Yarvin°hard word is blogging°hard word tonight, so we are co-blogging°hard word. His article°hard word is titled°hard word A New Sovereign°hard word Accounting.
Yarvin°hard word wants to maintain°hard word the American Empire in Washington°hard word, and I want to eliminate°hard word it. We have several obstacles°hard word to doing°hard word so. The nature of the currency°hard word and the nature of the military are the most prominent°hard word ones.
His sovereign°hard word accounting starts with three rules:
- The government owns the country. This is an unusual type of view of government, but it's°hard word not°hard word an unknown view. - The individuals°hard word in the state are mainly part of the collective°hard word of the state. If they oppose°hard word the state to a large degree, they should be liquidated°hard word, either killed or relieved of their assets°hard word and power.
- Fiat°hard word currency°hard word is government equity°hard word. This is a new rule that seems to be Yarvin's°hard word own: fiat°hard word currency°hard word is a proxy°hard word for specie°hard word currency°hard word, such as°hard word gold and silver. We are almost out of living memory for gold and silver being currency°hard word. But in the absence°hard word of government, people look to the laws of nature and of art. And of natural scarcity°hard word to create value.
- Securities°hard word are formal°hard word. He seems to misunderstand°hard word what a security°hard word is here. He defines°hard word a contract°hard word guaranteed°hard word by law to be a type of security°hard word. 💡 I would define°hard word a security°hard word as°hard word a financial°hard word instrument structured°hard word in a regular way, publicly registered°hard word, and based°hard word in the interest in some real property. ⚔️ this definition°hard word is intended to exclude°hard word derivatives°hard word; they are not°hard word securities°hard word
Yarvin°hard word thus introduces°hard word two contradictions°hard word and errors. Dollars°hard word are not°hard word a share of the U.S. government, or at least they should not°hard word be. The current policy°hard word of 2% per°hard word year inflation°hard word cannot°hard word go on forever.
Yarvin°hard word does not°hard word yet°hard word discuss the stocks and flows°hard word problem. That is, does a wealthy°hard word individual°hard word need to spend°hard word money to gain°hard word disproportionate°hard word influence°hard word, or does simply having the money bestow°hard word such influence°hard word? If you imagine dollars°hard word as°hard word "shares", it would be the latter°hard word.
🔥 If you imagine dollars°hard word as°hard word "shares" in the US government, it will be owned by China soon.
The differences°hard word between money(1) and money(2) is that one of them is virtual°hard word. If you have a million°hard word dollars°hard word from the government, that may or may not°hard word be worth°hard word anything°hard word on the ground. However, the money used°hard word in the transaction°hard word where you work 15 minutes, you are paid°hard word $7; you spend°hard word the $7 on a burrito°hard word. cannot°hard word be mangled°hard word by the government.
Monetary°hard word inflation°hard word is when that relation is abused°hard word by the government. ⚙️ this is opposed°hard word to scarcity-based°hard word inflation°hard word. If there is a famine°hard word, your°hard word money will buy less food, regardless°hard word of what the government does.