The previous chapter detailed premises and needed reforms. This chapter details the principles on which reforms must be founded:

democracy per diem,
capitalism per capita,
currency reform,
education (not regulation),
and semantic honesty.

When observed, these principles can perform miracles. These principles underlie an inexpensive, efficient organization of people whereby they can eliminate the increasing number of unsolved problems.

Democracy Per Diem: Colfilperhone*

America's problems are human problems; they are not ambiguous, non-human problems beyond the realm of corrective action. Inflation indexes the quantity and quality of these problems in the human environment. These problems will be eliminated and the inflationary cost will be reversed only when the people suffering the problems have the power to use their knowledge to rule their problems out of their lives. Only through relevant democracy can human problems be solved.

Relevant democracy does not consist of demolections. Demolections occur when the people have the power to rule on their problems only once every two, four, or six years. The benefits of democracy are not possible when one elected person re-presents the concerns and consensus of millions of people for a period of years. Can one person be familiar with all the problems and solve them in this fast-paced world? Understandably, problems go unsolved while the inflationary cost mounts.

Demolections cannot provide relevant democracy. Relevant democracy requires

the collection, filtering, percolation, and honing
(col fil per hone)
of the information, issues and individuals

pertinent to the most important, current problem. The most important problem is the one that costs the most people the most time. What constitutes the most important problem at any given time? Surely, only the people can decide.

Without divine intervention, a divisioning of people is the only way to determine what problem wastes the most time. Relevant democracy divides up the concerned people into small manageable units on a regular basis. A systematic hierarchy is then established to collect, filter, percolate, and hone the problem(s) prioritized by those concerned.

Each day Congress should be dealing with the most important problems of the land. But, between the loudest cry, the fattest bribe and feudal incumbency, Congress rarely deals with the most costly American problems.

Consider the following simple and rapid system for tapping the citizens' intelligence and consensus:

  1. Using telecomputation, people submit problems and proposed solutions to their Congressman.
  2. The Congressman directs the groups of submitters to democratically select the most important issue of those they submitted.
  3. Using telecomputation again, the people vote on the issues chosen by the groups.
  4. Finally, the Congressman re-presents the affirmed issues for legitimization by Congress.

This democratic process is called colfilperhone for collect, filter, percolate, and hone the intelligence of the people (see Election Reforms).

Most of the potential objections to this proposed use of telecomputation to solve the nation's problems have been considered. However, people will have more time through a process called work-sharing and workweek reduction. While many may say people won't participate in government, tax incentives (discussed later) will spice up the participation. Monetary incentives will come from reductions in the funding of the politicized lawmakers in Congress. These incentives will fund the participants selected as re-presenters within this new national problem-solving process. Local problem-solvers will earn tax credits.

No doubt the reader will have questions and concerns as to the quality of the information, issues, and individuals that would be colfilperhoned. First of all, any re-presenter that is democratically prioritized through several demolevels will not be a problem-causer. Only the most relevant problem-solvers would still be in competition. Give yourself and your fellow concerned citizens more credit than the politicians do.

Concerns about the "rabble" gaining control of the law-making are also empty. How effective is the rabble in gaining control of industry, academia, etc.? The rabble don't last because they don't prepare. The poorly prepared cannot survive the colfilperhone process any more than they survive the school of hard knocks today. Besides, if the "rabble" do gain control of anything, it is because the "elite" do not act. Aphoristically, evil triumphs when good men do not act. Colfilperhone simply allows the good to act without disrupting their normal lives.

Similarly, objections to private citizens presenting complex issues are equally empty. First of all, the complexity of laws passed by politicians is nothing more than the amendments they tack on to those laws. Political amendments are the source of much garbage dump (random and unnecessary) complexity, e.g., the Reagan tax cut bill with 140 amendments. Secondly, when private citizens concentrate on the definition and solution of only one law at a time, the quality of the laws will improve. Colfilperhone is a process for democratically selecting the most important problem and its solver. The same cannot be said of an incumbent or cloned Congress.

Furthermore, the colfilperhone process is merely the legislative (law-proposing) part of the new national problem-solving process. The actual legitimization (law-making) process is separate and discussed later. Additional checks and balances are needed to end the short-comings of government of, by, and for a few that are both law-proposers and lawmakers.

And to those who say that colfilperhone sounds too complex, it is complex. However, it is the simple complexity of a computer organizing people and their time to solve their problems. This complexity is certainly preferable to the garbage dump complexity of the polluted, policy-making process in Washington. Colfilperhone will eliminate the garbage dump complexity of corruption and incompetence.

Please withhold judgement until later. Besides, would you rather have people spending some of their weekends involving themselves in their problems and government, or engaging in distractions so they can ignore the problems? This new national problem-solving process (to be initiated by the NUSA Reform ballot) fulfills a principle on which the reformation and renaissance of America must be based: education, not regulation.

Legal and Logical

The colfilperhone process will promote a principle which is lacking in the present law-making process--logical laws. When the actual producers, gatherers, or "legein"ers of wealth can participate in writing laws, then the laws will be productive and logical. With the greater public participation and the open-door nature of a colfilperhone process, the special interests will not be able to bend the whole to illogically and inflationarily benefit their part.

Through colfilperhone, the people, as opposed to the politicians, will be the ultimate source of the information. Mis-translation of productive, logical laws will not occur as frequently as it does at the hands of mercenary politicians. The latter occurs when the lawmakers are isolated and insulated from the people: Politicians live in Washington which is not only the no-recession city but also the lobbying capital of the world.

NUSA Position #11: America needs logical, legal laws.

Long-Term Truths

Only the people, democratically organized, can determine what their long-term truths are. This is another principle which is sadly lacking in existing public problem-solving. Too many politicians make policy solely on the half-truths that will get them reelected. A good example of this failing is allowing the national debt to grow rather than enact the necessary tax and spending reforms. For you-know-who, the short-term benefit is being able to say they did not raise taxes and that they provided some pork-barrel project. For their short-term gains, however, the politicians have saddled America with an illogical, long-term debt that will collapse the whole economy.

Another example is the issue of tax exemptions for racially segregated schools. Ronald Reagan issued an executive order to that effect. The long-term truth is that no nation can survived if the government subsidizes the artificial separation of humanity. The short-term truth is political leverage with those able to fund not only private schools but political campaigns.

Reagan's flip-flop on the issue was instructive in two ways. The public outcry that caused Reagan to reverse his decision is an instance of how the people can guide top policy if they organize. Secondly, the moral body of a nation cannot descend from one person in the White House, even if that person "promised to use the 'moral authority' of the White House to work against racial violence." Ultimately, the people decide the long-term truths, even if it requires social tremors and upheavals as a result of a minority excluding the majority from policy-making.

NUSA Position #11: Policy should be made on the basis of long-term truths.

Morality vs. Practicality

An interesting thing occurs when a government adheres to the logic of long-term truths rather than the short-term gains: Morality and Practicality become one. All too often, however, one hears that the moral thing is not the practical thing to do: "The U.S. should stop being the world's 'moral guardian.'" This comment, by a former Secretary of Defense, was used to justify his claim that the U.S. should "relax terms for financing weapons purchases and [providing] sophisticated arms." To Casper Weinberger, this stance no doubt seems very logical and practical. (His previous employment, present portfolio, and future employment involves a West Coast, high-tech conglomerate that manufactures and sells "sophisticated arms.") However, the short-term truth guarantees long-term losses for many while benefiting only a few.

As argued elsewhere in the NUSA/AESOP writings, morality and practicality are one and the same. Those who claim that the practical thing is not the moral thing are sowing the seeds of violence. To be practical, but immoral, is to steal from the future for present benefit. The politicians are selling our future to the highest bidder.

Only democracy per diem can reunify morality and practicality. Only the public forum will permit the colfilperhoning of all the relevant information so that the practical laws are also the moral laws.


Another principle embodied in the colfilperhone process is the use of telecomputation to promote the average person's freedom from problems. The use of telecomputation in America today is, unfortunately, a trend toward consolidating all decision-making power into the hands of a fewer few, both public and private. As the problem-solving power becomes increasingly over-centralized, fewer problems are solved; the people knowledgeable of the problems are separated from the means to solve them.

Later chapters detail uses of telecomputation for democracy per diem and capitalism per capita. Among these is a more efficient, sensitive financial system that consumes fewer resources than the present banking system. Another is the establishment of a Consumers' Commodity Corps to combine the functions of the commodity system and social security. This combination will stop inflationary speculation and will create retirement funds that are backed up by real products, not diluted paper. In the golden years, people need the substance of wealth, not the symbols. For example, retirement, pension, and Social Security checks are fatter than ever but they buy less each year.

NUSA Position #12: Telecomputation should liberate people, not enslave them.

Summary of Daily Democracy

If America is to have the benefits of democracy everyday, it must pursue democracy per diem. Daily democracy demands a problem-solving, policy-making process which has more frequent

collection, filtering, percolating, and honing
of the
information, issues, and individuals.

Only through colfilperhone can the legal laws also be logical ones. Only through colfilperhone can America have the long-term truths that unite morality and practicality.

Capitalism Per Capita: Pure Capitalism*

Democracy per diem is a principle which must be pursued if public problems are to be efficiently and effectively eliminated. In the private sphere, a similar principle exists for dealing with the private, time-wasting problems in life: capitalism per capita. Democracy per diem and capitalism per capita reward the best problem-solvers for their inspiration and perspiration.

Both pure capitalism (capitalism per capita) and decapitalism (capitalism for a fewer few) start out with essentially the same premise. This premise was originally expounded by Adam Smith who stated that if a man were allowed to pursue his own good, then everyone would benefit. An obvious exception is the thief who, in pursuing his own good, does not benefit everyone. Theft is the point at which pure capitalism and decapitalism begin to diverge.

The decapitalist sees nothing wrong with bribing a politician in order to get a law that will give him more money without requiring an increase in production, e.g., tax support, tax exemption, or a monopoly. This is not capitalism; it is legal thievery through the law-making process which steals wealth from producers. This is decapitalism. Through inflationary price-gouging or higher taxes (to make up for income lost through unwarranted tax exemptions and supports) decapitalism reduces the wealth of the people.

Real capital or wealth results from people using their heads and time to produce goods and services. This pure capitalism is subverted and decapitated by what the decapitalist calls capital (stocks, bonds, currency, and land). These primarily scribbled-on-paper products are not capital, only the symbols of capital.

The use of the symbols of capital does not necessarily make a transaction capitalistic. For example, the opposite of capitalism occurs when a conglomerate borrows currency to acquire a company which it will streamline and vivisect. This activity reduces production and employment per capita. Such practices result in a "decapitation" of production (fewer people working). They should be labeled according to their effects, not their appearances. Thus, the activity on Wall Street should be called decapitalism, or capitalism for a fewer few, because of its effect on the namesake of capital.

The decapitalist can be distinguished from the capitalist within a common frame of reference: time. The pure capitalist benefits the average person through innovative ways of producing a good or service in less time. The time-savings represent profit for him as well as lower prices for consumers. Both standards of living go forward. This is capitalism per capita.

Decapitalism, on the other hand, involves overcharging for any good or service. Artificially inflated prices force consumers to spend more time in production of their own in order to obtain products that were previously available at a lower price. The decapitalist may call his inflated income a "profit," but true profit occurs only when both parties benefit and go forward.

As previously noted, price-gouging usually involves the passage of private laws (privileges) for special interests. In some cases, the price-gouging involves business laws that stifle competition. Or, certain people get tax exemptions or supports that are not based on increased production. Axiomatically, the unfavored get gouged with higher taxes because of the missing revenues.

Clearly, the mere use of the symbols of capital does not make a transaction capitalistic. Rather, the acid test is whether the transaction increases production per capita. Legally or illegally robbing a people (capita) of their wealth reduces their opportunities and motivation to produce new wealth.

Inflationary Returns Are Not Capital Gains*

As "capitalism" is misused to describe what is actually the decapitalization of America, the terms "capital gains" and "profits" are misused by the decapitalists to hide what is actually a reduction of production per capita. Regardless of how many stocks, bonds, monies, or other symbols of capital are used, a "capital gain" exists only when there is a gain in production per capita.

The opposite of a capital gain is an inflationary return. An inflationary return is income is not derived from the production of goods or services, e.g., a theft. Inflationary returns involve someone's worth being "inflated" relative to the product or its time value. Inflationary returns "return" a system of production to a lower level than what it is or might have been.

Currency Reform: Time, not Gold

Inflation is primarily the cost of unsolved problems, public and private. These problems cheapen human time, of which currency is but a symbol. In the hope of attaining a cheap cure for inflation, monetarists attempt to "fine tune" the money supply. This "fine tuning," however, is akin to trying to heat a house by putting a match under a thermometer and declaring success when the temperature reading rises. (Or, for that matter, changing the thermometer markings, e.g., changing the way the Consumer Price Index is figured as the Carterites and Reaganites have done.) Similarly, there are those who think that the cure for an unstable, inflation-prone currency is to tie or standardize it to gold. There are, however, many reasons why a gold standard would fail. For instance, it would encourage the inefficient production of unneeded goods (e.g., low-grade ore). These artificial "gold rushes" would reduce production in other enterprises and, subsequently, cause shortage inflation.

Another problem with the gold standard is the so-called "reentry problem." During the Nixon Administration the U.S. went off the gold standard. Since that time, gold has not been standardized at all, its price has fluctuating wildly. To return to a gold standard would require the government to set a fixed price for gold in dollars. Should the price of an ounce of gold be $10, or $100, or something else? This is the reentry problem. A gold standard cannot be reestablished without setting a value for gold in dollars. If the ratio of standardization is too high or low, monetary chaos will ensue: inflation or deflation.

Another reason for questioning the anti-inflationary nature of gold is history. Gold bugs (people who advocate returning to the gold standard) claim that inflation does not occur on a gold standard. However, the historical statistics they cite are disputable. Gold bugs select statistics only from certain years or periods while ignoring the statistical evidence from other periods. In addition, they do take into consideration that inflation may actually be caused by the social events that cause a government to forsake a gold standard.

The claims that inflation resulted every time the government went off the gold standard should be tempered. Cataclysmic, socio-economic upheaval has often preceded abandonment of the gold standard, e.g., the Civil War. Inasmuch as inflation results from shortages and given the counterproductive nature of wars, is it reasonable to blame the Civil War inflation on the lack of a gold standard?

Clearly, gold is not the resource to which currency should be tied. The correct resource can be found in the original meaning of currency. As an economic concept, "currency" derives its meaning from the expression "I'll pay you what your time is currently worth." Time is the namesake of currency. A currency becomes unstable when it is not standardized to its namesake.

For currency to be standardized to time, a re-balancing of the unstable economy is necessary. A system of production becomes imbalanced and unstable when the people involved in the least productive activities are overpaid for what they produce. As the disparity between production and compensation becomes more apparent, increasing numbers of producers change professions which causes a shortage inflation. Overpayment is the key motivating force behind the shift of human resources to less productive activities.

The only way to have currency reform is to standardize currency to its namesake: time. However, this standardization cannot come from the underpaid persons trying to get paid more; our tax laws already cater to those who claim to be underpaid. Instead of appeasing the underpaid with quick fixes, we must eliminate overpayment. As the overpaid are taxed, recalled, and replaced, the value of the currency will stabilize to reflect that which it symbolizes: the value of the citizens' time. Reducing overpayment will simultaneously increase the wealth of those who have been underpaid suffer inflationary losses.

The hope of commercial standardization has been destroyed by the failure of the top policy-makers to standardize the symbols of production, capital, and time. What good is it to standardize the measurement of real products if old fail. For instance, it would encourage the inent? Unstable symbols benefit only the people who control and manipulate the value the symbol.

The standardization of currency to its namesake will be nothing more than an extension of the original rationale behind standardization of measurements in agriculture and industry. Doesn't the quality and quantity of any real, non-symbolic product reflect the amount of time that went into producing it? Standardization of measurements basically amounts to providing an objective means of assessing the value of a producer's time relative to that of other producers.

In conclusion, currency stabilizes when a democratic process eliminates inflationary overpayment. The overpaid cause not only currency inflation, but also inflationary suffering. The overpaid stimulate production shifts which result in inflationary product shortages in the essential industries. The lure of being overpaid stimulates further production imbalances and shortage inflation.

NUSA Position #13: Currency should be standardized to its namesake: time.

Education, Not Regulation

Another principle central to reform is education. Democracy per diem, capitalism per capita, and currency standardization are useless if people do not learn about them. To produce lasting reform, an attitudinal shift toward education and regulation is necessary on the part of the politicians and citizens. Education, not regulation, is the answer to the inflationary problems. In the short-term sense, it is not in the politicians' interest to promote education. In the long run, however, an undereducated populace ignorantly turns to violence when it can no longer tolerate its problems. Who will the mob turn against?

One way or another, citizens, not politicians, take care of public problems. It is foolish to think that one can ignore problems because the government will take care of them. Governments operate by taxing the citizens for problems that citizens cannot or will not solve for themselves.

In addition, paid regulators may be able to pass a test on their subject matter, but, in their academic isolation from everyday reality, how effective is their regulation of problems going to be? Also, we cannot ignore the political pressures behind most civil servant positions with regard to hiring and retention.

Dollar for dollar, habitual regulation is inefficient when compared to popular education. For example, increased regulation expenditures in law enforcement do not bring a drop in crime rates, and longer (more expensive) sentences do not educate people to the practical implications of "thou shalt not steal."

With education, each person becomes his own regulator, twenty-four hours a day. To have a regulatory agency as efficient and effective as a relevantly educated populace, everyone would have to be on the government dole watching each other. Obviously, you cannot eat red tape and regulations. It follows that an over-regulated society is an underproducing system because of the massive commitment of human resources to regulation.

What is relevant education? For problem-plagued people, relevant education can only come from them. It requires a public process whereby the people can regularly collect, filter, percolate, and hone information about their most important problems. The most relevant problem-definers and solvers should be rewarded with tax credits (as described later). Conversely, an "ignorance tax" should be levied on capable non-participants for failing to pursue relevant education in understanding and eliminating public problems.

An ignorance tax fines people who "ignore" opportunities to acquire relevant education and increase their problem-solving abilities. An ignorance tax does not refer to taxing naivete which is the lack of educational opportunities, nor does it refer to fiscally punishing the mentally retarded. The target of an ignorance tax is the capable persons who ignore problem-solving education. Implementation is described in the tax reform chapters.

The purpose of a direct ignorance tax is to avoid the larger cost of inflation. Inflation is an indirect ignorance tax representing the cost of ignored problems. Solving a problem consumes a finite amount of time (currency) while an unsolved problem represents an infinite waste of time, dollars, and taxes. A direct ignorance tax will reduce the cost of problems. Education will become a moral duty for an extremely practical reason: A solved problem costs less than an ignored or regulated problem.

NUSA Position #14: Education, not regulation, is the answer to human problems.

Taxes: The Public Cost of Unsolved Problems

Essential to a better future is a better understanding of taxation. Taxes are a subclass of the general inflationary cost of unsolved problems. Governments come into existence to deal with problems that the populace cannot or will not solve on its own. To underwrite the cost of this government intervention, taxes are collected.

As the number of problems increases and government regulation expands, the need for more taxes increases. Taxes, then, are a symptom of a problem-plagued populace. Cutting taxes does not solve problems any more than restricting the money supply stops overall inflation. Cutting taxes merely exacerbates the situation.

The Reagan tax cuts and budget cuts demonstrate the disastrous effects of cutting taxes and budgets without cutting problems. Did the quality of life improve after Reagan's tax/budget action? No. Cutting taxes without cutting the problems (the original reason for the taxes) is a prescription for socio-economic turmoil. Problems are cut by democracy and education.

Laffer's Fallacy

Much of Reaganomics was founded on a hypothetical curve named after "economist" Arthur Laffer. The hypothetical curve depicts tax rates against government revenues. At each end of Laffer's Curve is zero revenue. On one end, the government has zero revenues if it does not tax at all. On the other end, according to Laffer, the government has zero revenues because it taxes 100% of the income, that is, the government took all of the people's income.

Laffer, a supply-sider, argued that if a government taxes everybody all that they earn then the people will not work. Initially, this seems reasonable. Between these two points of zero income, Laffer drew a hypothetical curve showing a peak where government gets the greatest revenues by taxing neither too high or too low. However, there is a flaw in Laffer's reasoning:

It is not the quantity of the tax revenues (Laffer's contention) but the quality of the services provided by the taxing agency that affects whether people work.

People willingly give their money to others if it directly or indirectly improves the quality of their lives. This is true of taxes: People willingly pay taxes if the taxes improve the quality of their lives. Consider a similar situation: Would you run away from home if your parents demanded 100% of your money earned from running errands, mowing lawns or raking leaves? It would depend. If your parents were thrifty, hard-working folk who made you save all your earnings while providing for your needs, you'd probably stay home and keep working odd jobs. On the other hand, if your parents were alcoholics who drank your money and beat you, you probably wouldn't work anymore. While it is not explicitly stated, a parent-child relationship is a service just like a government is theoretically a service to the public. The key is not how much the parent organization takes, but the quality of the returned services.

One buys the goods or services of another based on one consideration: Does giving someone else some of your income increase the quality of your life? The quality of life is tied to the number of problems in it. Thus, parents, churches, companies, governments and bankers are in the same boat. Does their control over your money (indirect capitalism) increase the quality of your life more so than if you controlled it directly?

Consider the reasoning of the Laffer Curve in light of the following examples. In Japan, pay is low because the corporation provides many company fringe benefits (services) lacking in America. The idealized Japanese worker does not complain about his low pay, because the company uses the money to solve the worker's problems better than he could if he had the money. In part, the idealized Japanese worker has these benefits because of a corporate counterpart to colfilperhone in Japan: worker-management teams.

Opposite the idealized Japanese worker is the company-owned town at the turn of the century. In the romanticized version of corporate insensitivity, the worker received low pay, poor housing, poor food, poor health care, and no job security. This deplorable scenario is analogous to a federal government that takes a lot of the workers' earnings without promoting a more problem-free existence.

Another example providing insight into both the Laffer hypothesis and indirect capitalism is the financial community. When one puts money in a bank, one is trusting the banker to use the money in one's interest. Legally, this trust is called "fiduciary." Usually, the saver merely looks at the direct interest paid on his savings. He also indirectly trusts the banker to not use the money against him. Ideally, a banker will make productive loans that increase production and productivity per capita. Thus, the saver benefits not only from interest on his money, but also from lower product costs due to productive management of his money by the banker.

In the inflationary reality of the 1980's, however, bankers counterproductively used the savers' money against them for fast returns. For instance, how many renters have had their apartments made into condominiums by realtors who borrowed the money from the renters' banks? In this case, the saver lost buying power; his money was misused to increase his monthly housing costs. The true irony, of course is the renter who ended up obtaining a high-interest mortgage from his bank to retain control of his home space.

The same is true of auto, steel, glass, and rubber workers whose banks used their savings or pensions to make acquisition loans rather than auto, home, or construction loans. In these cases, people relinquished their money with the belief that the retainer would use it to solve some of the savers' problems. Instead, savers have had their money used to generate many inflationary problems, e.g., loss of home and job.

Just as the banks have betrayed their fiduciary trusts, the government has failed to use the people's money in the people's interest.

Participatory Democracy: Cut Taxes and Problems

The only way to effectively and permanently cut taxes is to solve the problems that originally prompted the tax levies. Reagan simplified all the problems in America to one variable: taxes. Most Americans received only a few more dollars in each pay check as a result of Reagan's tax cuts, but they did not have fewer problems in their lives. In other words, Americans were penny wise and pound foolish. Cutting taxes without cutting problems is a classic case of treating a symptom rather than the disease.

If America is going to have a reduction of taxes, it must reduce its problems first. Only Americans participating in a democratic collection of their knowledge can stop problems. The purpose of NUSA is the educative, democratic participation of people in solving their public and private problems.

NUSA Position #15: Cutting taxes does not cut problems.

The issue of taxation is considered more fully later in this text. Reforming taxation is a principle that must be observed if America is to reform peacefully and effectively.

Semantic Honesty

Everyone agrees that dishonesty has become the trademark of habitual politicians. While their semantic slippage may or may not be intentional, it is certainly damaging. Inflationary problems result from poor communication because peoples' time and resources are misdirected and wasted. Problems remain when we lack the semantic tools to accurate define problems and solutions. As demonstrated in previous sections, many words that connote positive things are misused to cover up counterproductive actions that are necrotic. Included in this list were capital, capitalism, capital gain, profit, and tax cuts. To offset the misuse of these words, this text offers corrected semantic seeds that will hopefully nurture an accurate diagnosis of the disease affecting humanity, e.g., decapitalism.

If problems are to be solved, accurate labels must be used to identify their elements. For example, if the laws proposed by politicians consistently legalize inflation, then politicians should called legisflators, not legislators. Literally, legisflation means not only legal inflation, but also law cheapening. In addition to cheapening money and life, legisflation cheapens the law process itself as a problem-solving process.

Similarly, those who call themselves economists should be judged and labeled according to the nature of their actions. These people are nothing more than lobbyists for an isolated part of the whole human environment. In describing how economists can be found for any position, one writer compared them to "guns for hire." The whole suffers when any part tries to bend the whole to the benefit of that part. In other words, economists are a cancer; they necrose the whole. As a science, the study of economics is a "dismal science" because it is, in fact, possessed of necrotic laws: necronomics. Necronomists like to view themselves as scientists because they use statistical methods to come up with the data to justify their lobbying actions. Like the charlatan who thinks he is doctor because he draws blood from the body, necronomists do not have productive, viable grasp of their subject matter.

Only the people, organized in a democratic fashion, can collect, filter, percolate, and hone the information necessary to create a statistically justified set of laws for their environment. True economics can exist only through democracy.

Hereinafter, legisflators and necronomists will be the words of choice in describing the two groups responsible for our socio-economic garbage dump. Other words will be used without spelling changes but not without warning the reader of their original meanings. For instance, finance is considered not only a respectable word but a respectable profession. However, because of their pursuit for inflationary returns, contemporary financiers are fulfilling the original definition of finance: to ransom or forfeit. America's future is being forfeited by the necronomics of financiers. Similarly, the Wall Street brokers are breaking the productive backbone of America with their decapitalistic practices of speculation, acquisition, mergers, streamlining, and vivisection of production.

Names or labels should reflect the substance of what they symbolize. If words are allowed to drift from their literal meanings, people will suffer problems. Semantic slippage generates miscommunication in the recognition, definition, and solution of problems. Inflation of language contributes to the mass of problems that cheapens the standard of living. These problems are indexed by the inflation of currency.

Where does this language inflation and semantic slippage occur foremost? In the place where it should occur the least, namely, among the people who earn their living translating the logic of survival into written legal laws. "Inflation has eaten away our words; the bureaucrats in Washington churn them out by the billions, but they mean less and less." Rampant inflation, unemployment, overtaxation, and crime bespeak the effects of inflated language.

A recent addition to semantic slippage or dishonesty was the phrase "revenue enhancer." When confronted with a ballooning national deficit due to supply-side tax cuts, one politician chose this term for what most people would honestly call a tax increase. Were any problems solved by an additional, confusing label for tax increases? Were any gained?

Complexity: Garbage Dump or Logical Elegance

To understand and solve problems, one must be aware of the difference between illogical and logical complexity. The whole NUSA/AESOP effort is an attempt to replace the complexity of a garbage dump (e.g., today's Congress) with the logical complexity of a carefully planned problem-solving system (e.g., telecomputation for democratic organization). Out of this effort will come the more problem-free world of which corrupt and incompetent politicians can only talk. Through the NUSA/AESOP writings, AESOP, and the principles of daily democracy and pure capitalism, America can return to a society based on truth, logic, and prudence. In addition, this change will slowly but surely reunite the practical with the moral.

NUSA Position #16: We should pursue complexity based on productive logic, long-term truths, pragmatic morality, daily democracy, and pure capitalism.

Summary of Principles

This chapter has presented several major principles which must be observed if the new forms are to yield permanent improvement. The main principles suggested herein are:

democracy per diem,
capitalism per capita,
currency standardized to time,
education, not regulation,
taxation to solve problems,
semantic honesty, and
logical complexity.

Warning: Anyone found stealing lifehours will be forever banned from participation in and rewards of Better Democracy and Capitalism.


Quality Control Tools for Higher iCube ... Frog Leaping.
'Links To': Pages linked to by this page: ( (IndexDir ... Refs General ... !RefsRvu ... !Dir.nts) InfoLinks (05-22-2015@07:28) IndexAD1.bas:LinkLstToTable
Link Label on this page Uploaded Webpage Title of Link file
(A) No Incomplete Links:
(B) No HTTP:// Links:
(C) No Dated Links: Annotated References: HTB
(D) No Templates:
(E) No Internal Links, Absolute (non-dated):
(F) Internal Links, Relative (non-dated and ignore lifehour credit links): WT,SI,
 > #1 Homepage 071101 Timism: The Morality of More Time, aka, the periodic table of existence
(G) No Current Directory Links

'Links From' Pages linking to this page: ( )No IndexDir ... Refs General ... !RefsRvu ... !Dir.nts) InfoLinks (05-22-2015@07:28) Linkstat:LinksFrom2Table
Link In From Uploaded Webpage Title of Link In file
< #1 1-Toc 071112 1-Toc
< #2 BOOKSORT n.a. Future Upload of this file
< #3 CHAPTERS n.a. Future Upload of this file

To Do List Whole Scheme * Signup * Recruit * ISPs * Help * UPS * TTD? * BDC * Global Dying * MHC * Morality * 24in4 * Retiming
Navigate ABCIndex * Image Bibs * IndexDir * Indexes * Rags * Reference Bibs * RefsMajor RefsYMD * Slideshows *
WebLinks Timism.com * Timism.Net (F L) ... GlobalDying * Letters * Essays * MiniIndx * Writings
ManHeaven Index * IndexDir * D2D * CO2 Sins * Forms * GOOHF * Ltrs * Oath * Index * Summary Tipping Pts * TTD-MH
Armadas FlotillasLinks 6576, flObj, flObj$
Are You: Ill-Employed ... WorkHog ... Rioter ... Moral ... Immigrant ... Habitual Politician ... Medical Staff ... Military ... ManHell Letters
Survival SurfWisely * Timism vs. Habituals * Contract * Credo * Jack and Jill * Hope * What We Need * Leave Me Alone I hate you ... Ttd4U ... Modus Operandi
Tables temp 091226-0724 ntvd error

Created by Linkstat.bas\Program
05-22-2015 @ 07:32:36