equality

Understanding the current form of Democracy for the purpose of Redefining and Redesigning it

Posted on Updated on

by Thomas La Grua

Democracy Is

Ever wonder why we the people of societies have not been able to eliminate government corruption, and why politicians have been unable to stop unscrupulous activities of business men and women eager to profit even when it means poisoning a nation’s food and water supplies?

To put it simply, it is because our various systems of government, especially those of modern-day democracies are all subordinate to and thus defined by the hierarchy of money within and as the current world system of money. Accordingly, the priority of all governments and all other systems within the world system of money is not the people, but the people’s money.

Take for example representative democracy: what is this centuries old design of public administration still doing in the age of information communications technology? Certainly, in the days of horse travel and communications by printed-news and word of mouth, this form of limited people’s participation (wherein a minority make the decisions for the majority) probably made some sense simply because it wasn’t technology feasible to include all the people’s voices in the decision making processes.
Nowadays however, we have the communications technology and the infrastructure in the form of the Internet wherein we are able to instantaneously communicate with one another while openly sharing all information so as to enable all of the people to expressly participate in a form of real democracy, open source and direct.

The reason democracies have never functioned the way people have always hoped for is because our democracies have never been but in name, democracies of, by and for the people. They have always been democracies of the money by the money for the money. Why? Because by accepting and allowing Money to become the dominant system within humanity, we as humanity ended up also accepting and allowing money to override and therefore redefine the design of all other systems within and as the world-system of money; hence the inability to eliminate corruption in any society without concurrently addressing and correcting the corruption inequality of the current money-system.

 

Why hasn’t a new form of democracy yet materialized? 
Open Source Direct DemocracyEstablishing a foundation of real participatory democracy of the people by the people for the people is a process of people taking responsibility by investigating how the world functions, realizing where the problems lie, designing solutions, and then standing as those solutions so to change the system of democracy by stepping up and becoming it. This is what (real) democracy of the people by the people for the people is all about: all the people taking responsibility for all the things.

Unfortunately, this process of people taking responsibility is being hindered by massive amounts of programming/brainwashing of the masses in efforts to keep the people from realizing our potential, that which we begin to accomplish when we stand united in the principle of equality rather than divided along the lines of liberal and conservative ruling parties.
Who is behind the brainwashing of society, bankrolling the efforts to keep people dumbed-down believing that our current forms of democracy are representative of the majority when in reality they are not? Ask yourself: who benefits the most by keeping elitist-traditions alive? The elite of course, those with most of the world’s money, those who are currently in power and control. Eighty-five (85) of the richest people in the world now have more money than 3.5 billion of the poorest people in the world; where’s the democracy/equality in that?

A minority (called government) in the service of those with the most money write the laws, tell us what we can eat, drink, think, buy, sell, plant, smoke, the places we may go and not go, and finally the penalties should we disobey their laws and get caught. That we of so-called democratic societies do not even have a say in our national budgets, how much money goes to education, the education curriculum, minimum wages, taxation, war, etc., is testament to the reality that today’s so-called democracy is little more than an elaborate-hoax wherein we the people have come to believe that in voting every now and then, we are making the decisions, when in reality the only votes being counted are those of the currencies of money. It’s called democracy of the people, but really it’s just another form of mass manipulation, governmental systems in the service of money designed to keep the elite in positions of power control.

Although, we the people of the 21st century have excelled rapidly in information technology, we seem to have stumbled when it comes to using common-sense reasoning abilities to determine the difference between democracy of the people and autocracy of the money. Why else would societies still be allowing our most important decisions to be decided upon by small groups of individuals who (other than the fact that they are also human) do not represent the majority of society?

Somewhere along the lines of education-indoctrination and mass-media brainwashing, we as children to adulthood came to believe that government representatives represented the majority of the people when in reality, political representation (call it “a favor” if you will) goes to those who have the money and are willing to pay for political favors.

 

democracy

 

Look beyond the illusion (beyond the veil of government institutions, of corporate interests) to see the reality of the hierarchy of the world system, the hierarchy of money that currently defines humanity. All systems within and as the world system of money: politics, education, judicial and so on are currently within and subordinate to the world system of money, the almighty Dollar, Euro, Yuan, and so on, leaving us with the reality that democracy in coexistence with the current world system of money has never been but an illusion of people’s equal ability to participate in the political system.

Why have we arrived at this state of being? Because we as humanity have accepted and allowed the power of money to prevail over the equality of life; thereby, limiting each one’s ability to expressly participate (within humanity) to the sum of money-power that he or she currently possesses or controls. This is why it’s called the politics of money, and why nothing in this world gets done without sufficient sums of it.
Consequently, even if a president or legislative representative does attempt to represent the majority of the people’s interests ahead of the interests of the elite minority, he or she is likely to find it very difficult to get re-elected due to the fact that such politicians require large sums of (elite) money to finance their election-campaigns in order to get into power and stay there. Keep this in mind the next time you decide to point a finger and blame politicians.

In understanding what is currently here as democracy of the money by the money for the money, we the people are able to unite in the principle of equality to design a new form of democracy, one that supports all. The opportunity is for us to utilize information communications technology of the Internet to equally enable all members of society to participate in the process of making all of society’s decisions. How do we do this? As always, the journey for each one begins with the first step.

 

Learn more about the Living Income Guaranteed: The Proposal

Open Source Direct Democracy

Equal Life Foundation - WordPress

 

Watch our Google Hangouts on Democracy and Politics:

 

For further information:

Advertisements

The Shared Idea of Socialism and What to Make of it

Posted on Updated on

By Barbara Stängl

Socialism

Some history and the problem:

Socialism is an idea that has as its basis equality pertaining to property being shared by all and distributed equally. Unfortunately, when the idea was first put into practice by a British man called Owen in the US State of Indiana in 1825 on the huge property he bought and called New Harmony, it ultimately failed. This was not due to the fundamentals of the idea of socialism as such, but due to the organization of the distribution of the produce, the fact that the land was not owned by the residents themselves and in part in consequence to this, there was a lack of self-responsibility as to the cultivation of the land, the workforce needed to maintain self-sufficiency, and finally, due to the nature of the people that it attracted. Though the people who chose to live in New Harmony on the basis of the shared idea of socialism that received the tinge of its founder Robert Owen, were open-minded and socially oriented, they were very theoretically and philosophically minded. This set of characters and personalities gave the experiment a bias that ultimately tipped it toward being marked as not sustainable. However, Owen implemented a set of social rules to live by, such as no public drinking, personal cleanliness, emptying trash at specific intervals, free education in which the human character was to be developed in more fortunate ways and having to make time for family, he granted sick pay and shortened working hours. All of which were directed at changing human nature and optimizing the conditions of living together.

 

Owen-and-new-harmony

 

The idea was recast by two philosophers Engels and Marx later, who considered socialism to be humankind’s destiny which was considered to become a triumph over capitalism. It was thus directly placed to have a polarity nature toward capitalism, which allowed the idea of Revolution to settle in as a means to drive socialism forward and gain supremacy over capitalism. This was adopted as a point of self-identification that amounted to demonic obsession which found its most extreme manifestation and expression under the dictatorship of Stalin in the USSR. Here the term socialism was actually abused to cover up and, where not possible, to justify the atrocities against its population and the antagonists of the ideology. Socialism had been turned into communism, though the term was still used by the ruling figures to benefit from the moral appeal that true socialism had among large parts of the general world population.

 

Lidice_massacred_men

 

The ‘other side of the polarity’, the capitalistic states, the ‘States of Freedom’ as they were contrasted to socialistic states, used the label of socialism as a propaganda operation also but for the opposite reason, namely to defame socialism by way of association with this miserable and rapacious tyranny.

Socialism, as the core notion of working people being in control of production and of their own lives basically, on the principle of equality with respect to property and distribution of goods, has been evacuated of content over the last century, due to the Soviet Union being called a socialist society as a propagandistic means of directing the world to suit the vested interests of the elite by keeping the masses enslaved. It seems the few at the top are doing their best that nobody would be able to easily pick up the idea of socialism and try to establish a working structure on that basis for the common good of man.

 

chapter_corporate_profiles_bob

 

Solution

As a solution it is necessary to distinguish between the socialistic/communistic ulcerations of true socialism. The collapse of the Soviet Union can actually be counted as a small victory for socialism as such, because it has been freed of the radical revolution aspect as well as the aspect of tyranny and debasement toward the working class. The latter will have to be solidly embraced within the term of communism and within that, of course, dictatorship. Along those lines the term nationalization and nationalistic should be looked at and stripped of its associations with fascist developments and resulting atrocities of Nazi Germany leading to and in World War II. The pros and cons of the Israeli kibbutzim are to be investigated, and seen that these are said to have worked until they were ridden into a debt crisis in the middle of the 1980’s from which they weren’t able to recover. One must ask who is pulling the strings here and why. It is pretty obvious that they simply weren’t supposed to work in the public eye.

The solution to humanity’s demise should not be found in an idea or ideology, as that can be used within polarity and undermined, but within a living principle, that does not have to be named socialism or capitalism or democracy. It’s certainly not about the name or the idea.

Of course at first there must be something communicable as the name for a solution presented, such as a democracy on a real people-basis, a form of direct democracy, as has been proposed by the platform of Living Income Guaranteed. The realization must be fostered that life can only strive on earth – we can only strive, or even simply survive – when we give to the other what we ourselves would like to receive, on an equal and one basis. If we do not see that we are already equal on the basis of the substance of Life and are killing ourselves and others by not acknowledging and living this principle, we will perish.

One must realize that socialism is just a word – we are the ones who must take care of our reactions, associations, prejudices and fears within it and as it, and allow ourselves to establish a groundwork that supports all — as the sounding and individual letters of the word suggest: so-see-I-all-is-m(e)

We must turn to Life lived on the principle of equality and incorporate the lived realization of oneness, as we are all of and as Life here.

 

The reward is a state, where competition exacted on the basis of live or die / grow or perish will be of the past; where we implement our realization that we are able to stand as the living principle of equality and oneness and give to the other what we want for ourselves and our children, which is the kind of socialism that has not been compromised through fear and desire for control, greed and power. Giving to the other as one would wish for oneself means to distribute resources fairly and adequately, as required by each and on the basis of ensuring that everything used can be reconstituted and replenished, that resources are sustainable. This will provide for real, actual support of all equally resulting in peace and dignity. Responsibility will be more readily lived because there won’t be the point of ‘it’s not my responsibility – I don’t have a say anyway, I’m just a small keg in a big machine’ when equality is lived on principality.

We will see truly happy children that are able to play and enjoy themselves because they are cared for on a steady basis from the start with actual equal opportunity within education, good nourishment, and a stable social environment. One will find the ability to truly trust oneself and others within a trustworthy, self-responsible society that is not self-incapacitated through the allowance and acceptance of a maniac Elite that irrespective of the whole pulls the strings in utter self-interest. There will be no one to polarize to ‘defend’ a status of self-interested accumulation of wealth on the basis of democracy vs. socialism/communism when the principle of equality is truly implemented and lived.

Investigate the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal and Join us for discussion.

 

Photo credits

‘New Harmony’

Massacres

Vested Interest

LIG

Liberalism: Problems, Solutions & Benefits

Posted on Updated on

By Barbara Stängl
 

Liberalism

“Liberalism is a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market and the gold standard; in political terms it denotes a belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties”  (ref.:www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalism‎).

Classical liberalism has its focus on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government – the concept emerged as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization in the 19th century. It advocates civil liberties with a limited government under the rule of law, private property and laissez-faire economic liberalism. Social liberalism believes in government intervention to provide equal protection and opportunity. Neoliberalism promotes a market economy with a strong state, a ‘social market economy’. Later the meaning had shifted to hold one of a more radical and laissez-faire capitalistic ideas. It was used to criticize legislative initiatives for free trade, deregulation, enhanced privatization and an overall reduction in government control of the economy.

Neoliberalism is what we are still allowing and accepting as our economical and political system nowadays.

A change in economic course was taken with the program Ludwig Erhard formulated after the Second World War, where demand was not taken as the driving factor of production any more, but rather the other way around, wherein the idea was assumed that every offer created its own demand – which is said to only be valid for trade economies. This new directive of a social market economy, where focus is to be on profit, competition and consuming goods for and within each and everyone, not only economy and politics,  which was implemented thereafter, caused dire consequences reaching up to the current situation where the financial sector as a non-producing element in the system is reaching blown-up and disproportionate extents of power in that major banks are able to demand to be bailed out by the government using the financial means of the public when a tide of bad investments collapses back onto them in consequence and leaves them unable to rectify their position of creating money from loans, financial products and other financial machinations within the state. 

1. JahreDesAufbausInOstUndWest_plakatErhardSozialeMarktwirtschaft

 

Thus the real economy is in the process of subsidizing the banking sector which doesn’t produce consumer goods and thus doesn’t contribute to the productivity and added-value, but only creates claims for consumer goods with the respective finance products they conceptualize, the consequence being a discrepancy between factual goods and the claim for them, which in turn leaves people in the upper middle financial ranks of society feeling richer and better off than years ago, but they aren’t in fact, as they are holding only claims to potential goods and not the actual manifested object. This is actually a matter of window-dressing based on agreements without basic real securities.

Thus accepting the ideology of Neoliberalism as a political directive for how we manage our economy has led to the debt crisis of 2007, which should in fact show us what we are allowing, i.e. the economical coups that are possible by stock markets against democracy and in that against the people itself. A criminalist system of unfettered capitalism has been allowed, wherein values are destroyed instead of creating them, the consequence of which living beings have to bear in form of abuse, denigration, immense suffering, poverty and starvation, conflict, war, hopelessness and despair, death – all for an idea that has proven that it doesn’t work for society, where the principle of best for all is being ridden roughshod over.

 

The idea of neoliberalism is based on implementing the following parameters based on the concept that laws and regulations disturb the balance of market economy:

 

Austerity-is-not-working - LIG

  • the reduction of legal regulations for the private economical sector
  • reduced taxation of big income earners
  • austerity programs within the social state such as health, education and culture
  • no tariff security and secure jobs and positions
  • subsidization of corporate power and banking powers

 

Greece Greek Bailout LIG

 

Within this, forces that propagate and uphold this ideology of neoliberalism feature a tendency of obscuring the inner workings of the economy resulting in an impenetrability of the same for the common person. There also seems to be a tacit prohibition in place to further the common wealth on an equal basis, based on the presumption that there is a fundamental inequality between and amongst people, which in fact has to be intensified so that the principle of free competition works. 

 

Office Bully Bulying Profit Driven Societies LIG

Another feature is the maintained rationality that there is ‘no alternative’, as if this is how humanity inherently functions – on the basis of inequality and a competitive nature. Slogans such as ‘the market shall regulate society through competition’ show that the model as the blueprint of neoliberalism that leading figures sought to implement was to basically make individuals into enterprises who are required to establish entrepreneurial traits and behaviors on all levels of their social interactions, dominated by demand and offer, costs, gains and investments as the new social values post WWII within ‘free competition of inequalities’. This kind of freedom cannot accept other liberties along with it, as Erhard stated: “Rights shall find their expression in the freedom of consumption.” This ultimately allows for a constant state of fear of not being able to express within these limitations, and being judged by one’s ability or inability to do so and thus to hold one’s status within society and remain competitive.

 

Solution:

One must realize the allowance and acceptance of the manipulation leading to the change of focus from surviving within WWII and a hands-on approach of rebuilding and producing some kind of added value to what was left in the ruins of the war to a focus on and the dominion of competition and competiveness. This has brought forth an alienation within oneself toward one’s self-expression and what life is about and can be, and the diversion from the principle of best for all within giving another what one would like to receive oneself. This is where one can actually find a handle for the fear of not surviving. One is able to refocus, to redirect one’s focus on equality and in that seeing, realizing and understanding that there is an alternative way, because all are in fact equal as and within life and in that we are all one, one humanity, one life.

 

Living Income Guaranteed - Logo

 

As it is us, the people, each and every one, that constitute the system, politics, economy, what we focus on, what we allow and accept as the statement of who we are, we create. It is important to see one’s immediate starting point for one’ s actions and interactions and make sure it is not one of competition, of proving oneself better or superior over another, where one comes from the point of fear of not surviving. One is able to realign oneself with one’s self-expression.

Alongside with this personal process we are able to and in fact must reorganize the existing financial structures and the realign the power we give to institutions with what serves all equally. To this end as a first platform there is LIG – Living Income Guaranteed which states common sense rationalities – those we could have observed and referred to in ourselves instead of accepting and allowing the manipulations that have and are taking place in politics and underlying powers which we have submitted ourselves to. Such are among others a guaranteed living income on an as-needed basis as provisions for shelter, food and education etc. – basically everything that is required to ensure one’s well-being. We can stop this ideology that we have supported inadvertently by having accepted the misinformation and manipulations over many decades by bringing out the information that is relevant and valid and constitutes a basis for implementing a change on the principle of what is best for all equally as life.

The rewards are obvious: No more fear of losing one’s job and not surviving. No more competition as an all-pervading overlay on every social interaction, instead of self-expression. A letting go of pressure and an allowance to see the other and be with him without placing a price tag onto the time spent for support so one has money to survive. The security of having food, a home one can return to and feel comfortable in, education to expand in this existence, and providing children with a world that nourishes and supports all on the basis of true care.

Investigate the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal and Join us for discussion.

 

Photo Credits:

Ludwig Erhard

Office bully

Greece bailouts

Austerity

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Living Income Guaranteed – How does it all come together?

Posted on

Guestpost by Viktor Persson

UDHR+LIGThe Living Income Guaranteed is based on human rights that have been drafted and agreed upon by members of the United Nations. Hence, it is not only a political proposal but also a legal proposal. It represents the means to fulfill the judicial obligations we have taken upon ourselves to fulfill as responsible guardians of this world and as the people of the United Nations.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is by many considered to be customary international law. This implies that the declaration on a general basis is accepted to be part of international law regardless of country or culture. Furthermore, the purpose of the declaration is to define the meaning of the words fundamental freedoms and human rights that can be found in the United Nations Charter article 1.3. The United Nations Charter is for the member states a legally binding document.

Article 1 UDHR states that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. This implies that all have an equal right to a dignified life which evidently is not possible without equal economic support and assistance. Herein the Living Income Guaranteed provides a practical method wherein each individual can engage with the resources they require to sustain a dignified life through the use of one’s Living Income. Herein, the Living Income Guaranteed safeguards this human right indirectly by assigning a Living Income to those who are without the means to provide for themselves, who can then use their Living Income tailored to their specific needs.

Article 3 UDHR states that all human beings have the right to life, liberty and security of person. What must be understood is that this cannot be realized unless there is an economic support structure that ensures all receive that which makes life possible. Life cannot exist without food, water, and housing and such resources are thus a right implicit within the right to life. The Living Income Guaranteed will create the necessary environment to allow the right of life to be realized and sustained.

Article 23 UDHR states that all human beings have the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and protection against unemployment. Moreover, it states that everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work and that everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity.

What becomes apparent in looking at the conditions of today’s world is that we have failed miserably in this promise. All too many people presently feel the hardship of unemployment without access to sufficient support which would allow them to change their situation. Additionally, we do not have the ability to freely choose our employment as our path has already been determined by the setting within which we are born into – where we are either born into wealth or not. This in turn impacts on all the decisions we make in life as well as what employment we decide to take on (willingly or unwillingly).

We have in today’s world utterly failed to deliver equal pay for equal work that is proven by the very existence of the corporative tactic of outsourcing production to third world countries. It is clear that in order to fulfill our obligations towards humanity as a whole we require a social economic structure that makes sure all have access to their basic needs wherein employment and right to have a living wage is one of them. The Living Income Guaranteed will yet again revive the economy and produce countless opportunities for employment. In addition, the Living Income Guaranteed will make sure that the salary is not allowed to be less than a minimum amount making sure that all can create a life for themselves that is dignified and enjoyable.

Article 25 UDHR states that everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and wellbeing of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services. What is clear is that without financial support, without a clear economic foundation, we cannot create an environment that provides and fosters a dignified standard of living.

The Living Income Guaranteed will guarantee that each human being can create for himself or herself a life that is dignified.

Article 26 UDHR states that everyone has the right to education. In our contemporary world this is not a reality. Even though many countries have a free and public educational system, there are severe discrepancies in terms of the effectiveness of the education given by schools that charge money in comparison to the public schools that do not. Thus those born in unfavorable conditions are disadvantaged and deprived of an effective education compared to their wealthy counterparts.

To create a truly supportive and effective education for all, we yet again require a financially stable structure. The Living Income Guaranteed will make sure that public education does not dumb children down, make them completely dysfunctional and unable to create something extraordinary out of their lives. Herein must be understood that a great education is not something that can be supplied only through a schooling system but that the parent is a primary teacher during the first years of the child’s life. Though, without a sustainable income the parent is not able to attend to his or hers responsibilities and thus the education of the child is forsaken in the name of survival. The Living Income Guaranteed will ensure that parents have the necessary time to educate and support their child to become the best that they can be.

We can conclude that we as humanity through the words written as a promise to coming generations in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have not only an opportunity but also an obligation to realize a world wherein human beings can live a dignified life. Thus far we have failed to live up to our own words as we have not in a practical manner structured our economic system to support the implementation and actualization of human rights. The Living Income Guaranteed stands as the practical tool through which we will be able to make sure that human rights and a dignified life does not just remain a dream on paper but becomes a daily living experience for all human beings.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Living Income Guaranteed with Labor as Interest

Posted on Updated on

With the nationalization of banks within the Living Income Guaranteed and the eradication of interest on money, the money supply will grow as a function of labor. The labor has a capital value that will increase the money supply. This has been effectively used by the Germans where they made labor one of the foundations of their economic system. And within the Living Income Guaranteed where you have a Living Income for all your basic needs and you have a guaranteed minimum wage that is double the Living Income Guaranteed, your labor value will be predetermined as part of every product and service produced.

This means that the input of your labor as value is reflected and revealed within the price of goods and services. This way each person will understand that part of the price is another person’s livelihood, and that as you give = you will receive. Labor then becomes part of the economic value system, part of the production cost – which must be valued sufficiently to be able to support the laborer.

Labor is the action of the human with a measurable value which will be like the accumulation of interest and you’ll have a compound interest effect, which will have the effect of an ever expanding economy, ensuring that everyone in the country has sufficient support to have a dignified life. This is a fascinating point that economists should have adopted long ago, but unfortunately labor has been demonized instead of realizing that that is the actual only real interest that can exist within a system based on money.

Equal Life Foundation Research Team

Basic Income Guaranteed with Labor as Interest

Living Income Guarantees Business Profits

Posted on Updated on

For the Living Income Guaranteed to work we require an economic model that must be efficient to follow very specific regulations. Just as one would regulate food and certify it for instance as ‘safe for consumption,’ we have to apply the same principle and certify businesses as ‘safe for the economy’. Within this, one will have to establish ways to ensure that businesses are not built on the ideology of competition but rather on the principle of profit and of quality.

Therefore pricing will have to be certified to be sufficient and effective to ensure the minimum wage at least, is paid to the employees, the business owner makes a profit and the resources bought are paid for at a price that ensures such profit. We have to also ensure that the business is compliant and the movement of sales tax/ value added tax is efficient so that both the government and the Living Income Guaranteed is effective; and then the consumer will be able to buy from businesses that ensure a good quality product, knowing that they are participating in an economic system that is taking care of each one’s individual dignified living with Living Income Guaranteed. Doing this will also ensure that things like poverty, debt and the many psychological issues that develop because of stress around money, start to disappear from society.

This also implies that the true supply and demand will be based on quality and preference wherein the necessary research should be done and facilitated before one brings out a new product on the market. This is the part where psychology and public relations also play a role to ensure the person assesses the product as something that they possibly may be interested in acquiring; this ensures you’re not wasting resources on a ‘potentially successful’ product, and instead you secure your investment once you have your market analysis results,  an effective presentation of a product that will have an assured market with sufficient demand which you will supply – so it is demand first, then supply.

Thus a clearly defined and estimated market share is established and cross-referenced according to the income levels available. This means assessing whether the available amount of money that is in the consumer’s budget is in fact realistic so that the business can work effectively. This is how one will ensure profit and sustainability instead of investing on opening businesses that are guaranteed to fail, just because the proper research was not done prior to running it. This effective business planning will ensure that sufficient profit is made as well as providing a good rate of success that will satisfy the business and the population in an equal manner: everybody wins!

Equal Life Foundation Research Team

Also on this topic: Living Income Guaranteed and Business Transparency

Basic Income Guarantees Business Profits

Living Income Guaranteed and Commodity Pricing

Posted on Updated on

The theories about free market suggest that supply and demand determine the price and that apparently there is a ‘market force’ that is determining at the end of the day who will be wealthy and who will be poor. The odds – if you know from playing Monopoly – are that ‘he who has the money will be wealthy because they will get more’. This is happening very effectively with commodity pricing, because the future’s market and the establishment of pricing through this common oddity instead of common sense – for example, determining the price of food this way like in a giant casino – is certainly not a way for any competent government that represents citizens to enable feeding its people.

Take for instance food in a capitalistic world where labor is a capital and your food is a capital, and the seat of your government is a capital and the money you have is a capital: the creation of food and feeding one’s citizens and then making available the surplus in the open markets is the way it should function. Where the establishment of food prices is based on the labor input and the cost input and the historical growth in value through the accumulated effort of the human’s participation on Earth. These are the aspects that must be part of the pricing system to ensure that those people have no need for a Living Income, because there is sufficient profit for those involved in creating the food to make a decent living, to pay the farm laborers properly so that they can do their work with a loving heart and not because they are forced to do it because they have no other means to make a living.

Imagine! all the people that are into the ideas of ‘consciousness’ for instance, already have this inclination that ‘the hands that touch things have an influence on its constitution’. This would imply that if your food is produced by poor people desperate to make a living that are not getting enough money, constantly experiencing anger, anxiety and fear = that would be transferred to our food and because we accept that as ‘okay,’ we accept the consequence of this form of production as ‘okay’ and as such, we accept the consequence of placing this in our body as ‘okay’ without realizing and understanding how is it that within this we contribute and participate in creating more disease on Earth.

Within the commodities’ markets, food pricing and the giant casino, those that make profits do not care about this because they can create another health product to sell and place on the markets, continuing the cycle of supply and demand which results in forced labor and economic slavery.

With Living Income Guaranteed we suggest that we start looking at the real science, not only the genetic modification that is attempted to be controlled through patents and influencing the food supply to influence the palate of the population and have control over it and thus control over price. Price control in Living Income Guaranteed is not a matter of control, it’s a matter of common sense: if the labor part of the food production is not healthy = the food cannot be healthy as the investigation into water crystals by Masaru Emoto indicated – and then it cannot produce a healthy society because the pricing isn’t healthy, the capitalistic system isn’t healthy, there is not enough money moving and your debt will increase! And then, because you are creating the system through a form of conflict, the only way you can then save the system is through conflict. Capitalism throughout time has been proven to ‘need war’ to continue existing and regenerate the economy, to create jobs and to create money for a minority.

Commodity markets and open markets need a new definition where a country produces a particular commodity, it first supplies its own citizens and the surplus – which can be determined as to what is needed in the world, just as it is done with oil – can be sold to all the other countries that need a particular commodity so that they can have access to it on the open market at a price that does not cause poverty and starvation, but that enhances the global economy.

Labor has lost all capital value which means if your labor is worth nothing = you have no power with which to ensure your wellbeing financially, health-wise and in all ways of your own family – and then a country is not able to support its citizens through proper government. And here the capitalist, the wealthy person needs to understand the simplicity of the Living Income Guaranteed. If you have citizens that have more money to spend and you only have a system that focuses on competition based on pricing, will cause less money to flow. Therefore we propose that competition is based on value, technology and effectiveness.

If one competes on things that are genuinely valuable like a better warranty, better quality product or a unique and innovative product, it is a healthy use of competition that doesn’t cause harm: it enhances the product. But to compete based on price alone, claiming that global prices are going to be ‘good for the citizens’ while the quality of the products is dropping all the time indicates that there’s something really wrong in our reasoning! Because the evidence is very clear that this is not how reality works. The very fact that this is even allowed and not seen as treason because of the way it harms the citizen = that is even more revealing to what extent we are not yet aware of how we have caused our own crisis and demise.

How labor loses capital value with lower commodity pricing and that lower prices create job loss, unemployment and starvation, should be part of our common sensical understanding of the economy. Yet, do you see any of this in the news? Do our journalists actually even comprehend the fact that they are not actually reporting the root and cause of the problems we hear and read about every day? This is a massive problem when we fail to see how it is through our common acceptance of economic inequality that we then accept every single problem and consequential outflow that stems from failing to support every single individual to live in the best possible sustainable manner.

The facts are that if the labor that is put into the production of something like food is not compensated effectively in and through the price, and if the distribution is not compensated and all participants within the creation of the food process are not compensated properly = then we are creating poverty through producing food.

How have we created poverty? We have food at a lower price which means less tax = which means a weaker social service = which means there is not enough money to support all the citizens – this is why we end up with revolutions – Why would we do that deliberately, unless it is that we don’t even understand – after our so called evolution – that we are actually creating the problem with ideologies like a ‘free market forces’ and ‘supply and demand.’

Supply and demand is very simple, it should be based on: What is the supply? Is there enough food for everyone? Which means that the demand is how much we need, what’s the surplus and whether the profit made from it actually supports everyone that is involved in the production process to make a decent living – this is what supply and demand is in a practical civil way. The ways that are currently used are downright counterproductive and detrimental to our global economy.

If you can see within integrity and common sense the problem that we are presenting here, then support a solution that is real: educate yourself, step out of your self-interest and realize that we must work together as one within a democracy to bring about real change.

Equal Life Foundation Research Team

Basic Income Guaranteed and Commodity Pricing