Jun 8, 2023·edited Jun 8, 2023Liked by John Day MD
Even if everyone knew just half of what you wrote here would it matter?
The situation is dire and still no legal system anywhere has stepped up to the plate to denounce the horror.
I cannot understand, how is it possible that so many powerful people are happy to be complicit after they know even if they have the resources to walk away from it all if they get targeted for speaking out.
You have made some very good points about the economic tricks needed to continue this way and the goals of the powerful do not include our welfare now or in the past.
Hello Dr. John, I only met you today and I read only this one article. You are certainly well read and keep orderly references, (more than I do). I do follow some of these topics, and feel reasonably informed, so I don't feel to ask about them. But the subject matter here is so vast, there is no constant subject, except, "everything is awry".
Well, I kind of know that and am an Expat for that reason. Somewhere it said: there is no (functioning) legal framework to do anything about it. So we read this (I have to say it) shit, and all we can figure out is that we are over a barrel. (We are over a barrel, but that is also the tone of your article.)
If there is any hope, and I am not going to go into it, it must be states rights, maybe like the greater Idaho project. Re-Gerrymander the states. States are not going to break off and secede. I don't see it. Granted that most of the states are probably more corrupt that the Feds (if that is humanly possible).
I guess the best point of entry is the leader article on surplus energy. We can easily admit (with no discussion) that all modern civilization is built on fossil fuels. First coal, and then in 1859 in Pennsylvania the first oil well.
The real economy is dependent on energy, they're our supply chains. Well, the financial economy turns on the lights and runs banks of crypto-mining computers?
Here's your quote:
"The financial system comprises an aggregation of forward claims, whose viability depends on the delivery capacity of the real (energy) economy in the future."
You seem to be saying that the virtual economy is somehow spawned from, or dependent upon, the real economy. So then just by; "prioritizing innovation over sustainability, it has somehow enabled the virtual economy to overshadow real supply chains? I am no economist, but this I do not get????
A while back I was trying to figure it out. I used US figures from 2015, when GDP was $ 18.2 T. Market value of domestic corporations was $ 29 T with 25% in land yields $ 21.7 T for the USA investment in means of production in 2015. So what were the alternative (virtual) investments? ( I hope you can follow this, it is really very easy, and my margin of error can be huge and still make my point.)
$51 T Stocks out of world $ 111 T. $ 50 T Bonds, out of a world $ 128 T, and derivatives were at $ 1000 T. But all the $ 1000 T is not at risk, so there are various ways to calculate it, some say 10 times GDP, or $ 182 T at risk. So $ 283 T invested in the virtual economy, and $21.7 in the real???? I am asking:
WHY IS THERE 13 TIMES MORE CAPITAL IN THE FINANCIAL ECONOMY THAN IN THE REAL ECONOMY?
Is that what you call "duh"? Of course, there is 13 times more profit in the virtual than there is in the real! The real economy is only the money laundering leg of corporate gangsterism. That is why I don't "get" the connection of "an aggregation of forward claims, whose viability depends on the delivery capacity of the real economy." THAT'S MY QUESTION.
Or interpret it anyway that you like. I know nothing about it, but I would prefer if the ends of this story would tie into a bow.
Thanks for all your good work. Please write a post with fewer subjects (more numerous but focused), and that shows some light at the end of the tunnel. (Again; I have not read the other entries.)
Even if everyone knew just half of what you wrote here would it matter?
The situation is dire and still no legal system anywhere has stepped up to the plate to denounce the horror.
I cannot understand, how is it possible that so many powerful people are happy to be complicit after they know even if they have the resources to walk away from it all if they get targeted for speaking out.
You have made some very good points about the economic tricks needed to continue this way and the goals of the powerful do not include our welfare now or in the past.
(fix typo)
That Vegie garden is a triumph John
What if all the fiat USD's are trash?
What if literally half of all people are "below average intelligence"?
What if those in control spew endless lies through state controlled propaganda outlets?
What if at least half of the people believe the lies, no matter how obvious and stupid they are?
What if the legal system has been weaponized against anyone challenging the state?
What if there is no legal framework to undo this?
What if facts no longer matter?
Your minefield of biowapens is the ultimate, how can you not come out of it as a healed human being?
Hello Dr. John, I only met you today and I read only this one article. You are certainly well read and keep orderly references, (more than I do). I do follow some of these topics, and feel reasonably informed, so I don't feel to ask about them. But the subject matter here is so vast, there is no constant subject, except, "everything is awry".
Well, I kind of know that and am an Expat for that reason. Somewhere it said: there is no (functioning) legal framework to do anything about it. So we read this (I have to say it) shit, and all we can figure out is that we are over a barrel. (We are over a barrel, but that is also the tone of your article.)
If there is any hope, and I am not going to go into it, it must be states rights, maybe like the greater Idaho project. Re-Gerrymander the states. States are not going to break off and secede. I don't see it. Granted that most of the states are probably more corrupt that the Feds (if that is humanly possible).
I guess the best point of entry is the leader article on surplus energy. We can easily admit (with no discussion) that all modern civilization is built on fossil fuels. First coal, and then in 1859 in Pennsylvania the first oil well.
The real economy is dependent on energy, they're our supply chains. Well, the financial economy turns on the lights and runs banks of crypto-mining computers?
Here's your quote:
"The financial system comprises an aggregation of forward claims, whose viability depends on the delivery capacity of the real (energy) economy in the future."
You seem to be saying that the virtual economy is somehow spawned from, or dependent upon, the real economy. So then just by; "prioritizing innovation over sustainability, it has somehow enabled the virtual economy to overshadow real supply chains? I am no economist, but this I do not get????
A while back I was trying to figure it out. I used US figures from 2015, when GDP was $ 18.2 T. Market value of domestic corporations was $ 29 T with 25% in land yields $ 21.7 T for the USA investment in means of production in 2015. So what were the alternative (virtual) investments? ( I hope you can follow this, it is really very easy, and my margin of error can be huge and still make my point.)
$51 T Stocks out of world $ 111 T. $ 50 T Bonds, out of a world $ 128 T, and derivatives were at $ 1000 T. But all the $ 1000 T is not at risk, so there are various ways to calculate it, some say 10 times GDP, or $ 182 T at risk. So $ 283 T invested in the virtual economy, and $21.7 in the real???? I am asking:
WHY IS THERE 13 TIMES MORE CAPITAL IN THE FINANCIAL ECONOMY THAN IN THE REAL ECONOMY?
Is that what you call "duh"? Of course, there is 13 times more profit in the virtual than there is in the real! The real economy is only the money laundering leg of corporate gangsterism. That is why I don't "get" the connection of "an aggregation of forward claims, whose viability depends on the delivery capacity of the real economy." THAT'S MY QUESTION.
Or interpret it anyway that you like. I know nothing about it, but I would prefer if the ends of this story would tie into a bow.
Thanks for all your good work. Please write a post with fewer subjects (more numerous but focused), and that shows some light at the end of the tunnel. (Again; I have not read the other entries.)
.