AN EXPLANATION OF INTEREST AND EXPLOITATION FOR THE WATCHING, EVER ANGRIER WORLD
Like the gaudy titles by which phonies of every kind attempt to insulate so many deceptions today, the names given to the recent emergency legislation play to a world whom their authors hope will never grasp, understand, or heed a proposition or fact of one real, integral solution.
All of the purposed names given to this transgression together will never lend credibility to those who can never prove the pretentious things that panderers will assert, yet which can only hinge entirely upon the legislation’s wholly devoid integrity. Instead of proving pander, this infamous extension of theft from the people will provide a future icon of today’s delinquent, selfinterested clowns, dupes, and shills, who meant together to profess to us falsely, to rule us by keeping the truth from us forever if possible, and to steal from us with such unwise and blatant abandon, so long as we remain so ignorant.
But this day was bound to come not just from the excesses of so many usurpers and perpetrators of fraud.
They who are against us, dipped of course always as deeply as we tolerated, while they obstructed us in every possible way from stopping them. Cries of excess were hardly heeded. And yet, even if none of them dipped ever so deeply from the well which could only drain all other wells dry, this day was always the inevitable culmination of that underlying well.
No matter the ways of dipping, or the names which takers give to them, the well of unearned taking itself sucks everything else dry. Superficial furtherances of the crime of course may indeed pick away at what else can be stolen from the pool of wealth — further depriving true producers of just reward for production, with the glee of participation granting free reign for the underlying drain to work the primary means of our demise, which is multiplication of indebtedness. But still, all dependent forms of unearned taking inevitably succumb too to the omnipotent, primary obligation to service a sum of debt multiplied perpetually and purposely by the very nature of the imposed currency.
All of us succumb then to an alpha taker, more immense, more unduly powerful, more entrenched, and even more unassented than however many dippings from its irreversible drainage.
While any further unearned taking then could itself otherwise engender terminal failure, the alpha well is the ultimate ruin of all.
Those who claim regulation is the issue have no leg to stand on.
There is of course no reasonable dream of regulating away the iniquities of inherently multiplying debt, without eradicating the very thing we might regulate. So long as the primary process takes unearned profit, terminal culmination of the process is ensured by the fact that either by greater increments or by lesser, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to the obligated circulation eventually exceeds the finite potential of the circulation to service debt.
We can readily understand this, as the instrument of the process is in fact endowed with few elementary powers, because just such few, comprehensible irregularities are necessary to its insurmountable purposes. The well that drains all other things can prevent or allow us from drinking from it, and it can regulate the rate at which it multiplies a sum of debt which ever moreso sucks the life out of everything.
But regardless even of presumably minimal rates of multiplication which might ostensibly justify the purpose of unearned taking, the process is ultimately terminal, and manifests its final stages of failure at inherently escalating rates.
How so?
To whatever degree we are compelled to maintain a vital circulation by reborrowing principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt, the sum of debt increases irreversibly by ever greater increments of ever greater periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt. As principal is reborrowed, it is impossible to pay down the sum of debt; and it is impossible to sustain the vital circulation without further borrowing. Whatever interest we must reborrow thus increases the sum of debt, escalating the onset of terminal failure.
So long as we maintain the vital circulation so, the process is irreversible. All the while, ever more of the obligated circulation is inherently dedicated to servicing debt, leaving ever less of the circulation to sustain the industry which is obligated to do so.
All of us can readily understand the singular possible outcome of this process. Being the primary obligation, these takings consume all other taking. Whether further thieves dip from the alpha well, we succumb to a system which in fact was engineered and imposed upon us for the very purpose of multiplying debt in proportion to the obligated circulation.
Such a system therefore can only expire at a maximum practical lifespan, at which it imposes upon its unwitting subjects a terminal sum of debt. When the music stops playing, no chairs are left, because they have all been taken by inherent, escalating dispossession, which of course ultimately results in complete dispossession. When the music stops, all the players trying to sit can only fall down. By only subverting the nature of currency, the central bank ultimately makes itself the real owner of all the chairs.
You yourself are headed there, until a prevailing majority of us understand solution. If you are not ready to do so, you are part of the problem. Otherwise, you won’t mind my repeating the few principles which deliver the fact of solution to the present, or perhaps to any heedful posterity.
According to this thesis that such pretended economies ultimately engender unsurvivable sums of terminal debt, the purported bailout can only reasonably hope to let some of the bad guys out of town “with whole skins,” as Congressman Louis T. McFadden put it, reporting to Congress on June 10, 1932 from the midst of the first Great Depression.
The events and causes of then however, were no different and no greater mystery than their present reiteration. And so in fact, because the species of perpetrators and necessary methods of perpetration have no truly different manifestations, Mr. McFadden actually reported something further that we can only find even more familiar — that as the curtain dropped then too as an inevitable consequence of the same, terminal multiplication of indebtedness, the very perpetrators not only “got out with whole skins,” they “left the people of the United States to pay the piper.”
More correctly, as the final curtain fell, to save themselves at the end of that lifespan as well, the very perpetrators left the people with a further measure of debt, beyond the terminal sums of debt which the perpetrators had already imposed, and beyond therefore what had been proven by the events of the moment, was already such an excessive, insoluble sum of debt as the people already could not even afford to service.
Yet as I have said, this is the very nature and purpose of the system, even if the final act, in attempting to preserve the system for all this, is something like a murderer going through the motions of killing the victim again, after the fact. So it is not at all surprising that even in the end, consistent with that intrinsic purpose, the perpetrators seek to preserve their takings and even the means of those takings, by a coup de grace which sustains only the pattern of taking as if perpetual multiplication of artificial sums of debt is natural, normal, or just.
But obviously then, nothing could be further from solution than the present farce of a bailout. We only know from the facade of it what we are up against, should the people of the world storm their capitols, armed even with the only prescription for absolute solution.
So indeed, in the present replay of the scantly described, terminal cycle of taking, there is no mystery why the term “bailout” suggests that fools allow the perpetrators to prove for a while longer what they can never prove.
They say to you, save the banks, that the banks can continue to serve you. But they mean, save the subverted form of “money” which can only multiply debt into terminal sums of insoluble debt.
You are not faced with terminal failure because some of the outer institutions which steal from you are failing, having “invested” in the success the multiplication of debt denies you. You are at the brink of worldwide failure because even despite all the artificial means of sustention which can be tried, the alpha well ultimately succeeds in a vaster drainage, achieved by generating the terminal sums of debt everywhere around us.
The very perpetrators say to you now, take on the bad debts of these banks of every river draining into the alpha well, so that the banks might still for some little while even remain capable of giving you your own little remaining money. But your money is gone already, only because they have “invested” it in the water rushing into the alpha well.
The perpetrators of course want, forever if possible, to preserve their gargantuan parasite. Once the present lifespan is concluded, they would like to remain the publishers of that same kind of currency which can only convey all the wealth we produce to them, leaving us again and again in the wake of inevitable failure.
To sway the kind of fool who will never know better, they will give each further manifestation of that illegitimate currency a different name; they will tell us it is a new, better currency; they will assure us they have somehow prevented further failure. But they will never tell us how, because it will be the same currency — still having the singularly terminal power to multiply debt in proportion to a vital circulation.
The parasite can never afford to tell you how, because there is no how in retaining the process by which they intend to profit illimitably, and unjustifiably.
On the contrary then, not only is it completely unnecessary to save the parasite; we only ensure failure by its preservation.
Moreover, we certainly preserve the parasite by retaining the institutions which embody the very processes which can only engender our present problems. Our quest instead is to overrule those institutions and their bogus advocates, that we can solve the few rudimentary crimes imposed upon us.
Of course then, for leaving the very rats which steal so in charge of the hen house… preserving the parasite which can only multiply debt all the further, is all the purported bailout even pretends to do.
To understand this means of multiplying debt therefore, is to hold both solution and renegade government by the only grip which can set the hen house straight.
Which do you keep? And which do you eradicate?
If the perpetrators did not know the choice we should make, they would not prepare for what we have not yet done.
Yet if there were any police force or military or government which could hope to prevail in further preserving this system of stealing by openly declaring its means and purposes, there would be no reason to choose evasion and deception instead.
It is not then a matter of if the betrayers can rectify the “monetary” systems imposed upon the world, for we can clearly show the betrayers exactly how they can. With only rats in charge, to continue pretending representation then, they have no choice but to simply pretend they have never heard: there is of course no veritable argument which can invalidate the mathematic perfection of economy.
Realizing solution then is a matter of either a) what might possibly force the betrayers to abide by their obligations of representation, or b) how we will restore lawful government to ourselves — hopefully before the plans of an unlawful, selfappointed elite make that too late. But we are capable of solving the monetary calamity before us immediately, and without cost.
And we can prove how.
A magician has no power of magic. Nor of course does legislature.
And nor of course do I.
Mechanics rather, are the substance of succeeding, failing, or betraying processes. Thus a failing process, or a process of betrayal, can only be understood and solved by discerning its actual mechanics. Nothing is solved by facades and deceptions — particularly which certify not that we cannot solve our problems, but that the facades and deceptions of renegade governments are the problem.
A republic therefore succeeds only as its whole populace recognizes and adheres itself to the only principles and mechanics which can serve the whole.
It is not enough to say “understanding” is only so much as perceiving our problem is a parasitic process which can only multiply itself until the host dies. We must understand the subject mechanics of the process well enough to understand what is solution; for if there is but one integral solution — and I will sufficiently establish that fact — then a republic can never solve its problem of the particular parasite until it understands altogether what comprises that one integral solution.
Then and then alone can we unite upon solution in such a way that no renegade government would risk its neck in the final days of the calamity they have imposed upon us, to resist or evade solution.
If all of us together already understood what the vital monetary principles of salvation are, we would already be united against the violations of our laws and principles of sustenance.
That is of course, “if” the present seeming absence of solution is a matter of betrayal.
If on the other hand, the system of stealing which has been imposed upon us were sustainable, neither is that evident in the obvious present deterioration, or in the first, original fact that the field we so erroneously refer to as “economics” is not only wholly bereft of formal proof and theorem; it is wholly bereft even of a principle to deliver what is economic.
On the contrary, what we so erroneously refer to as “economics” is strictly a device for imposing oppression by multiplying indebtedness.
A practically unbelievable controversy thus exists between the utter facade of “economics” and mathematically perfected economy™. What are the differences? Where are the arguments?
The arguments of mathematically perfected economy™ are sufficiently documented by the work which compels this appeal to you [these pages].
Briefly however, the thesis identifies a potential for any purported economy subject to interest to terminate itself under insoluble debt. The subsequent solution of this process and the further problems imposable by the few powers of contemporary monetary systems, then build upon categorically ascertained faults of 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation:

Inflation and deflation in respect to whatever wealth the circulation is intended to represent are solved by paying off monetary obligations comprised only of principal, at the rate of consumption or depreciation of the related asset.
It is impossible to solve inflation and deflation without eradicating interest, because monetary obligations subject to interest require paying out of circulation more than the original value of the related asset.

Inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation is solved by eradicating interest, which of course is the very singular process which irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to the obligated circulation. This of course is the very cause of the present final, terminal sums of debt.

Systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property is solved by the combined solutions of inflation and deflation (1) and inherent multiplication of debt by interest (3), which are the only powers these pretended monetary systems have to manipulate the cost or value of money or property.
By eliminating extrinsic costs, mathematically perfected economy™ therefore is absolutely “economic.” There is no multiplication of debt, no terminal multiplication of debt, no inherent devaluation of the currency, and no systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property whatever. The very powers of all these evils are simply stripped from mathematically perfected economy™.
Contemporary usury (“economy”) of course lacks any corresponding theorems or proofs, because in fact interest makes every aspect of the one integral solution impossible.
This, together with the assumable distribution of this unearned taking of course, explain why the advocates of usury even at its end, can only meet the proposition of mathematically perfected economy™ with evasion.