#SHOW COMMENTS

Here is the transcript of what I wrote in reply on Anthony Migchels blog post called:
The Public vs. Private Dialectic, or: Money as part of the Commons

australia4mpe:
Of course national debt is a result of the people’s willful ignorance of money creation & what money truly represents.

Now If we allow any seated government to “ take over “ the bankers monopoly on currency & then pretend to loan or allow that currency to be ”allegedly“ loaned by themselves or any other entity such as a bank public or private it can only then mean it’s a further obfuscation or purposed misrepresentation of our universal right & ability to issue a promissory obligation to someone who actually gives up property.

What most don’t or completely refuse to comprehend today is that its we the people, who already act in a ” private capacity ” as a ” private individual (s) “, have the monopoly on all wealth creation because its we the people who give up the only consideration of value in all money & property, only we have ignorantly given it to thieves & criminals over the centuries, who as a result purposely intervene on all our business & commerce only to then steal what all currency represents by merely pretending, they, the thieves, either a bank, or any seated government who works for thieves, gives up in consideration of value of their very own in either their “alleged creation“ of currency, or in any “alleged loan“ they may impose on one of us as a result.

It is a logical fact banks simply can not exist if they didn’t impose interest, & to infer or suggest we can have an interest free bank is only a suggestion to preserve the banks very ”first crime” in my opinion, where the bank or mere publisher, public or private, who merely publishes a further representation of our promissory obligations merely then pretends to loan a sum of principal giving up no consideration of value themselves to that principal representation.

The banks first two crimes:
1) The local bank steals & launders a sum of principal an * alleged borrower * creates by purposefully obfuscating the obligors promissory obligation, * before the banking book entry *, pretending, then, to loan principal only as if it was the banks principal value to loan out in the beginning.

2) As a result of the banks first crime the bank, then commits its second crime by stealing & laundering a further sum of principal by charging unwarranted interest on what is a *falsified debt* only as if the bank gave up or risked consideration of its own commensurable or equal to the *alleged loan* or debt it falsifies to itself.

I’m all for having a seated government, limited in power by united public mandate, law, dictated by the people to print or publish a further representation of our promissory obligations on behalf of the people at cost only, which is non profit accounting at the end of the day not a bank.

However as soon as a seated government starts “ allegedly loaning “ or giving that or rather our representation away, which is not theirs to either loan or give away much like a bank does today, that is where any seated government has stepped directly into the shoes of the exploiter, or the banker, whether you put a public or private stamp on it regardless.

Anthony Migchels:
Basically I go along with this a long way, but there are two issues, one of them is a problem.

The first issue is that even under MPE there must a credit facility. So the question is: who’s going to run it: a private foundation kind of outfit or a Government institution?

It is this question I had in mind when writing the article.

The problematic issue is: MPE mistakenly assumes that volume will not have to be managed if all the credit is properly asset backed. This is a mistake: it will fuel asset bubbles.

Meaning we will need some kind of Monetary Authority to manage the volume.

australia4mpe:
Sadly what many fail to comprehend in regards to the sum volume of circulation in MPE™ is that not all property or not all our production has representation or not all our production will be represented by a promissory obligation so there is no mistake but a misunderstanding if you will .

Logically what is spent & earned from the outset of another’s promissory obligation, earned profit or savings can also purchase unrepresented property that’s likewise been produced from another’s earned profit or savings, but that’s not to say all our production has representation & nor does it infer our labour is not included in our production if anyone was to look up the definition of the word ” production” that is. The volume of circulation in MPE™ simply circulates so long as there is remaining consumption left on * represented property *.

Either way money is created by the obligor for representation regardless, when its needed, without any intervention or regulation whatsoever, so in other words MPE simply regulates itself at the end of the day.

Let me be clear MPE™ does not claim it can perfect man, it would be absurd to infer or suggest such a thing & this is exactly why we have a united peoples mandate if any one was to read it , however believe it or not MPE™ can indeed perfect any purported economy today with a simple 1.1.1 Second grade * EQUAL * math ratio, where (1) All OBLIGATIONS are equal or no more than all remaining money in (1) CIRCULATION & equal to no more than all remaining depreciating (1) *REPRESENTED PROPERTY* VALUE.

The solution is therefore an obligatory schedule of payment retiring principal at the rate of consumption or depreciation of the related property & a complete eradication of interest.

See the mathematics .
https://australia4mpe.wordpress.com/the-mathematics/

Mathematics can determine people’s behavior in certain respects & don’t get me wrong here, MPEs Mathematics does not claim it can determine what color underwear you are going to wear every day . Now how this 2nd grade math ratio insulates (a volume of circulation) against any ones outside adverse behavior or decision is quite simple if we are capable of using logic really, because all promissory obligations are paid down & retired at the rate of consumption of the related or represented property where any remaining circulation is *fully redeemable* in remaining property value, so in other words one cant issue a promissory obligation that represents nothing ,or above the remaining consumption value left on property in MPE™ & what further representation or money you may give away from your savings by ignorance or otherwise for example is your loss & your loss alone, buyer beware still applies in MPE where what you give away simply circulates further unimpeded as its consequently spent or earned by others so it can be rightfully retired on someones promissory obligation, either now or in 100 years.

So as for asset bubbles people will soon learn if they decide to pay above the remaining consumption left on property they take the risk of not redeeming what they gave away in the first place above remaining consumption on any subsequent sale thereafter, again you can give your money away in MPE if you want however as I have explained it wont effect that 1.1.1 ratio.

There is NO FREE LUNCH in MPE™, we pay just so much (principal only) for what we consume, so in the unlikely case someone defaults or dies for example before they fulfill an obligation, that remaining unconsumed property value in question is again * fully redeemable * so someone else can buy the remaining value of that property, & likewise pay down the remaining property value at the rate of their consumption, so the remaining money still circulating that represents the property in question can be rightfully retired (not stolen by a mere publisher who pretends to loan us money)

We don’t really have a credit facility in MPE™ as such , we have a Common Monetary Infrastructure (CMI), we are not imposing a loan or borrowing money/credit off a mere publisher who gives up no consideration, but we do have a savings facility (CMI) which also checks your ” issue worthiness ” so as to know you can pay down & rightfully retire your principal creation or retire your intended issuance of a promissory obligation, ” Issue worthiness ” like ” credit worthiness ” is much the same process where it could be for example demonstrating you have an income, savings or unrepresented property you already own that maybe used as collateral.

The ”Non Profit” Common monetary infrastructure or (CMI) in MPE™ is merely accounting nothing more really ,its * NOT A BANK * that pretends to loan the value of our production back to us for the mere cost of publication & charges us interest for the privilege of being robbed then irreverently multiplying artificial debt , the practice of banking therefore will cease to exist & will be considered an act of treason in MPE.

Nevertheless the CMI will be administered by public servants on the peoples behalf sure, however I must stress politicians have absolutely NO ability or power whatsoever to intervene or regulate the CMI outlined in the mandate, to do so in a manner without transparency or without the approval of the people first by a transparent referendum for example would be considered political betrayal by an act of treason & treated as such by law outlined in the united peoples mandate, which is to secure Absolute Consensual Representation ACR™ of the sovereign rights of just individuals within any nation who actually choose to adopt MPE™.

I mean we need someone to do the administration don’t we, so putting it simply as I can, under ACR™ it will be the people who will be holding all the purse strings. The hands of politicians will be tied well & truly when it comes to administering a nations affairs which includes restrictions on spending, building infrastructure etc, simply because the people have to recommend public spending first, thereafter its affirmed or consented by the people by a referendum or vote for example within the area where that infrastructure is built & if money is needed to go to war on a national level for example, or anything spent for the nation on a whole the nation therefore votes.

See the beauty of ACR™ is even if you vote no for some public infrastructure you don’t want in your area & your in the minority vote , your not going to use that infrastructure right?, so your not going to be taxed to pay down that infrastructure as you would consume of it if you did vote yes, likewise if you vote no to go to war for example & in the minority vote you don’t pay any further taxes to fund war you didn’t vote for, there are no other taxes in MPE™ other than what you pay to use or consume infrastructure of course.

There is more in the mandate regarding media & the like, I do suggest anyone reads it, its in audio on my blog so you can just listen to it at your own leisure, the audio is likewise in 12 sections so one can even listen & or read a section a day if they wish.

ACR is what true sovereignty should be in my opinion, where the people govern themselves holding all the purse strings for its the people who give up the only consideration of value.

Lastly I might add there are no bureaucrats who dictate the value of your labour & production you give up & receive from each other, not the CMI, not any politician & most certainly not any thieving bank who artificially inflates prices by imposing unwarranted interest on what have always been falsified debts since the very conception of banking, you only pay for what you consume in MPE & that is rightfully retired at your choice of consumption.

To learn more I suggest you likewise read my blog or go directly to a post called ” MPE for dummies.”
https://australia4mpe.wordpress.com/category/mpe-for-dummies/

Thank You
David Ardron

Anthony Migchels:
Long story short: MPE assumes money will be paid down & retired at the rate of consumption.
What I’m saying is that this will mean that the total amount of credit in circulation will grow and grow, leading to higher prices, because there will be no limit on new credit and new credit will be taken on before the old is paid off.

This will lead to rising prices. Asset bubbles.
People will take on ever more debt, underwriting it with assets which are rising in price because more credit is pumped in.
So while all the credit will be fully backed (until the bubble bursts, which it must eventually), it will be at inflated prices. This is the problem.

In fairness: I’ve been struggling with this issue for years. Hoping it would result in the understanding prices would be stabilized by market functions, but it will not. Mutual Credit will inflate if volume is not properly managed.

australia4mpe:
If you or anyone cares to look at the mathematics link on my previous reply you will clearly see MPE proves & demonstrates with elementary logic & 2nd grade mathematics that so long as we are issuing promissory obligations for new represented property the circulation will always increase in respect to that equal 1.1.1 ratio as we increase our production, which is logically greater than our consumption which is retired, where logically a house for example may take only months to produce & represent right ? but to retire the value of that house may take 100 years right?, so of course the circulation will increase but its not an abnormal increase in relation to representation. Hypothetically even if we all stopped issuing promissory obligations for new represented property we still wouldn’t suffer inflation or deflation & there would be a sufficient volume of circulation per representation to pay down our remaining consumption.

Please let me be clear there is no circulatory inflation or deflation per representation in MPE, nor is there any price inflation on a whole, its a total eradication of inflation & deflation thus we are solving what is an inherent fault in this lie of economy we all currently live in, which is on the most part only the evidence of a monumental theft of circulation today.

Now the premise & mere assumption, or LIE rather, taught in most if not all economics schools & universities today, assumes without a shred of poof or qualification that price inflation is solely caused by circulatory inflation or too much money printed, published or issued within any nations monetary circulation per goods & services, however what is completely overlooked is not only elementary logic & 2nd grade mathematics, but as a result of this intellectual disability taught in universities & schools (WHICH IS NOT EVEN ECONOMY BY ITS VERY DEFINITION) the volumetric impropriety imposed by unwarranted interest on a falsified debt is completely overlooked & totally ignored, which is the very interest we the people all pay out of a general circulation on our very own falsified debts to all the local banks, which indeed perpetually depletes a general circulation that only ever consists of some remaining principal at the very most? (NO ONE ON THIS PLANET CAN PROVE & DEMONSTRATE HOW ANY SUM OF INTEREST IS * FIRST CREATED * & ISSUED INTO CIRCULATION ABOVE ANY SUM OF PRINCIPAL?), clearly indicating, then, price inflation most certainly can not be caused by circulatory inflation at all today?, that’s if one has the intellectual capability of using elementary logic, they can clearly see circulatory inflation or even hyperinflation is indeed a mathematical impossibility under any interest based monetary system? concluding, then, using *elementary logic a five year old could demonstrate with a bag of marbles* that price inflation can only be caused by a further imposition of unwarranted interest on a blatant theft of principal which is a theft of ” principal & interest ” or often a sum of 2X the principal, that’s in fact, directly imposed on all our industry & commerce today, which is consequently passed on to the consumer in the price of goods & services.

There are only 2 types of inflation.
1) Circulatory Inflation or hyper inflation: Never happens, simply because the rate of circulatory deflation or should I write a rate of a perpetual theft of circulation by a banks purposed obfuscation of our promissory obligations, always, always, always exceeds the rate of any prior reflation by national debt, clearly evident by perpetually increasing sums of national debt upon further cycles of reflation which is indeed necessary today to service the prior sum of debt.

(your not in a wash of money by increasing national debt are you, & WHY is this?, THINK > simply because national debt or a irreversible multiplication of artificial debt perpetually reflates a general circulation over & over that’s also perpetually deflating over & over at a greater rate than any prior rate of reflation due to a never ending continuous ground floor theft of principal + interest by a banks purposed obfuscation of our promissory obligations or upon MONEY CREATION itself)

2) Price Inflation: On a whole, is primarily caused by unwarranted interest imposed on all our industry & commerce, where businesses has no choice in most cases to raise their prices to meet their own debt obligations to a bank, therefore price inflation on a whole today is almost entirely artificial in nature, which is passed on to the consumer in the price of goods & services.

” Please note there are exceptions to price inflation in isolated cases if a particular product is in short supply, the price of that product only will rise, as opposed to a product that is abundant in supply that products price will fall ,however these isolated cases are not the cause of all or the majority of price inflation on a whole today & nor will they under a mathematically Perfected Economy™ “

See the root cause of all inflation?
https://australia4mpe.wordpress.com/category/what-is-the-root-cause-of-all-inflation/

The proof of one & one only Mathematically Perfected Economy™ is a singular integral solution for 3 categoric faults.
1) Inflation & deflation.
2) Systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money & property.
3) Inherent irreversible multiplication of falsified indebtedness by unwarranted interest.

Once again the solution is therefore an obligatory schedule of payment ( see the mathematics ) retiring principal at the rate of consumption or depreciation of the related property & a complete eradication of interest.

THERE IS NO INFLATION OR DEFLATION IN MPE: (properly managed?)
The meaning of ”inflation” is to increase but its an abnormal or distorted increase, so there is NO such thing as inflation & deflation in MPE because there is no distortion or abnormality ,even circulatory in nature neither a increase or decrease of circulation is abnormal or distorts the availability of the remaining volume of circulation that it was intended to represent in relation to remaining property value & remaining principal debt /obligation which are balanced or always equal at all times.

With the total eradication of interest In MPE we have no price inflation on a whole because the interest imposed on all our business & commerce today that’s likewise passed onto the consumer is non existent in MPE.

Circulatory Inflation & deflation therefore just doesn’t happen from the get go in MPE even when an obligor issues a promissory obligation for new represented property that issues new money into circulation simply because this increase of circulation is immediately equal to the remaining principal debt & remaining value of the property that the obligor purchased so long as the obligor retires principal at the rate of their consumption there is NO inflation or deflation.

Deflation is to reduce or a reduction in the availability of circulation resulting in a deficient circulation. so in MPE we don’t even have deflation or an insufficient volume of circulation simply because we will always have exactly the required amount of money per representation available left in circulation to pay down & retire the remaining principal from circulation in servicing any outstanding obligation, balancing then circulation equal to the remaining obligation & equal to the remaining property value.

Circulatory Inflation & Circulatory deflation therefore means there is an adverse volumetric impropriety that exists in the remaining availability or volume of circulation for what it was intended to represent which is a volume of circulation that’s abnormally above or below its intended representation, therefore the remaining volume of circulation is not balanced or not equal to the remaining property value & not equal to the remaining obligation or principal debt.

Anthony Migchels:
The underlying assumption is that the credit is financing our consumption. But once we have paid for our consumption (up front, like we do when buying a house) the credit starts to circulate in the wider economy. It does not magically stick to the asset that is underwriting the credit.

MPE looks at money purely as credit, but once the credit is created and used to pay with, it becomes money and follows the laws of money, including that of inflation and asset bubbles.

It matters not whether the money is printed debt-free, or as interest-free credit. What matters is its volume in circulation and MPE will see growing volume with rising prices as a result of circular inflation resulting from eternally growing credit as money.

There is no mathematical proof: there is a mistaken axiom and upon this a wrongful formula was devised

australia4mpe:
Not so, I guess one has to know how money is created & what money truly represents first don’t they ?, However promissory obligations are financing our consumption, the assumption is fact even today only banks misrepresent our promissory obligations pretending to be the real creditor who actually gives up a house or risking consideration of value of their own commensurable or equal to the value of the house.

MPE sees money as a promissory obligation, promissory note, contractual obligation which has consideration of value… anything else is a further representation only its a purposed misrepresentation today, its not credit as such in MPE, which is why we call credit worthiness ” issue worthiness “, simply because credit is the ability to obtain goods or services * before payment * which is based on a lie we loan money from a bank, when we actually create it , even in MPE without exploitation, even today we create a sum of principal by signing a promissory note disguised as an alleged loan contract when we only allegedly borrow money from a bank, which is the banks first crime really & the second is unwarranted interest as a result of its first crime only pretending to give up consideration of value.

See the origin of money ?
https://australia4mpe.wordpress.com/category/the-origin-of-money/

Now if you actually take the time to read what I’m pointing you at you will see we are paying the real creditor in full from the outset of our issuance of a promissory obligation, its money creation, money is NOT created as a debt in MPE™, simply because we as the obligor (NOT BORROWER) creates money (principal only) free of exploitation or purposed obfuscation to first pay the true creditor in full who gives up property & then the obligor likewise earns, & rightfully retires money, (principal only), with their future production at the rate of depreciation or their choice of consumption of the related property they purchased in fulfilling a obligation.

What is consumed logically no longer represents value so logically what has been consumed has to be paid down & retired out of circulation to solve the otherwise circulatory inflation if we didn’t rightfully retire what we consume.

I mean is a principal debt a crime or paying for one house for receiving one house, or is it a crime paying the value of 2 house’s to a thieving bank for only receiving the value of one house off a real creditor?

It is true in MPE one owes a true creditor (someone who actually gives up property) a like equal measure of ones own production over time for what production the true creditor gave up (EG: A house), however one is merely paying down out of circulation what one has paid in full to the true creditor from the outset of ones very own promissory obligation (money creation).

No one is paying back as such because one merely pays with a like equal measure of ones own production for what one consumes of another’s production, which is rightfully retired, deleted, extinguished that guarantees the very integrity of the money circulating for its intended representation, which is most certainly not anyone’s to keep in fulfilling a promissory obligation, we give up & receive an equal representation of wealth to each other upon money creation, which also consists of the earned profit or entitlement from our labour & production we give up & receive from each other, without banks or government representatives intervening on our business & commerce stealing from us in the process.

Today’s purposefully obfuscated debt is NOT created as a debt at all, rather its *falsified debt* subject to banking exploitation or a purposed obfuscation. which equates to a *MONUMENTAL THEFT* & *ONE BIG MONEY LAUNDERING RACKET* nothing more.

Moreover Its preposterous even to entertain the idea of debt free currency because logically even barter itself or the act of exchanging property or goods (which otherwise money represents) is the very act of fulfilling a debt or obligation.

By the very definition of the word *debt* does not define a theft but rather the assumption pertaining to the legal definition of debt which implies a bank gives up lawful consideration of its own in a would be loan which is commensurable or equal to a debt that would otherwise justify interest? Which is not the case at all today rather there is: NO BORROWER, NO LOAN & most certainly there is NO DEBT owed to any bank.

Money in MPE™ is a debt instrument not a debt itself because the evidence of our production that one earns is entitlement of wealth which is not a debt at all in MPE, & nor is it today because the debt is really a theft, therefore money only becomes a *principal debt* in MPE when we use it in the exchange of property or services, unlike today where money only becomes a * principal debt subject to interest * when we use it in the exchange of property or services, however unlike MPE, today’s money is stolen on conception creation by thieving banks who are purposely falsifying a debt to themselves by intervention upon our contracts with each other which is the core obfuscation & first crime a bank commits where the bank is neither risking or giving up consideration of its own commensurable or equal to the falsified debt it imposes, essentially stealing principal representation on conception creation of money, so in effect we are really exchanging our labour & production that the banks have already falsely claimed as their very own today by merely pretending to loan a sum of principal to the ” alleged borrower “ which is a sum of principal the ” alleged borrower “ actually created upon signing & issuing a promissory obligation *before any banking book entry*, thereafter the 2nd crime of unwarranted interest is imposed ONLY AS IF the bank risked or gave up commensurable consideration of its own.

As for your assumption that there is no mathematical proof in MPE pertaining to a mistake or being not accepted somehow when you haven’t even articulated why yourself even after I have shown it to you is really an absurd unqualified assumption in my opinion.

There is not one mathematician or alleged economist on this earth who can formally disprove MPE or the mathematics, not in over 45 years.

Sure there are those who propagate assumptions pretending to find fault in MPE by a misunderstanding or willful ignorance such as Victor J Aguilar, aka charlatan, who cant disprove MPE so he character assassinates MIKE with blatant LIES, but in most, if not in every case these individuals are just spouting unqualified assumptions based on further lies they only believe to be fact that MPE indeed proves to be lies at the end of the day anyhow, that’s what one sees if one genuinely takes the time & effort to study MPE asking genuine questions of logic before making their final conclusions or assumptions.

Anthony Migchels:
I’m not trying to refute MPE, Austrialia4MPE. I consider myself an interest-free crediter and a colleague of you and Mike.

Having said that: considering the crucial nature of this debate, I’m not going to settle for anything I don’t understand, let alone simply disagree with. And I disagree with Mike on the way he thinks volume is under control in MPE. Vehemently.

I understand what money or t is and how it is created. I also understand the difference between a promissory note and interest-free credit.

For all facts and purposes in terms of volume and prices, there is none.

This is where you and Mike go wrong. This is the core issue:
“What is consumed logically no longer represents value so logically what has been consumed has to be paid down & retired out of circulation to solve the otherwise circulatory inflation if we didn’t rightfully retire what we consume.”

What this says is that you believe that money in circulation derivees its value from the assets that is backing it. If it is consumed, it must therefore be retired.

This is WRONG.

The value of money is a function of volume, not the assets backing it.

Here, I’ll give you a little example.

You, I and X start up MPE.

I take out a credit line of 200k to buy your house and I will start downpaying on my promissory note next month.
I will require a 1000 MPE ‘dollars’ per month to downpay the mortgage. I need to get these from you. But where are you going to with your money? Who can handle 200k MPE based credit in this economy?

X will come work for you, but you’ll have to pay him some pretty stiff wages. There is too much MPE in circulation.

australia4mpe:
It is true money today is just a volume of circulation that has volumetric improprieties without banking representation as such, but every alleged debt today is collateralized to some degree is it not? well logic tells us if you foreclose on your mortgage the bank gets the house do they not ?, so they are pretending to redeem the property only as if they risked or gave up consideration of value that represents that house, do they not?, but it wasn’t their house to begin with, nor did they give up consideration of their own that represents the value of that house in any alleged loan to one of us, not even in their alleged creation of money, which is not only a monumental theft here, because its we the people who give up the only consideration, but an inherent fault mind you ,which is a volume of circulation today that’s disproportionate in volume to the price or value of goods & services, at the end of the day you fail, or sadly refuse to see the very cause of inflation & deflation circulatory in nature, moreover you fail, or refuse to see that logic tells us its mathematically impossible for circulatory inflation to exist under any interest based economy, simply because the cause of price inflation today is the very interest that all our industry & commerce pays out of circulation to a bank which is logically passed onto the consumer in the price of goods & services,therefore price inflation is definitely not caused by increasing sums of circulation per goods & services or per representation today ,but that is not to say circulatory inflation will not cause price inflation, but this is not the case at all today rather price inflation is caused by the very interest we pay out of circulation.

As a consequence of your misinterpretation of the cause of inflation & deflation or a refusal to come to terms you maybe mistaken here, and you are, you fail to see the banks are neither risking or giving up consideration of value, which is what backs a contracts value, or one of our promissory obligations. Banks are essentially misrepresenting the contract on their paper falsifying a debt to themselves giving up nothing of their own , giving the contract no backing whatsoever themselves but pretending they do.

All banks are committing contract fraud since their very conception (no exceptions public or private) that every law profession on this earth makes an exception, or turns a blind eye when it comes to the contract essentials in purported loan contracts or mortgages from banks.

Basically my only conclusion here is that you still fail or refuse to see the banks purposed obfuscation of our promissory obligations or refuse to come to terms you may be mistaken in your interpretations after I have articulated it all in much depth already, not only here, but on my blog in triplicate.

Now as for your little example, if I’m not mistaken you ask how you as the obligor that pays me in full is going to get the money off me to fulfill your obligation? Well I have already articulated this haven’t I? Its quite simple as I spend the money it circulates further so you can go out and earn that money so you can pay down your obligation.

Now if I don’t spend my money straight away it stays in my account as savings or earned profit you wont be necessarily earning the money off me personally, your really earning it from the overall pool of wealth we all create & contribute too, so more than likely your earning the money from the outset of another’s promissory obligation unless your my employee of course, which would be unlikely right, but a dollar is a dollar circulating at the end of the day, which is the evidence of someones promissory obligation regardless.

Hypothetically if you paid me 200k & I keep that as savings for example & didn’t spent it at all & I die , it will be my children spending it as an inheritance more than likely, considering a house will more than often have a proprietary determinate life span of a 100 years or more it doesn’t matter if I horde my earnings, in reality in MPE we would all be self retiree’s where we would be spending our earnings later in life anyhow before we die & whats left in inheritance will be spent also by our siblings either now or in a hundred years.

All the answers you seek are already on my blog really, but will you or anyone apply themselves?.

Is Savings Deflationary in MPE ?
https://australia4mpe.wordpress.com/category/is-savings-deflationary-in-mpe/

All money circulates unimpeded in a nations pool of wealth so long as there is remaining consumption left on represented property. So long as people are producing, & we always have even though today that production is stolen only to irreversibly multiply artificial debt upon perpetual re-inflation, nevertheless in MPE so long as we are always issuing new volumes of circulation per new represented property when its needed, that one doesn’t otherwise have, without the need for any regulation what so ever, you wont have to earn that money off me personally, which I have already articulated wont cause circulatory inflation anyhow if all remaining circulation is equal to all remaining obligations & equal to all remaining represented property value or remaining consumption value left on represented property.

The idea here is not only an eradication of inflation & deflation its to make sure we are not multiplying the debt to service the former debt like today .

In MPE we have no need for re-inflation or the resulting national debt so its physically possible for at least some of us today (not all) to actually pay our falsified debts to a thieving bank, However in MPE we will always have the exact amount of money or exact remaining volume of circulation at all times, so we all can pay down our promissory obligations either now or in 100 years ,its that simple mate.

However there is a difference between value & price TODAY which is related to the volume really, so your incorrect there by writing:

“For all facts and purposes in terms of volume and prices, there is none”

Its not a fact, simply because price inflation is wholly artificial in nature , where the money has really *DEVALUED* due to the banks purposed obfuscation of our promissory obligations, as a result banks are stealing & laundering circulation which is often * 2X above * the (represented property) value of principal, stealing the value of two house’s in total for example which is *perpetually decreasing* the remaining volume of circulation by *charging interest* on all our falsified debts to all local banks ,where the remaining volume of principal in circulation has actually lost its value (per represented property value) & WHY you may ask?

Your paying more out of the *existing or remaining *volume of circulation, (per represented property value), NOT paying more out of an * increasing * volume of circulation (per represented property value) OK mate.

REN:
Anthony, mathematicians have trouble with their assumptions all the time. Then, once they start their proofs, they forget about the assumptions, and allow the math to take them where it will. Economists do the same thing.

But, there are ironclad rules that cannot be denied by any form of logic. At the very moment of transaction, money stands in as a good. It is not a good, but merely a stand in. The volume of money in ciruclation should match the volume of goods and services. The rate of circulation makes money more efficient, therefore the effictive volume of money is really a factor = volume x velocity.

After the moment of transaction, the money goes on to be spent, and hence jump to and mediate another transaction. There must be the “right” amound and right kind of money to operate for transactions.

MPE money starts as credit and then goes on to serve as money i.e. jumping from transaction to transaction. That is undeniable and axiomatic, yet not comprehended apparently. This is the public function of money, i.e. commons, and it cannot be wished away.

Also, any cirular flow of money that is asset derived, will also require the math to have feedback functions. In other words, asset backed money will “push” markets, driving up general prices, allowing more credit.

Somebody, or the MPE function model (math function) does derive its pricing formula from markets. Yet, the markets themselves are pushed by the money creation. Yet, another disconnect in their logical formulations

Anthony Migchels:
I agree Ross (REN), this is at the heart of the matter.

The underlying credit becomes money once it is spent into circulation.

I’ve checked MPE’s website for their take on inflation. Mike (correctly) states that past war price rises were mainly because of systemically ever higher interest charges. This is true, but he’s not mentioning that interest rates keep a lid on credit expansion. This would of course not exist in interest-free credit. Furthermore, Mike more or less seems to ignore that inflation is in fact well documented in for instance the case of the Continental, which was inflated into oblivion simply by overprinting.

Growing credit volume will automatically see escalating volume of money in MPE and this must be solved for it to work.

australia4mpe:
Preposterous? you guys don’t even know what credit is because credit in the form of a purported loan from a bank is really theft today, & likewise if you think spending money in MPE is actually spending credit or think MPE is a credit system of some sort that loans interest free credit your completely WRONG.

I have already articulated why credit today is based on a lie banks loan money , unless any of you can prove & demonstrate what a bank gives up in consideration of value, which you cant, there is no banking credit if one was to look up the definition of the word?

The bank gives up no value that represents the credit they allegedly loan which makes the bank a thief …period .

Now If I can prove with logic alone, & I can, only the principal is created by one of us by signing & issuing a promissory obligation/note *before any banking book entry* when we ”allegedly” borrow principal from a local bank, how can fractional multiplication thereafter ” allegedly ” multiply or expand principal, when either way here from the outset of ones promissory obligation principal is only ever issued into circulation for what it is or once was intended to represent, EG: A house, upon a sale or purchase of property?

INCREASING INTEREST RATES:
By increasing interest rates attempting to slow alleged borrowing doesn’t actually solve price inflation, nor does it keep a lid on purported expansion?, rather increased rates of interest may indeed slow growth but it always increases the rate of circulatory deflation or increases the theft of a vital circulation regardless, accelerating then an adverse volumetric disposition of a general circulation that consequently accelerates the multiplication of falsified debt into terminal sums of falsified debt even faster just to re inflate circulation.

DECREASING INTEREST RATES:
Decreasing or lower rates of interest however is a slower rate of adverse volumetric disposition, or a slower rate of theft of circulation, which can temporally stimulate growth, allowing the banks to artificially inflate circulation by periodically increasing alleged loans to an alleged borrowers only, which is not the cause of price inflation at all today (mathematically impossible) simply because interest at any rate paid out of a general circulation by an alleged borrower always, always, always, depletes a general circulation that only ever consists of some remaining principal at most, where the rate of circulatory deflation is always, always, always at a greater rate than any former rate of re-inflation by means of national debt, which is clearly evident by increasing sums of national debt upon further cycles of reflation, further cycles of reflation, that’s necessary to keep the banking cycles of dispossession going, so its physically possible for a least some of us who are still credit worthy ,or some of us who are lucky enough to have the ability to first earn principal & interest out of a circulation of principal so its physically possible to continue servicing our falsified debts to local banks.

Moreover to suggest there could be ”interest free credit” is simply irrational & absurd because credit is the ability to obtain goods or services *before payment* which is based on a lie we loan money from a bank ,when we actually create & give value to it Anthony, & the bank steals that value on conception Anthony, which is the banks first crime where the local bank or an ”alleged creditor” steals & launders a sum of principal an *alleged borrower* creates by purposefully obfuscating or misrepresenting the obligors or *alleged borrowers* promissory obligation, *before the banking book entry*,*before expansion* , *before publication* pretending, then, to loan principal only as if it was the banks principal value to loan out in the beginning.

And to likewise suggest MPE ignores inflation & deflation when it actually solves inflation & deflation is likewise based on Anthony’s failure to see price inflation is caused by the very interest all industry & all commerce pays to a bank, it always has, since the conception of banking, which is logically an added cost passed onto the consumer in all sales or the price of goods & services. Its mathematically impossible for price inflation to be caused by circulatory inflation today simply because any sum of interest paid to a thieving bank above any sum of principal perpetually depletes circulation that’s only ever comprised of some remaining principal, even upon perpetual cycles of reflation, or a irreversible multiplication of artificial debt the circulation is only ever comprised of some remaining principal, unless of course any of you can prove & demonstrate how any sum of interest is first created & issued into circulation above any sum of principal that’s allegedly loaned by a bank, which you cant?.

Its not mathematicians having trouble with their assumptions all the time because the mathematician will often use logic in extending their equations, if you fail to apply logic in extending any mathematical equation you get an incorrect answer or solution, thus to assume or infer mathematicians don’t use logic here is sacrilege to any mathematician, it goes against the very grain of maths & science. Mathematicians more often don’t bend the facts or bend what is rudimentary logic to suit a theory or suit a proven thesis that no one has formally disproved in over 45 years, but economists & pretenders most certainly do, they do it every day to suit a LIE that we borrow money or borrow credit from a thieving bank, even to suggest we can have ”interest free credit”, ignoring the very reason why interest is imposed in the first place, or ignoring the banks very first crime, where the bank *allegedly loans principal credit* to an *alleged borrower* so an *alleged borrower *can obtain goods or services before payment?, which is not the case at all today or in MPE because the person who is giving up property of commensurable value is paid in full from the outset of the obligors or the *alleged borrowers* promissory note or obligation regardless.

MPE most certainly doesn’t ignore the velocity of money because it identifies the velocity of money we pay out of circulation (principal & interest) on our falsified debts to local banks terminally depletes a circulation that only ever consists of some remaining principal at most, where the rate of circulatory deflation or the theft of circulation by all local banks perpetually depletes circulation at a greater velocity of any former velocity of re-inflation by means of national debt which is irreversibly multiplying debt upon further cycles of reflation, clearly evident by increasing sums of national debt.

Identifying then banks don’t spend what they steal “principal & interest” back into circulation because the velocity rate of a monumental theft of circulation is governed by the rate of interest on our very own falsified debts to local banks, where principal & interest is stolen, laundered out of circulation over the years & consequently the money banks steal is loaned back into circulation as a terminal multiplication of national debt just to re-inflate circulation, continuing the banking cycles of what is a guaranteed dispossession & consolidation of all our property & wealth public & private in the very end.

Money in MPE simply circulates over & over until the principal debt is fulfilled likewise its retired at the consumption rate of the property one may have purchased from issuing a promissory obligation, however principal is NOT generally retired in full before the debt is due or fulfilled, one can choose to pay their debt off faster however but this does not mean the money paid in advance is retired faster than remaining consumption left on represented property because what is paid above remaining consumption simply remains in the obligors own account, otherwise as savings, its not stolen & laundered out of circulation by a thieving bank to irreversibly multiply an artificial debt.

And finally its NOT difficult to control “Velocity of Circulation” in MPE if one has the ability to use logic because the money we create, earn & pay-down from circulation is *RIGHTFULLY RETIRED* at the rate of consumption or depreciation we decide of the related property, where if someone unfortunately defaults on an obligation the property in question is *fully redeemable* for its remaining value, anyone who merely assumes human nature can adversely effect MPEs simple 1.1.1 Second grade math ratio needs to think again, go back to school repeat 2nd grade mathematics & come back & articulate exactly how & why human nature can disrupt or be adverse in the 1.1.1 ratio? Because you if you did think again & actually read what I have already written you will clearly see with logic alone that MPEs 1.1.1 ratio insulates a volume of circulation from any outside adverse decisions in commerce.

WHEN THE PERFECT VELOCITY OF REMAINING PRINCIPAL AVAILABLE LEFT IN A VOLUME OF CIRCULATION IN MPE IS ACTUALLY RETIRED AT A PERFECT VELOCITY OR RATE OF OUR CHOICE OF CONSUMPTION ”EXACTLY EQUAL“ (NOT ABOVE OR BELOW) BUT ”EXACTLY EQUAL“ TO THE REMAINING VELOCITY OF PRINCIPAL DEBT & ”EXACTLY EQUAL” TO THE REMAINING VELOCITY OF REPRESENTED PROPERTY VALUE.

It appears that philos grand delusions are rubbing off on you & others Anthony, but this is expected coming from 11th hour pretenders. I have now come to the conclusion I’m only wasting my time here on this blog of yours Anthony, you write that your on the side of MPE but as far as I’m concerned you are indeed not, in fact your adversarial in many respects that can only cause further division & confusion in others, whether its unintentional or on purpose its up to the reader really, but Its my observation like all others who truly comprehend what I’m writing is that the simplest logic completely evades your reasoning regardless Anthony.

Anthony Migchels:
Australia4MPE, I’m pretty much aware of the way banks create credit. That’s why I like interest-free Mutual Credit, of which I consider MPE an example. I have no difficulty following your line of reasoning on the money creation, either in Banks or in MPE. I consider discussing it superfluous, because it’s all a given.

What we’re talking about here is that your promissory note is not going to stick to your house when you buy it. The previous owner of the house is going to spend it elsewhere. And his supplier will use it again. That is the way money circulates, also when you create it as an interest-free promissory note. It is not the same note that ‘is retired at the rate of consumption’. Other notes, that the one paying off his obligation has earned with work or other means, are being used for that.

Because MPE creates ever more promissory notes, more and more of these notes circulate in the economy. This has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the underlying credit is being paid off also. New notes are created to pay off the old ones and asset bubbles are unavoidable.

Nothing of what you are saying disproves the many precedents in history of inflated currencies. The theory that the credit underlying the growing money supply is asset-backed will maintain stable prices is simply unreal, because the inflating credit will be backed at inflating prices! It’s a self feeding spiral that we always see when the banks lower interest rates and housing prices immediately begin to boom.

Don’t rely on logic too much man! We have clear practical examples that we can and must compare. Practical problems to solve!

I understand it’s unpleasant to be grilled on an issue like this, but I think it’s necessary. I believe in interest-free credit, but it must of course be designed well and the management of volume is crucial link in the story!

australia4mpe:
You have proven already you don’t know how banks create credit Anthony because they don’t create credit at all?, & if you like “interest-free Mutual Credit“ that purports to loan credit your advocating a theft regardless if interest is imposed or not Anthony, which most certainly cant be compared to MPE here at all, because there are NO alleged loans in MPE.

What we are talking about is money creation or one of our promissory obligations that represent the property or consideration of value in MPE given up by both parties in a promissory note, if promissory notes didn’t have consideration of value they would NOT be promissory notes Anthony?

The former owner in MPE who gives up a house or gives up consideration of value in return for what money is published from the outset of our promissory obligations simply circulates further in a pool of wealth that we all contribute too without thieves intervening on our transactions with each other, however promissory notes or our promissory obligations have always been interest free dating back as far as 2000 BC until some centuries ago banks started to intervene on our promissory notes we had & still have with each other, insisting we issue the promise on the banks paper, tricking us so the bank can essentially steal the represented value of that promissory note by pretending to loan its value, often X2 out of a pool of wealth because of the resulting interest.
https://australia4mpe.wordpress.com/category/the-origin-of-money/

Furthermore your absolutely WONG assuming without proof or qualification we are not retiring the same promissory note or obligation for the intended consumption of the related property. Its absurd to even suggest such a thing after I have already articulated we are retiring what represents our promissory obligation which includes any further representation of money published that evidences one of our promissory obligations Anthony.

All money published in MPE is a further representation of one of our promissory notes Anthony, which are promissory obligations that have consideration of value Anthony, even today the money published from the outset of one of our promissory obligations is a further representation only thing you refuse to comprehend is it’s a purposed misrepresentation of our promissory notes or obligations on the banks paper Anthony, NOT OURS, it’s a purposed obfuscation Anthony, where the bank is pretending to loan a sum of principal Anthony, unless of course you can prove what consideration of value the bank risks or gives up of its own in any alleged loan of credit ?, but we all know no one can, because banks or what is a mere publisher such as a central bank for example likewise give up no consideration of value don’t they Anthony.

If we are paying principal +interest out of a circulation that is only ever comprised of some remaining principal a child with a bag of marbles can prove circulatory inflation is mathematically impossible Anthony, thus your assumption that price inflation is caused by an increasing circulation that equals the value of represented goods & services in MPE is unfounded & completely false.

National debt which perpetually re-inflates circulation is never ever increasing a volume of circulation over & above the value of goods & services today because price inflation on the whole today is artificial. As I have already explained ever since the conception of banking price inflation is actually caused by all the interest all our industry pays to a bank which is logically a cost passed on to the consumer in the price of goods & services.

Blind Freddy can see if an alleged borrower purchases a house for 100K & the bank wants 200K in principal & interest & if the alleged borrower is lucky enough to earn principal & interest out of a circulation of only principal & fulfill a falsified debt to a bank they will then want at least 200K on a subsequent sale thereafter, which throws your mere unqualified assertion out the door assuming that price inflation is existent in MPE , how can it exist if we eradicate interest completely & most importantly we always keep a volume of circulation equal or no more than remaining obligations & equal or no more than represented property value.

Your basically claiming without a shred of proof that MPE has no system of accounting in regards to a volume of circulation at the end of the day here totally disregarding what is 2nd grade Mathematics in MPE based on a further lie derived from Austrian economics assuming maths cant be relied upon in relation to volumes of circulation because maths cant determine peoples decisions ,which is absurd really because MPE proves it can insulate a volume of circulation from peoples adverse decisions, even if they bloody give their entitlement away.

Your only attempting to convince others a fact exists basing it on the lie that inflated currencies subject to interest has existed or exists today, which is not the case at all Anthony, ever since the conception of banking currencies have always been permanently deflated due to unwarranted interest Anthony.

If we pay down circulation at the rate of consumption or depreciation industry & commerce in MPE™ would also have this extra money to expand business, employ more people, pay more to people, unemployment will be by choice NOT IMPOSED, employment will flourish, likewise we won’t be wasting vast amounts of natural resources because business will be paying their principal debt down at the rate of depreciation or consumption so naturally things will be built to last longer resulting in lower rates of payment over the lifetime of what is purchased to retire money thus leaving more capital or earned profit to expand business, pay more money to employees, employ more employees, likewise competition will also flourish keeping the price or cost of production competitive in what will be a true free enterprise market based on innovation rather than built in obsolescence & a throw away society.

And lastly if you advocate an absence or a non reliance of logic Anthony? Well, what can I say, you are indeed your own worst enemy, & as for any alleged clear practical examples you may have such as your “interest-free Mutual Credit“, is only advocating a theft at the end of the day, the banks first crime, which is a misrepresentation of our promissory obligations regardless, on the contrary Anthony I’m grilling you, I’m holding you accountable for dividing & confusing others with the lies of economy you cant prove or demonstrate as fact.

This will be my last post on this preposterous blog. I’m only wasting further of my time here with those who can’t even help themselves let alone help others using what are lies of economy pushing them as fact.
————————————————————
In addition I would like to add here it is complete & utter nonsense that Anthony asserts:

” Nothing of what you are saying disproves the many precedents in history of inflated currencies.”

Anthony couldn’t be any more WRONG in his unqualified assumption here simply because he fails to acknowledge the currencies have been “losing value” due to the volumetric disposition of interest, even in the case of ” the continental “ the state knew not was too much or too little to print only what was sufficient to fund a war at that time where total emissions of paper money amounted to $200,000,000 divided by the 3,000,000 inhabitants of the U.S  which only equates to a sum of $66 per head, & with the amount of counterfeit likewise circulating during that time no wonder the people lost all confidence in the continental currency, nevertheless Benjamin Franklin at that time parables the devaluation & the end of the continental currency to a tax that paid for the war concluding now in all these historical cases of alleged hyperinflation currencies only appeared & then assumed to be over inflated in volume, where in most if not all cases currencies are generally *re-denominated* as a end result to a lower value per unit or *lower value denomination* where no greater amount of notes remain in circulation prior to re-denomination such as for example a 50 billion dollar note replacing a lower denomination note that cant even buy a can of coke not even before nor after re-denomination , which clearly indicates a currency has been perpetually devalued *before* the resulting re-denomination apposed to Anthony’s irrational unqualified assumption that firstly asserts a volume of circulation has no representation or has no consideration of value not even what WE THE PEOPLE GIVE UP IN CONSIDERATION & secondly then  illogically asserting a preceded increase volume of circulation over & above the cost per goods & services that’s not representation somehow is the only possible cause of price inflation, or to even absurdly suggest increasing volumes of circulation that actually equal representation in MPE will cause price inflation , asset bubbles or alleged hyperinflation.

In retrospect there’s no evidence in history that categorically proves increasing volumes of circulation above representation has ever preceded or even caused price inflation, we can only surmise increasing volumes of circulation above the cost of goods & services can cause price inflation which is a law of money Anthony references that’s yet to be substantiated by formal proofs contrary to Anthony’s preposterous false assertions that so many repeat like him as factual when at the end of the day here circulatory inflation has clearly NEVER existed in any purported economy subject to interest, NOT even in the case of the Continental at $66 a head, however I must stress this is something MPE most certainly doesn’t ignore to a point where the 2nd grade mathematics & lets not ignore the elementary logic here that likewise proves & demonstrates MPE can indeed insulate a volume of circulation from this would be volumetric disposition using a 2nd grade equal math ratio only to then have a plethora of pretenders such as Anthony here ignorantly dismiss it all with irrational  assertions only repeating the unsubstantiated false assumptions of others who like Anthony haven’t even bothered to apply the simplest of logic & elementary math. In all seriousness all one has to do is logically ask oneself the question does a life time of production amounting to $66 per head in the year 1779 even remotely suggest a case of hyperinflation? OF COURSE IT DOESN’T & only demonstrates Anthony’s very own ignorance in pretending to grill me then further suggesting I need not to rely upon logic in what can only described as a poor attempt to justify his preposterous unqualified assertions to his readers. Price inflation however always always always precedes the re-denomination of any currency right to the very end when its totally devalued due to banking intervention & theft, thus price inflation primarily “due to interest” was & always is preceding & contributing to devaluation or resulting re-denomination of any currency , but circulatory inflation or hyperinflation most certainly never comes before price inflation, never has in the entire history of banking , not before or even after re-denomination.

Its not rocket science here at all folks & far from it simply because overinflated currencies in volume is mathematically impossible due to banking interest, its that simple , therefore the asset bubbles Anthony references is primarily artificial due to unwarranted interest imposed on falsified debts which artificially inflates prices to a point where industry & commerce can only go bust simply because at the very end of every terminal cycle ,just before a bust , we have always observed whats left of industry & commerce can no longer sustain the irreversible escalation of artificial debt, while all along the true value of all money & property or the true value of representation which is  the represented value of a promissory obligation or note  that I might add Anthony vehemently ignores & ignorantly calls a loan when its actually NOT a loan at all is nevertheless perpetually consolidated by banks or to put it simply as I can is a value we the people give up up to each other only to be stolen by the unjust intervention of thieving banks by a means of only pretending to loan us money.  Asset bubbles or price inflation has therefore never been caused by overinflated volumes of circulation NOT so long as that volume of circulation is subject to interest.

See video example of re-denomination in Zimbabwe?

As I have already referenced Anthony to The Root cause of all inflation I would like to reiterate what is in that blog post of mine that proves hyperinflation or printing too much money is mathematically impossible if that currency is subject to banking.

Now for example If a volume of circulation is comprised of 100 X $1 notes & each dollar is * DEVALUED * down to 1cent each , you would then have 100 notes worth 1cent each or a devalued sum total of $1 value in circulation.

1) Using Zimbabwe’s alleged hyperinflation for an example AFTER re-denomination, EXCHANGING the 100 X $1 notes devalued sum worth of 100 X 1cent for *1 X $100 note* worth $1 value in circulation (NO wheelbarrow needed to pay *1 X $100 note* that’s worth a total devalued sum result of $1 value to buy a loaf of bread with a price tag of $100)

OR

2) Using Weimar Republic Germany’s alleged hyperinflation for example BEFORE re-denomination, keeping the original *100 x $1 notes* devalued sum worth of 100 X 1cent worth $1 value in circulation. (USE a wheelbarrow & pay *100 x $1 notes* worth a total devalued sum result of 100 X 1cent or $1 value to buy a loaf of bread with a price tag of $100)

Either way here in the above EXAMPLES 1 OR 2 the money has *DEVALUED* due to the banks purposed obfuscation of our promissory obligations, as a result banks are stealing & laundering circulation which is often *2X or 3X above* the represented property value of principal, *perpetually decreasing* the remaining volume of circulation by *charging interest* on all our falsified debts to all local banks ,where the remaining volume of principal in circulation has actually lost its value per represented property value WHY?

As I already have explained to Anthony its simply because we are paying more out of the *existing or remaining* volume of circulation per represented property value, NOT paying more out of an *increasing* volume of circulation per represented property value.

In further addition HERE is Anthony not only making preposterous false unqualified assumptions or pushing further lies rather claiming promissory notes are loans , NOT SO , a promissory note is a signed document containing a written promise to pay a stated sum to a specified person or the bearer at a specified date or on demand, so they are not even loans in his purported interest free mutual credit system nor are they loans in MPE when in actual fact UNEXPLOITED promissory notes are clearly not even loans from a true creditor who actually gives up property in any exchange & the fact is promissory notes are merely* promises to pay *that indeed have consideration of value that’s essentially money creation signed & issued by an obligor ( NOT A BORROWER ) who may likewise give up future production in consideration of value in return which is consequently a promissory note issued to a true creditor who actually gives up property & of course in MPE void of any  unwarranted Intervention or exploitation that would otherwise impose FALSIFIED DEBTS in the form of PURPORTED LOANS  , which Indeed confirms my former suspicion that Anthony is actually advocating the banks first crime of theft  as a purported solution in his interest free mutual credit system pretending to loan money for the mere cost of publication of further repsentions of our promissory obligations & now a confirmed plagiarist of MPE who dividing & confusing people with  further lies with the addition now only pretending he has found a fault in MPE only to sell you exploitation as a solution  but nevertheless I would like to add another unsubstantiated attack on MPE  HERE or an unsubstantiated pack of lies from Anthony likewise found on facebook.

Quote:
Anthony Migchels :
Mathematically ‘Perfected’ Economy is an epic fail. It allows people to spend as much as they want, as long as they have the assets to back more and more promissory notes. The result is predictable: asset bubbles. People will buy inflating assets, and use these to back their promissory notes with. More and more money will circulate with higher and higher prices.

What is worse: its advocates don’t want to come clean on this most crucial issue and they are destroying the case for interest-free credit vis a vis the idiots of the Mainstream and Austrianism, who may know very little, but who at least understand the basic dynamics of the volume of money.
End Quote:

So lets undress Anthony’s quote above for the charlatan he really is shall we ?

Lie 1
Mathematically ‘Perfected’ Economy is an epic fail.
It allows people to spend as much as they want, as long as they have the assets to back more and more promissory notes.

Truth 1
MPE is proof of solution making it the one & only solution contrary to Antony’s unsubstantiated epic fail assertion  . In MPE you only pay for what you consume of another’s production which is CATEGORICALLY NOT A LOAN & to suggest one  pays more than what one consumes of another’s production is a choice in a would be free market that wont increase the remaining circulation above the cost of  representation or above the costs of goods & services simply because one cant issue a promissory obligation above the remaining consumption left on represented property even upon any new representation  , what is paid above consumption is SIMPLY paid out of ones earned savings or earned profit which simply circulates further unimpeded with out any intervention whatsoever so another person can likewise earn  that money again & again so as to pay down & rightfully retire their own obligation.

Lie 2
The result is predictable: asset bubbles.

Truth 2
The result will be solving inflation & deflation , moreover there is no proof that circulatory inflation has ever existed to begin with so as to purportedly  cause asset bubbles therefore asset bubbles  or price inflation is primarily  caused by unwarranted interest that all industry & commerce pays to banks on their own falsified debts which is logically an added cost  passed onto the consumer in the final cost of goods & services .

Lie 3
People will buy inflating assets, and use these to back their promissory notes with. More and more money will circulate with higher and higher prices.

Truth 3
People Indeed have a choice in MPE to buy overinflated assets but only with their earned profit or their very own savings which is CATEGORICALLY  NOT ISSUING NEW  PROMISSORY OBLIGATIONS THAT INTRODUCE NEW MONEY INTO CIRCULATION & any attempt to issue a promissory obligation above remaining consumption of representation by anyone, NO EXCEPTIONS political or otherwise is an act of treason outlined in the mandate . Now If I may reiterate once again for the dummies , particular Anthony here that there’s no evidence in history that categorically proves increasing volumes of circulation above representation has ever preceded or even caused price inflation, we can only surmise increasing volumes of circulation above the cost of goods & services can cause price inflation which is AGAIN  a law of money Anthony references that’s yet to be substantiated by any formal proofs, HOWEVER this is not to infer or say MPE doesn’t ignore increasing sums of circulation that’s above representation for MPE indeed identifies these inherent volumetric improprieties in today’s volume of circulation & then prescribes the only proof of solution that  not only eradicates inflation & deflation with a total eradication of  interest but solves any further possible volumetric improprieties with a simple 2nd grade math 1.1.1 ratio that quite frankly any child could demonstrate with a bag of marbles .

Lie 4
What is worse: its advocates don’t want to come clean on this most crucial issue and they are destroying the case for interest-free credit vis a vis the idiots of the Mainstream and Austrianism, who may know very little, but who at least understand the basic dynamics of the volume of money.

Truth 4
What is even worse after all this someone like Anthony here who doesn’t even have the 2nd grade intellect to see MPEs equal 1.1.1 math ratio which not only fully accounts for a remaining volume of circulation that’s always equal or no more to remaining obligations & likewise equal or no more than remaining represented property value, but  proves & demonstrates with elementary logic & 2nd grade mathematics that those who truly study & advocate MPE completely comprehend the dynamics of any volume of circulation by RIGHTFULLY retiring circulation at the rate of ones consumption of the related property in accordance to that simple  1.1.1 ratio , contrary to the lies of economy that  mainstream economics , Anthony here & likewise the Austrian dogma push that cant even formally be substantiated as fact.

further facebook Quote:
Anthony Migchels :

The two problems are 1) MPE claims inflation is caused by every higher interest charges. But this is only one cause of inflation: the housing bubble was caused by easy credit and associated escalating volume of money, not interest. Inflation is literally increasing volume, not rising prices.

2) MPE claims people can spend as many promissory notes (take out as much credit) as they can back with assets. Since the promissory notes will circulate as money, this means there is no theoretical limit to credit/volume expansion. This can only lead to asset bubbles.

End Quote

If asset bubbles are not caused by interest what is easy credit then if it doesn’t involve interest ?  ( contradiction noted ).  Well I ask the reader is bank credit easy or otherwise not a result of perpetual re-inflation or only possible by an irreversible escalation of artificial debt caused by any sum of interest that always precedes & contributes to any boom & bust cycle where the bust is when industry & commerce can no longer service this irreversible multiplication of artificial debt.

The question is how can interest contribute to an increase in volume of circulation that may otherwise cause price inflation if Anthony has just finally admitted interest can cause price inflation where logic can only then tell a 2nd grade student that if interest is paid out of any sum of principal  it perpetually deflates or decreases any remaining volume of circulation which is a volume of circulation that’s only ever comprised of some remaining principal at the very most even upon further cycles of reflation , which can only result in artificially inflating prices while at the same time perpetually deflating the remaining volume & value of any circulation, always then re-borrowing new artificial debt to physically pay the former artificial debt that’s irreversibly multiplying artificial debt giving one only the illusion increasing prices means increasing volume or the illusion increasing prices means increasing value.

So if Anthony is stating people in MPE can create money that represents property without any limitations whatsoever , limitations he irrationally asserts are not present in MPE that may otherwise prevent asset bubbles , but I have not yet seen Anthony articulate how these purported lack of limitations will cause MPE to irreversibly multiply artificial debt in the first place that would otherwise be the very thing that inevitably results in asset bubbles or booms & busts .

So what makes Anthony  think anything he has written proves there would be asset bubbles in MPE, where is his math or logic for that matter so as to extend any math ?  unless he is using an unqualified assumption that merely asserts MPE has no limitations, no math or no means to solve the following .

1) Inflation & deflation.

2) Systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money & property.

3) Inherent irreversible & therefore terminal terminal multiplication of falsified indebtedness by unwarranted interest.

So Anthony assumes all along there would be inflation in MPE that will cause asset bubbles , however Anthony  assumes this without first demonstrating  how MPE would irreversibly multiply artificial debt from this purported over-inflation that may result in asset bubbles or to even articulate why a volume of circulation that’s indeed always equal to remaining obligations & equal to remaining  represented property value can possibly then irreversibly multiply artificial debt that will result in asset bubbles or booms & bust cycles ? keeping in mind one cant issue a PO above remaining consumption of represented or any new represented property from the get go in MPE , what it costs to build new is the value of property, value subject to any subsequent consumption or depreciation regardless, so prices can only go down therefater in relation to any subsequent  promissory obligation that may take on any remaining consumption or remaining obligation which is a promissory obligation I might add that’s NOT necessarily issuing any new money into circulation anyhow, unless for example someone adds a new room to a house that may otherwise increase any remaining consumption value left on that house of course.

So the underlining question Anthony is faced with is how on earth can he possibly first demonstrate an overinflated volume of circulation in MPE would irreversibly multiply artificial debt to begin with that can  only then result in asset bubbles or putting it simply how can any  volume of circulation even cause an irreversible multiplication of artificial debt in MPE ? & this is logically what Anthony has to qualify first before he can rationally even consider purported asset bubbles . It only stands to logic & reason that booms & bust are a result of irreversible multiplication of artificial debt where industry & commerce can no longer service this artificial debt resulting in a bust of an asset bubble that was a bubble * artificially inflated  in price only * caused by an irreversible multiplication of artificial debt to begin with , so indeed where has anthony actually demonstrated  an overinflated volume of circulation has been the very cause of irreversible multiplication of artificial debt that may result in an asset bubble either in history or in MPE ?

What is clearly apparent in Anthony’s assertions is that he likewise  assumes money has value somehow but has no representation as such  & that’s the very reason, or the only pathetic, irrational, contradictory excuse he is using to deny MPEs limitations,  maths or a 2nd grade 1.1.1 RATIO which is the very thing that address the volume of circulation in MPE that Anthony of course  is ultimately pretending to find fault in by flat out denying representation exists or can exist in relation to volume which is to deny a theft of that representation & its value today or to deny a theft of our labour & production we really give up to each other.

In my final conclusion I have lost count how many times I have articulated  to Anthony that we have a choice in MPE to pay over remaining consumption but it has to come out of ones own pocket or earned savings & its ones loss & ones loss alone void of issuing any new promissory obligation by which  is the only means or vehicle in MPE to issue new money into circulation upon new representation , therefore what one pays above consumption in MPE takes the risk  in a subsequent sale thereafter of not redeeming what one originally gave away in the former purchase, so as for any possible asset bubbles in MPE people will soon learn by their mistakes because what Anthony likewise completely fails to even remotely consider that the buyer in MPE will be fully aware of this depreciation or consumption process & will nevertheless remain vigilant in getting the best possible price for their money regardless JUST LIKE TODAY  & lets not forget logic also tells us if industry & commerce pays their obligations down at the rate of consumption products will generally be built to last longer over time due to unimpeded innovation simply because it only stands to reason & elementary logic their monthly payments to retire Principal would be greater if they didn’t build things to last longer throughout the production process thus as a result with the total eradication of interest or any unjust intervention a throw away society will be indeed a thing of the past using less & less finite resources where prices on a whole can only then competitively fall to what they aught to rightfully be in what can only be  described as a true free enterprise market of the likes that’s never seen before in the entire history of commerce, moreover upon implementation of MPE  there will be a choice by the people in a  process of revising down or even keeping prices where they are currently now  which was touched upon in my blog post called ” What about land in MPE ”  & if I may leave you all with this final quote :

“The  power of wealth should not be placed in the hands of only the rich” 

Particularly in the hands of exploiters or thieves who only pretend to loan the value of our own production or only pretend to loan the value of our promissory obligations we really have to each other, which is a theft that  Anthony now openly advocates in his preposterous interest free mutual credit system that only purports to loan money which is at the end of the day nothing but a another plagiarization attempt of MPE only then pretending  to have some monetary authority pushing further exploitation or the banks first crime of theft as some purported solution & what makes this even more destructive Anthony here is pretending all along to find a volumetric fault in MPE only in order to sell further exploitation as some purported solution that I may finally add is a purported solution Anthony cant even justify with unqualified assumptions & repetitive lies he cant possibly substantiate & nor has he even substantiated as a matter fact, except for what he & many other pretenders have remotely understood & collectively stolen only in part from the MPE thesis which of course at the end of the day can only be a distortion of an irrefutable truth at best  .

( A further discussion on facebook between Mike Montagne & Anthony Migchels)

Here we go again folks , It doesn’t end with Anthony’s LIEs & deception that he is still pushing as fact OR are they games now .

Seriously  HERE you will see a screen shot of my original reply on Anthony’s latest attack on his blog where he is absurdly suggesting  MPE is some cult now , talk about scrapping the bottom of the barrel in defense of the lies he propagates as fact folks ,  but nevertheless HERE is another screen shot a day later where Anthony  has purposely edited out what I originally wrote in my reply on his blog of all things , which indeed refutes his false assertions once again.

I ask anyone reading this by all means compare the two screen shots above  & you will clearly see anthony has removed whole paragraphs of what I originally wrote that proves him incorrect once again in turn hoping his readers wont actually do their homework & follow the links of course , however I will admit It appears the screen shots tell us some have followed the links but they’re are some who are still making the wrong assumptions like those who clearly haven’t followed the links of course because they like anthony who are making the incorrect assumptions regarding MPE are too lazy to read the entirety of my blog posts & ask the questions here if need be before making the assumption or conclusion  , rather , these ignorant individuals who are making the incorrect assumptions are sadly relying upon the 11th hour pretender such as Anthony to answer any questions regarding MPE on his blog of all things, relying upon what has been a misinterpretation of MPE  from the get go due to pure laziness & what can only be described as a lack of intellect on Anthony’s behalf which doesn’t say much for those who endorse his actions either .

I mean at the end of the day I have personally wasted over 80 hours of my time  in reply to Anthony’s preposterous assertions  & we have collectively articulated disproof to every one of Anthony’s false assertions with logic & 2nd grade math only to be branded as some cult  by Anthony in desperation.  Therefore Anthony’s irrational denial of all this disproof &  now evasion by actually removing whole paragraphs I have written in reply to his latest attack can only reinforce & categorically prove with the screen shots I have provided that its his intent to purposely deceive & mislead the readers of his blog proving once again Anthony is nothing but a charlatan pretender.

I ask the question here to the reader why would anyone edit out parts of another persons reply, my reply to be precise , on their own blog if they are not hiding something from their readers , admittedly I may have missed a source link as he states in his actual edit of my reply, but this is no excuse to remove whole paragraphs while he is at it & why wouldn’t he state this in a further reply as he has already done in denial of what I have written without any evidence to the contrary ?. I most certainly don’t stoop to dishonest tactics like this here on my blog so why would Anthony do it on his blog unless he is hiding what categorically proves him incorrect.

This never ends with this charlatan folks ?  SEE HERE

Anthony even fails to see that the true credit is the actual representation of value or the asset a true creditor  may give up in an exchange,  & any money issued to pay for this asset is by the obligor or one who may sign & issue a promissory obligation ,essentially creating money to finance the exchange & or any other resulting exchange in the course of circulation , we pay now & buy now,  even today this is the case apposed to assuming we are buying now & paying later, simply  because the true creditor who gives up property gets paid in full from the outset of a promissory obligation regardless . Instead of paying & rightfully retiring circulation as we consume another’s production we have a bank steal the represented value of all money & property ever created or all the value of our labour & production , which is represented by money that’s NOT CREDIT at all as most people misinterpret bank credit today, completely unaware this misinterpretation is a part of a banks purposed obfuscation of all money & property. We don’t have a credit facility in MPE, simply because the CMI does NOT create or issue credit nor does an obligor for that matter , seriously how can anyone issue a Home if its not instead an obligor  issuing of a promissory obligation ( money creation  ) to pay NOW for a home, or pay & retire the value of the true credit at the rate of consumption that some one may have given up in an exchange for a promissory obligation  .

The true credit is therefore the value of what is given up in an exchange & any further representation or money published thereafter from the outset of an obligor issuing a promissory obligation to purchase someone else’s production is the very evidence & record of this in any exchange really, where property is logically redeemed for the money or redeemed for the very evidence of another’s production that the obligor originally pays then earns from a pool of wealth so as to otherwise *pay down * & *rightfully retire* an unexploited  debt in MPE, thus rectifying a falsified debt into what it ought to rightfully be, free from exploitation.

Anthony ignorantly assumes in his latest blog  MPE * believes* that the value of money is dependent on the underlying asset, on the contrary anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together can categorically prove this is the case * knowing * money is dependent on the underlying asset or property , even today, because all purported bank loans are collateralized for example when a bank pretends to be a true creditor re-possessing a house when that house was clearly not the banks to possess to begin with  , & to deny this readily provable fact using observation alone is to deny a theft of that collateral value by a bank.

As a result of Anthony’s clear lack of any rational intellect he ignorantly assumes its a fact the bank creates credit for us, which is another incorrect assumption or contradictory LIE if anything , rather banks publish a further representation ( today’s bank money/credit ) of our promissory obligations  ,which is ( today’s bank money/ credit ) a purposed misrepresentation of the debt we have to each other.

Its also noted any further representation from the outset of our promissory obligations or the fiat paper itself admittedly has no intrinsic value of course , but what most people fail to even comprehend here, including Anthony, is the only real intrinsic value is what that paper represents , evidences & records upon the exchange , promissory obligation inclusive , which is in short the value of  the labour & production we give up to each other, NOT just the asset , which is logically a debt where there are no loans or borrowing .

However ever since the conception of banking, all banks, no exceptions, have falsified this otherwise unexploited debt to themselves by unjust intervention on the exchange , pretending then to risk or give up value of their own in the exchange, either in banks purported creation of money, or any purported loan the bank may impose on one of us as a result.

Anyone who has read the entirety of this blog post so far will have to admit Anthony has no authority on monetary reform because he has already proven he has no clue what money or true credit actually is , what it represents & how its created , & nor does he want to know proving you cant educate a pretender who clearly has other motives in mind   , failing all along to see the banks purposed obfuscation of all money & property of course , likewise  its a undeniable fact now that Anthony is quite persistent in deceiving & misinforming his readers about MPE , actually he has already proven this not only in his preposterous posts about  MPE , but reinforced this fact by editing out the critical paragraphs in my last reply on his blog, which are critical paragraphs that had the additional math that proves his assumptions are once again nothing but lies.

Stay tuned for more folks , plagiarism of MPE in the making here, staring Anthony Migchels , aka charlatan , eleventh hour pretender extraordinaire  🙂