politicians, believe or not, can be bribed.

[jeepndesert]

@AustrianLens Bill Still is running for President on the Libertarian Party ticket with the same monetary reform as Zarlenga, minus the health insurance and infrastructure spending. He already has delegates pledging votes in three states. You shouldn't dismiss the central idea so quickly with your neo-conversative brainwashing from the Rockefeller Foundation's (UN, Fed Res, Standard Oil, Amoco, Chase Bank) Austrian School of Economics. ASE is not Libertarian nor Classical Liberal.

[playaz33]

Search YouTube for Peter Schiff to gain another perspective of how money and economics works. Economics isn't difficult to understand.

[heckler73]

@playaz33

Economics isn't difficult to understand? That depends on your desired perspective.

Austrian Econ. is like being able to identify a car.

Neo-classical econ. needs a little more understanding of math and statistics (identifying car model and understanding Mileage, HP, Oil/Fluids, etc)

But if you want to understand the intricate details of the car's engineering, then it requires A LOT of understanding and specialization (i.e. Dynamic Econ. Modeling).

It's not just "supply and demand".

[playaz33]

@heckler73 You make it seem as if Austrian Economics is just about basics. There may be some simple principles, but it's because they are sound principles.

So many people try to over-analyze and they can't predict what will happen better than the next guy.

Don't get me wrong, I am open to new ideas. How would studying dynamic economic modeling help me as a business person in a practical sense? Will it help me make better decisions? How?

[heckler73]

@playaz33 How would Dyn. Mod. help you in business?

I guess that depends on how much business you do.

Have you ever sold lemonade/kool-aid at a road-side stand?

Do you need Dyn.Mod. for that?

Then, have you ever sold lemon-tree Ph monitors to Kyrgyzstan in exchange for a ship of Kool-aid powder to benefit your Nation's Mission to Outer-Space?

Would Dyn.Mod. be useful for that?

Austrians are okay for selling Lemonade.

[playaz33]

Money is a Medium of Exchange. That's all it is. We agree on a particular medium and call that money. Whether we decide on sticks as a medium of exchange or gold or paper, it's still considered money if it is society's agreed medium. Things that are scarce are a better medium because you can't create it. (i.e. gold.) Fiat currency (paper money) was usually created as certificates redeemable for actual valuable currency (gold/silver/something rare). Study Austrian economics.

[jeepndesert]

@playaz33 i'm a libertarian. i believe in the separation of commodity markets and state. the state can mint coins and regulate them for a direct user fee. however, the government should not accept or spend coins because it is a corruption of commodity markets, creating fictitious values for the commodities, allowing individuals to steal wealth with what was originally god's toil and property of humanity in common, natural resources.

[jeepndesert]

@playaz33 if anything, the coins should be taxed to collect the public rent on the use of the rare natural resources for private purposes.

[wind0wninja]

Energy is recognized as the key to all activity on earth. Natural science is the study of the sources and control of natural energy, and social science, theoretically expressed as economics, is the study of the sources and control of social energy. Both are bookkeeping systems: mathematics. Therefore, mathematics is the primary energy science. All science is merely a means to an end. The means is knowledge. The end is control. Beyond this remains only one issue: Who will be the beneficiary?

[wind0wninja]

He mentions that money is only by virtue of law. Okay so what about this law? I'm just not convinced he's studied this side of the coin. How can you make a private institution who job it is to secure the debt; which he likes to call credit which in itself implies a creditor meaning there is a debtor. So it all comes down to which ever one you happen to be at any given time. In this case we're the debtors. The real question should be, how do we become the creditor?

[lollard]

He's wrong about Utilitarianism. Bentham and other utilitarianists didn't say to not look at the morality of an act, but that an act is defined as moral if it's consequence generates a return of the greatest possible happiness for the greatest number of people (which is called "utility"). Really, out of all the ethical ideas, this one makes the most sense to me as a moral rule and moral guidance. It's a morality about making people happy, not about ignoring morals for the sake of usefulness.

[jeepndesert]

i'm against the leftist policy of zarlenga. the money necessary to stop deflation should be used to pay off the national debt and end income taxation first. also, adam smith debunked competing and "free market" currency, the reason behind article 1.10 and the end of colonial currency. i have some other minor differences, but those are the major ones from the interview.

[GnosticMedia]

@jeepndesert You couldn't have misunderstood Zarlenga's possition any worse than you have. If you read his book, he outlines very clearly how to pay of the debt, to bankers, BTW, who created that debt out of nothing. Leftist, exactly what does that mean? And as for Adam Smith, nearly all of his nonsense has been refuted. I've cited this several times already, but please see The Philosophic Corruption of Physics by David Harriman - who destroys Smith.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i've read wealth of nations rather than critiques. his criticism of free market currency is quite clear, as is the constitution. i only criticize that point in the film. adam smith supports public currency like zarlenga. the national debt is owed to actual bond holders, who aren't necessarily bankers.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i understand the basics of zarlenga's position because i have the same position derived from my own understanding through analysis and reading. i have no idea what you are talking about. private debt is private debt. when fractional reserve banking is ended, the government can print money to replace the money printed and loaned by private banks as the private debt loaned under fractional reserve banking is paid back. that printed money can go to retiring the national debt.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia zarlenga is lefist because he wants to pay off the national debt, keep the income tax, and greatly expand government spending by ending fractional reserve banking with public debt-free money. i want to pay off the national debt and end the income tax by ending fractional reserve banking with public debt-free money. i'm just making it clear, the fundamentals of ending fractional reserve banking are non-partisan while zarlenga adds some leftist positions.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i will admit that want a public health insurance option like kucinich. however, i wouldn't make that part of the debate of ending fractional reserve banking. i personally would rather see a progressive sales tax, land value tax, or other tax targeting monopolization, usury, or unfair trade, than a direct tax on labor like the income tax. in other words, that is a separate debate.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i should say free market legal tender. the states can't write their own legal tender and banking laws. it is too prone to money market manipulation and other unfair practices. the congress has the duty to provide a public legal tender... to write legal tender laws, issue the money, and regulate the value. the people are still free to barter with whatever they want to barter.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia in other words, i'm not trying to debunk zarlenga. i'm just trying to say there is common ground between adam smith and zarlenga. i'm just nit-picking the contents of the interview.

[GnosticMedia]

@jeepndesert Smith and Zarlenga are nothing similar. You should read Zarlenga's book - where he dedicates several chapters to refuting Smith. You should also hear David Harriman's lecture on the Philosophic Corruption of Physics - where he reveals how Smith's ideas are based entirely on debunked Kantian philosophy.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i'm not saying they are similar. i'm just saying that adam smith (and the framers of the constitution) and zarlenga both are against the idea of free banking. i understand there are problems with adam smith, as with any single individual economic theory. i'm just saying adam smith was correct in his criticism of free banking as zarlenga is.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i'm not saying they are similar. i'm just saying that adam smith (and the framers of the constitution) and zarlenga both are against the idea of free banking. i understand there are problems with adam smith, as with any single individual economic theory. i'm just saying adam smith was correct in his criticism of free banking as zarlenga is.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i have also recently had my eyes opened that if you solve either the monetary or land problem, the one you don't solve will be worse. if solving monetary first, you'll have another housing bubble and previous holders of national debt now holding corporate bonds will make corporate influence of government worse. thus, if you can't implement lvt, solving the insurance problem and focus on land-based infrastructure would help with newly created poverty and corruption.

[jeepndesert]

@GnosticMedia i'm not against the idea of public insurance, as insurance is usury, and the idea of infrastructure funding justified with the idea of land as wealth in common to humanity. i just think monetary reform is important enough that the focus should be on the monetary issue to better sell the idea rather than have to sell the other classical liberal ideas of insurance being usury and land being public property. i agree with zarlenga, it just comes off as neo-leftist.

[seaneire]

@jeepndesert there is a debt?

[MELISSA84008]

@seaneire Have you seen the 'Money Masters'!!! youtube.com/watch?v=JXt1cayx0h­s A MUST watch for everyone!!

[leadcreator]

@jeepndesert if you haven't read 'secrets of the federal reserve' you need to.

[8DoverNJ]

Thanks for this interview Jan. I wonder what your guest would think about local currencies? It seems his research is along the lines of what Bill Still came up with. I'll admit that I'm more inclined toward the Austrian School but I appreciate this viewpoint as well. This is something we have to get right.

[GnosticMedia]

@8DoverNJ His work is nothing like Bill Still's... in fact, they're very opossed to each other's ideas. Please remember that an interview is not a full representation of a 700 page book. I personally feel the austrian school is a joke. I've mentioned to check out The Philosophical Corruption of Physics by David Harriman, who completely refutes all of the Adam Smith fallacy based nonsense that the austrians all hide behind.

[8DoverNJ]

@GnosticMedia Yeah, kind of tough to get 700 pages into one interview, lol. Anyway, glad to hear he has many differences with Still. I think I mentioned it because he (as well as Still) calls for the treasury to take control of the monetary system if I'm not mistaken. I'll assume their are some nuanced differences. I think governments can't be trusted (especially now). What specifically don't you like about the Austrian School? Have you read Human Action by Mises?

[GnosticMedia]

@8DoverNJ Zarlenga wants the PEOPLE to take over the money system.

[8DoverNJ]

@GnosticMedia Good. Many Austrians actually propose the same basic idea of putting this power in the hands of the people as well. I don't think the Austrian school is merely rehashing Adam Smith. There's a lot of variations within that camp as far as solutions. I like De Soto's free banking proposal but am open to other possibilities. I'll check out Harriman's and/or Zarlenga's book at some point. I like the Austrian School but they're not the end all be all. No one is. Thanks.

[wind0wninja]

@GnosticMedia Then we have to define the "PEOPLE"...

[3AtomicJabez8]

I also thank you Jan. This material is so important,,,,

[vegaswolf]

Great idea but would anyone in their right minds trust the Washington clowns we have in charge now to control and monitor the lifeblood of any nation? The money supply? They are knowingly screwing us now...what makes anyone think it would be better in their hands? We could vote them out? Heck we can do that now and does nothing. I think overall the ideas presented are great but we'd have to clean out the rat infestation first.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@vegaswolf 24 states have Direct Democracy. Where as the people vote on what they want, not the politicians. CA has it. and as long as an inactive doesnt infringe on another's rights within the constitution, bill of rights. Like marijuana laws for an example. The people vote. not the politicians. The US, Switzerland, and Sweden are leading the way for direct democracy.

[vegaswolf]

@DecentralizedByGuilt People will vote themselves some money. Imagine the scenario: Politician: "I will get XX State more money from Treasury which means more jobs and more money in your pockets if you go with me on [insert Power grab sound good liberty squasher]. " What's the difference? I'm just not getting it. People vote for their selfish interests, if it means stomping on others liberties, so be it. I don't see how changing how money is printed will make any difference there.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@vegaswolf yeah, you're not getting it at all. You're making things up even. You should not do that. No one can vote into law anythng that infringes on our rights. I made that very clear.

Whether a government (our FED central bank is privately owned, as you know, which it should not be) uses fiat money backed by labor, or the gold silver standard. Neither one can work in the long run without equal trade.

[vegaswolf]

@DecentralizedByGuilt I didn't make things up, I presented a fictitious scenario that has roots in current reality. Didn't the Patriot Act get voted into law? Does that not infringe on our individual rights? How you can even say that is silly at best. I'm not here to argue so please don't bait me. I'm making the point that simply changing the monetary system will do nothing as long as the same sociopaths run things. You are living in fantasy land if you think otherwise. Peace.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@vegaswolf What I'm talking abut is us representing ourselves. Not the politicians. we are not out to take away our own rights. duh! and the laws we vote on must first be deemed as constitution has defined by the supreme court. There are risk involved with true freedom, sure. What I'm talking about IS already taking place, and growing. I suggest you actually do the homework on it, first. Its your future happening right b4 your eyes, very exciting times. we our beginning to govern ourselves.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@vegaswolf I'm actually pro fiat money. but with equal trade agreements. meaning anti-NAFTA, CAFTA, etc but our money should not be ran by private bankers, we have that now, and it's not working. My "fantasy" (direct democracy- us representing ourselves, not government) is becoming a reality. *sticks tongue out*

take care, I'm so off this thread for good now,lol

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@vegaswolf The US goes trillions of dollars into debt from trade, and other money exchanges with foreign banks, like purchasing companies, or anything. That is our core problem. Trade deficits. Equal trade creates jobs on both sides, and doesnt leave one side deep in debt.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@vegaswolf It's a way to remove the power from the elite, and represent ourselves. we can have it in all states, and federally. The more that people know, the sooner we can get there, but we are on our way now ;)

[BrodyLuv2]

Money represents the bar at which you peg a collectives' agreement on an accepted depth of servitude.

[KRITICALConscious]

@klard parasitic class. lol @ that.

[KRITICALConscious]

@GnosticMedia I thought you might get a chuckle out of this poem, Jan. It is an English fellow reciting a satirical poem about money, control, elites, and all that jazz. Hope you take a look and have a good laugh! Take it easy. Peace!

watch?v=XEXhPLdqnDs

[khemtherevelator]

Best talk on "money" I've ever heard.  I'm definitely going to buy his book.

[UnoRaza]

Nice documentary, Jan!

One thing is CERTAIN and that is to have enough solid commodities that England does not control behind our new currency!

What about our so-called "free press"? ;D)

[klard]

The modern definition of money is a mechanism for the transfer of wealth from people who work and produce to a parasitic class.

[MoneyIsSilver]

This guy has no idea what he is talking about. Money is simply a good that is used for trade. Sugar, hemp, tobacco, cheese, and salt have all been used as money. The rich are only able to take advantage with the aid of GOVERNMENT FORCE to get people to accept fake, or fiat, money.

[GnosticMedia]

@MoneyIsSilver And you have no agenda with your "money is silver" user name... Never mind De Beers and the Rhodes scholars and how they control all of the gold and silver and diamonds, manipulating their value etc. And never mind that there's not enough gold and silver in the world to handle just the US's economy. So it's easier for you to attack a work you haven't read to protect your agenda - silver. If you had read the book you'd see that it should NEVER be a commodity. But you sell it... !!!

[MoneyIsSilver]

@GnosticMedia Ridiculous. No one "controls" all the gold and silver. Why do they control it? Maybe because they know they are richer if they have actual resources and then give you paper. See, if they can fool you with rhetoric to accept currency of no intrinsic value, then they can create money out of thin air - like they do now.

[GnosticMedia]

@MoneyIsSilver Study the sources I provided before you jump to conclusions. I suggest you also study Cecil Rhodes Last Will and Testament, and Tragedy & Hope by Carrol Quigley. Not to mention, read the book you attacked without actually reading - Zarlenga's Lost Science of Money - rather than making argumentum ad ignorantium and reacting with emotional nonsense. Speaking of which, you'd probably benefit by studying the logical fallacies, see my channel - "logical fallacies"

[MoneyIsSilver]

@GnosticMedia i wouldn't read his book because i can tell from what he said in this video that he doesn't understand what money in a free society is. He made a big deal over the definition of money, and in a free society, money is simple - its whatever people want it to be. If I want to trade you carrots for fish, I should be able to do that unfettered by government. In such a free society, gold and silver generally emerge as a medium of exchange because of its characteristics.

[GnosticMedia]

@MoneyIsSilver You're entirely wrong, based on your own presuppositions, rather than understanding why your points have been long refuted. You must be one of those Adam Smith invisible hand guys. I already quoted you to David Harriman who refutes that. It's sad though how you're taking the entire body of research and trivializing it down to one line sound bites that you thoughtlessly regurgitate without having done your own research on these topics, and the fact that you'd kill the messenger...

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver Keep in mind the US does not have enough gold, or silver, to pay her curent debt to foreign central banks. Nor does the US have enough gold or silver to pay foriegn banks an additional one trillion a year, and growing, for her trade debts. we dont even have enough to cover our own fiat money. Doing so, for an example, would reduce the value of gold by 400% So be very careful on what you push for. It has no logic bassed in reality.

[MoneyIsSilver]

@DecentralizedByGuilt The female personification for the fascist/corporate USA is kinda lame and means nothing to me. Truth is, the people who own USA have shitpiles of gold and silver. Take the Queen for instance - she has a gold carriage for chrissakes! The debt is meaningless, its just accounting entries for fake money.

The value of gold will never be reduced 400% because its a good. Its the fiat money that has arbitrary value.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver If you don't like the US, either leave, or work to change it.

The Royal family has a history of conquering and acquire wealth, not to mention borrowing gold from the US for ww2. I think it was 900 billion in gold.

I said if one were to cover the amount of fiat money out there, it would reduce the value of gold by 400%

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver The US would have to have equal trade if she backed her money with a commodity, instead of US bonds and treasury notes. Other wise she would run out of gold and silver very fast. One trillion a year in trade debts. You would have to pay that with gold or silver, if you didnt pay it with bonds. Do you understand that?

[MoneyIsSilver]

@DecentralizedByGuilt I'm not talking about government gold money - that will never happen because statists hate gold. I'm talking about people freely trading with privately minted money. Fuck your nationalist love of "her" in reference to our fascist, masonic pile of shit USA. I'm french canadian and my people were here first.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver worry about your country then. No one takes you serious, when all you do is fear mongering "Logical Fallacies"

You ignore the fact that without equal trade. which Canada does not have. You will never have a strong economy, regardless of what you use for money!

but do take care. I apologise, but I no longer have any time for you. bye

[MoneyIsSilver]

@DecentralizedByGuilt I don't have a "country" and if I did I sure as fuck wouldn't personify it as if I had some retarded sentimentality about it. USA has always been and will die as one big bullshit lie, so enough about that.

Try to explain how I've used a logical fallacy - you can't.

You are using one by changing the subject when you can't debate the merits of what I've said - pretty female tactic. I have never argued against FREE trade.

I'm glad you 'no longer have time'..go fuck off..

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver I haven't left yet, so you are in luck. You used many logical fallacies. fear mongering is one. Nice media tactic you do. big bad government free mason bla bla bla be very scared. YAWN.

You accuse me of being a nationalist. That is a logical fallacies to do so. Address the points I made, not attack me. You lost this debate by default. Mr internet tough guy *snort*

[MoneyIsSilver]

@DecentralizedByGuilt i wasn't fear mongering, and that's not a logical fallacy anyway. How old are you? 15?

Couldn't I say Zeitgeist fear mongers? I mean, I could just spew accusations like you do without any real arguments.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver /watch?v=MhhJAGjBIEw

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver haha you're actually a hypocrite to,lol my turn for logical fallacies. You have no videos, but you ride on every one's back like socialist youtube welfare baby who doesnt practise hat he preaches, I will gladly "fuck off" now. last word is yours, so puff out your chest real BIG cutie pie *kisses*

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver Money is coupons for labor. Labor is the real value. without labor, the world as you know it stops! You work and you get money (coupons for labor) this allows you to buy food, shelter, to live. The golden rule has always been, he who has the gold makes the rules! We must work against the system, not for it!

[MoneyIsSilver]

@DecentralizedByGuilt The keynesian definition of money wasn't the original definition in Black's Law nor is it practical in any sense. Money is not "a coupon" and is not defined as such ANYWHERE except in your head.

"The golden rule has always been, he who has the gold makes the rules! "

Duh! So shouldn't the people demand goods with intrinsic value like gold for their labor instead of a "coupon"? If we traded online, you would want a GOOD with VALUE from me in exchange for your goods.

[DecentralizedByGuilt]

@MoneyIsSilver Today money is back by labor. Most countries do this.

You shouldn't worship what a banker tells you value is!

[dutchtruthseeker]

@GnosticMedia this is a response i am going to copy and past to twards like silverIs.

Thanks Jan, and thank for this interview. I am going to buy the book, should be a great read!

[MoneyIsSilver]

Money is simply a good (commodity) that is used as a medium of exchange.

Took him 600+ pages..took me one sentence.

[GnosticMedia]

@MoneyIsSilver That's because you didn't bother to actually read the book, look at the evidence, use critical thinking, or judge the historical evidence before you chose to use false rhetoric in your one sentence. People who sell and make money off of silver and gold should be locked up. They're nothing but money changers who don't contribute anything of value to society. Study how your money philosophies are based on the refuted Kant - The Philosophic Corruption of Physics by David Harriman