Zeitgeist Addendum**must see**

[elirien]

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I feel the same way, Elirien, like it's become my new job. Ironic, seeing as I'm currently unemployed

Well I am employed but if this continues this way I'll be probably broke, have an internet documentary, some esoteric books and shot by a U.N. peace officer that tried to "reason" with me for an rfid chip Not that I see death as doom and gloom but I also don't see it as a "release" from something. I like to give my back to uncle "I dunno ****" on this matter Well let's continue with the main topic.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

"Is this thought the product of a monetary system? What would this thought look like in the absence of wealth and capital?"

I like to first adress this sentence since it is exactly reflecting my feelings. I don't know if feelings are to be trusted on anything (not that I'm against them. Their heaps of fun many of the times ) but this is an important sentence that kind of sets the stage or is sort of a point of reference to return when one get's lost in the "fact jungle".

I don't define myself with an external source anymore. I still have some connections to the external on this matter but I'm trying hard to root them out. I couldn't care less if this monetary system fails (which it will). I don't believe that I am a product of any system. I'm not trying to define myself with the past. I am neither a grandson of Jesus neither of Atatürk. I am what I am and I don't know what the hell it is

Originally Posted by Reveling John

The problem with dicitionary definitions is that when you we use words to create sentences we have to choose which definitions apply to each word. If you use all six of those definition for 'resource' and apply that same approach to each word in the sentence, you'll get more than a billion different meanings for that sentence, because of course, the definitions themselves are made up of words, each of those words having multiple definitions. So we need to choose ONE definition in order for this conversation to have any meaning. Further more the way Jacque uses the term resource, he is using it as a synonym for NATURAL resources, which is even more specific. Here's what I mean:

Well that sentence from Mr. Fresco doesn't define his view on resources. It just states the blueprint of his theory should be customized for the elements he lists there. Gold is a natural resource by the way.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

So, since my use of the term RESOURCE will always be in reference to NATURAL RESOURCES let's look further into the definition of natural resource:

Again applies to gold.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Now, when it says that a resource's value "rests in the amount of the material available and the demand for it," it is defining VALUE within the context of a monetary-based economy. All of your definitions that use the terms VALUE, MEASURE, WEALTH, CAPITAL, and ASSETS are projections of a monetary-based understanding of the resources available to us.

So basically when using such definitions as a foundation for argument, you are arguing from the perspective of consciousness that measures everything and defines everything on a scale of supply and demand, which in this manifestation of the world economy are total ABSTRACTIONS. Look at what's happening to the stock market. The economy is shrinking despite that fact that there has been NO CHANGE IN THE QUANTITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES in the last three weeks AND NO CHANGE IN THE DEMAND FOR THESE RESOURCES. If there is an observable change in REAL demand it would actually be an increase, which should result in an expanding economy, and yet...

If the theory here is that natural resources worth or value should be evaluated by their appliances and rarity then I'm all for that. But I can't see how that could tie in with the idea of using papers representing the resource itself. Ok. The economy model of today is bs. I am saying that of course and the ideals built on scarcity (which is virtual anyway) are also bs. Still I can't see the connection of a representative paper.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Think about the housing "bubble" in the US. In July it was reported that the foreclosure crisis had left 2 MILLION homes (in the US alone) standing empty, with the price of these properties plummeting. Is there no demand for houses? My city (los angeles) alone had EIGHTY THOUSAND homeless people at the beginning of this year. San Francisco has TWENTY THOUSAND. New York has FORTY THOUSAND. Is there a demand for homes? Google the term "Tent City" or "Bushville", and you will find that the rate of homelessness in this country is SKY-ROCKETING EXPONENTIALLY. There is SUPPLY and there is a HUGE DEMAND, so why aren't these houses selling, and why is the market price crashing? This would indicate that supply and demand AS DEFINED IN A MONETARY-BASED WORLD ECONOMY IS A COMPLETE ABSTRACTION, having very little relationship to the actuall PHYSICAL MEASUREMENT of SUPPLY and the actual human need expressed as DEMAND.

As I said above you are totally right on that one. The basis on defining worth with supply and demand graphs is moronic to say the least. I'm a fresh business student and am reading about this bs lately and I can just perceive not optimization of the usage of natural resources but digitization of the human being with these hollow and idiotic economic models. You don't need to change your transactional media to make them better. You just need a brain and good will.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Furthermore, the DEMAND for gold, silver, or platinum is not based on their uses as conductive or semi-conductive materials, which has only come about in the last 60 years or so, although this may be changing at this point in time. However, in the periods of time when money was backed by a gold standard it was not a useful resource of any kind, except as a representation of wealth or capital.

Yeah or perhaps used as a resource for making cups, perhaps the holy grail :P. But there is this monatomic gold issue that reaches far into the times of moses and the pharaohs. I'm not sure if you are familiar with that. It does put a lot of worth on the gold.

And of course there is the sitchin story with enlil and enki creating us as gold miners... Since I don't trust him I can skip that as some sort of father christmas story.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

And I didn't say DISTRACTION although that could be applied ironically. The term I'm using is ABSTRACTION:

Sorry. That was my fault. Although it is kinda close

Originally Posted by Reveling John

And yet your DEMAND for gold is not effecting the PRICE (i.e. VALUE) of gold. Rather the value of gold, which fluctuates daily, despite a finite REAL supply and an exponentially increasing REAL demand, is determined by how gold COMMODITIES are selling on the stock market. Notice that COMMODITY is an inherently monetary-based distinction and would have no use in a (natural) resource-based economy.

Yes.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Yes you can and the fact that you can use it as a COMMODITY gives owners of gold and gold stock an incentive to ARTIFICIALLY LOWER THE SUPPLY of gold in circulation (which they do, in the same way that they control the supply of silver, diamonds, plantinum, oil, beans, rice, corn, EVERYTHING - despite millions of people having a REAL need/demand for these items). For this same reason stock traders who speciallized in short-selling are given incentive to ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE SUPPLY so that when the commodity looses value they can make money off of the sale (short sellers make money when a stock sells at a loss). This is EXACTLY what they did in the MORTGAGE and DERIVATIVE markets, which led to the sub-mortgage crisis because (and this is freaking insane) THEY PROFIT FROM OUR LOSSES. If gold were ONLY a resource, and it's value were ONLY determined by your REAL need and my REAL need to harness it as a conductive material, our valuation would be completely disconnected from the way we currently assign value to this material. In other words it would have REAL VALUE, but this is IMPOSSIBLE IN A MONETARY SYSTEM.



That's the whole point, friend. NOTHING IS BEING USED AS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL. That's the whole freakin point.

NOTHING.

Our entire economic model is base on FAITH. It is pure ABSTRACTION. That is why when people get afraid the whole thing starts to fall apart.

From BBC News:



It's right in front of our faces and in the very language that we use to describe the collapse. We have lost FAITH which is the only thing that our capital is supported by. Better put:

CAPITAL IS FAITH.

Those that wield capital and leverage wealth are wielding FAITH and leveraging FAITH. Now that we are loosing FAITH, now that we are SEEING that the whole system revolves around a MIND GAME, the whole thing is falling apart. The ABSTRACTION is no longer believable.

Everyone who reads this and feels that there is atleast some truth to what I'm saying should check out Alan Watts. In this short lecture he lays it out sooooo clearly:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...906&playnext=1

Very true all of the above except again money as a media for transaction. I still think the problem is with the wrong interpretation of the system. Using resource not as resources but as symbols for virtual assets or as you above mentioned as symbols for blind submission is the problem. Capital became faith years ago first when the priest dudes began collecting gold for their "church". It's a long subject which I won't go into here. But as I stated before the only problem I have with your research is that you see money as what it is defined by the federal bank of america. Money is not only that.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I will leave this responce to the realm of capital V.S. resource management. I did read what you had to say about religioun and I quite agree with your position that nobody really knows what's going on and that you've made it your goal to find out for yourself. I love it. DO YOU!

Great Love,
John

P.S. I've started a new thread for discussing the venus project here:
http://projectavalon.org/forum/showt...9869#post59869

Well at least I'm gonna try which is more fun and interesting then simulations of this search that is being presented to us in moronic plots in TV-Cinema

Thank you for your posts John. I'm sure we will arrive at a conclusion in a short time. Maybe we should gather these in a text file and use them on the forums we visit, blogs etc. I2ll be over at your new post later on in the day (got to work occasionally ).

Be good all of you.