PEOPLE For  Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (PFMPE™)  :  mathematically perfected economy™ (MPE™) is the singular integral solution to 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 vital circulation, engendering inevitable systemic failure at a finite system lifespan defined by an inevitable, terminal sum of insoluble debt. Mathematically Perfected Economy™ is every prospective debtor's right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.

MORPHALLAXIS, January 14, 1979.

EVERY PRESIDENT SINCE GERALD FORD EVADES MATHEMATICALLY PERFECTED ECONOMY™

Nancy Reagan, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, Nelson Rockefeller.

PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country.

A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation therefore, and all our activities, are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world — no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."

CONGRESSMAN LOUIS T. MCFADDEN

Congressman Louis T. McFadden, former Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency from 1920 thru 1931, would address the House of Representatives in the midst of the first Great Depression, on June 10, 1932:

In 1912, the National Monetary Association, under the chairmanship of the late Senator Nelson W. Aldrich, made a report and presented a vicious bill called The National Reserve Association Bill. This bill is usually spoken of as The Aldrich Bill.

Senator Aldrich did not write the Aldrich Bill. He was the tool of European-born bankers who for nearly 20 years had been scheming to set up a central bank in this country, and who in 1912 had spent and were continuing to spend vast sums of money to accomplish their purpose.

The Aldrich Bill was condemned in the platform upon which Theodore Roosevelt was nominated in the year 1912; and in the same year — when Woodrow Wilson was nominated — the Democratic platform as adopted at the Baltimore Convention expressly stated:

"We are opposed to the Aldrich plan for a central bank."

This was plain language. The men who ruled the Democratic Party then promised the people that if they were returned to power, there would be no central bank established here while they held the reins of power.

Thirteen months later, that promise was broken; and the Wilson administration, under the tutelage of those sinister Wall Street figures who stood behind Colonel House, established here in our free country the worm-eaten, monarchical institution of the "King's Bank," to control us from the top downward, and to shackle us from the cradle to the grave.

mike montagne

Solo bow hunt, self portrait, 7 miles into the North Fork Wilderness.

ANSWER TO 1996 MSNBC QUESTION (PUBLISHED BY MSNBC): "ARE POLITICAL REPORTERS POLITICALLY BIASED?"

"Unless there is an editor or reporter with a perfectly neutral work-focus and style of presentation, then ALL reporters and editors are politically biased."

"Bias however, is no sensitive issue where a mature audience is apt to detect bias and account for it. The damaging aspect of 'news' coverage is its non-focus on imperative issues and qualifiable solution; and that so many citizens of all countries of the world hold to so many irrelevant snippets as if they can be served by them."

"For some 20 years for instance, the prospect of a 'balanced budget' occasionally draws some focus. But, in the news, and in politics, never have we seen an exhaustive proof of whether it is even mathematically possible to balance the budget under current and ever-worsening conditions. If however, world politics will ever see the solution of ever-mounting debt, and a solution of the ever greater costs of ever mounting debt, inevitably this will be through the eyes of a mathematic expression equivalent to conclusive, mathematic proof."

"Do the people even want to see or hear this, or administer to issues in conclusive terms? Only their focus on such a scope will tell. But certainly no news-service offers the inevitable argument."

"In any event, the impertinence of the audience befits the impertinence of submitted material. If they had no equally impertinent audience... all impertinent material, and all impertinent politicians, would be equally vanished."

"Just something to consider, as we plunge ever deeper into insoluble debt."

ECONOMY UNDER NATURAL CONDITIONS

Under natural conditions, industry prospers consistently as much as our need and willingness to render production from available resources. So long as resources remain so available, so long as need so persists, and so long as we are so willing to maintain production, we prosper without interruption to the consistent extent predicated by the natural determinants.

Usury perpetually subverts these natural sustaining factors by multiplying debt in proportion to a vital circulation.

From the very initiation of the system, we have the original injustice of being deprived multiples of our production to whatever extent interest increases the obligation above the principal. All this initial unnecessary expense is for the sake of a process which can only perpetually multiply unearned profit, with the supposed necessity of the unearned profit being that earned wealth is at risk, and/or that the process which can only perpetually multiply indebtedness even to terminal collapse somehow endows such a currency with an integrity, that debts can and will be repaid, and/or that the circulation will therefore retain value.

All in fact however are false.

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, DEATH, AND TAXES

Benjamin Franklin did not say two things are certain: death and unjust taxation.

You are paying interest upon interest upon interest, because you have tolerated the unlawful and unassented imposition of a privatized currency which, for the sake of unearned profit, can only multiply debt until you collapse under an artificial sum of debt.

No; responding to just such an unassented imposition of a privatized currency as we have now, Franklin said, "We would have gladly borne the little tax on tea and other matters, if it had not been that they took from us our money, which created great unemployment and dissatisfaction."

Those who cite Poor Richard's Almanac to convince you of the contrary, plainly do so out of context; and plainly do so to promote your unknowing servitude — for they carefully avoid discussion of the relevant principles.

ENGINEERING A TRUE ECONOMY

Imagine that you are designing the first combustion engine:

A prototype finally starts. It sputters; it coughs. It stumbles.

You envisioned smooth delivery of power — efficient power. Your very initial objective was to achieve full possible power. So is an engine to cough? Is an engine barely to run?

No one would ever have built a decent engine if we exclaimed only how wonderful all the "running" amidst all the first sputtering.

Imposition of a central banking system on true free enterprise runs quite the opposite course. It takes a free running engine and irreversibly multiplies its debt until it can run no more. That it ran in the first place, that it ran for some time, and that it improved its production at times even faster than usury imposed ever greater oppression is no testament to the ostensible merits of usury; nor does it prove the subject commerce can sustain itself against the multiplying costs of debt forever.

In fact commerce is finite; and a system which can only multiply debt in proportion to commerce can only eventually exceed the capacity of finite commerce to support infinite, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation. Indeed, as ever more of such a circulation must be dedicated to servicing the multiplying debt, ever less of the circulation remains to sustain commerce.

The inherent collapse of a central banking system therefore approaches at an ever escalating rate, as the subject commerce struggles against all the malignant consequences of servicing perpetual multiplication of debt in proportion to the potential commerce which can survive to do so.

COMPUTER MODELS PRODUCED FOR THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION

I had been asked if I thought it was possible to project the maximum possible/practical lifespan of an economy subject to interest. I answered that this would be a simple matter of calculating borrowing necessary to replenish interest. Months were spent developing computer models capable of calculating the maximum possible lifespan for any plausible managerial scenarios. The most probable managerial scenarios we ran anticipated that if federal/public debt accumulated parallel to the inherently escalating rate of multiplication of private debt, that Reagan would triple the federal debt of the entire previous history of the country over two terms of office.

Not only did those projections for federal accumulation of debt hold true, the modeled accumulation of debt has held true ever since. As we projected for more aggressive de-escalation of interest rates than have been deployed over this timespan, the projected accumulations are actually somewhat conservative. Even so, to most purported experts these numbers were hardly even imaginable in the early 1980s.

For more aggressive de-escalation of interest rates, the models projected a maximum possible lifespan in the vicinity of 2020 AD, and a general practical lifespan therefore of approximately 2015. Accounting for the higher rates of interest deployed would downwardly adjust the general practical lifespan to approximately 2010. Thus withstanding artificial suspensions of consequences and so forth, we can expect near term full fledged systemic failure.

In the final analysis, Reagan had doggedly moved ahead with a plan that couldn't possibly work. Despite my appeals, he left an imposed process to destroy the house by further irreversible multiplication of debt to the eventual terminal state. In that, he may be no more guilty than any and every president since the 1912 campaign. But too, these events certify we require a higher genre of leadership — at least capable of resolving the intellectual challenges of identifying, presenting, and prevailing in solution.

REPRESENTATION VERSUS USURY

Witting subjects rectify their deprivation. Sheep wait for whatever hand their usurers will deal them.

Theirs is a system no intelligent society would ever authorize.

In fact, no intelligent society ever has.

SCOTTISH REVOLUTION — Declaration of Arbroath

"It is not for glory or riches or honours that we fight, but only for liberty, which no good man will consent to lose but with his life."

Thursday, August 9, 2007

EVERY PRESIDENT AND PLAUSIBLE CANDIDATE SINCE GERALD FORD EVADES MATHEMATICALLY PERFECTED ECONOMY™

With such a vast cast of the founders standing so adamantly against usury, perhaps it is not surprising that since the deception of the so called Federal Reserve was established, no purported representative dares even try to answer the most central question upon which the very fact of representation itself hinges. This is my standard question. A question I ask first to candidates, to presidents, to their staffs, and to naysayers of the proposition we can perfect economy:

If the currency is introduced to circulation as a debt subject to interest, how is it even possible to maintain a circulation without suffering irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to the circulation until we succumb to an eventual, impossible sum of debt, if to maintain the circulation we must re-borrow whatever we pay against principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt, always increased then so much as periodic interest?

In the 35 years I have been asking and answering this question, no one yet has been able to disprove interest is usury; that interest inherently and irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to a circulation until such a currency imposes collapse; or that there is one and one only integral solution to 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 the circulation and/or wealth it ostensibly represents.

Some of course — very few — say otherwise; and their readily disproven answers can be counted on less than the fingers of one hand.

One "economist" for instance laughed at the question, saying one thing made all this possible and right: "Profit!"

With a single word he thought he sufficiently dismissed the proposition of mathematically perfected economy™, and the need to solve all that it solves.

I then asked how it is that we, the unassenting subjects of the system, make so much profit from the central banking system as to answer for all the interest we are compelled to give up to it?

Of course, he was dumbfounded even at his own inability to answer.

The answer he had simply blurted out is twice-fold preposterous: A) virtually all of our profit is from each other, and therefore has no power to diminish the unearned gain taken from the circulation by way of interest; and B) what negligible profit any of us re-take from the central banking system is but a pittance in proportion to what they take in the way of interest. After all, even an initial debt is subject to multiples of our production in terms of interest; and the system only multiplies every such debt further.

Some ten years ago, by way of a poster who had visited my pages, the proposition of mathematically perfected economy™ found its way to the longwaves economics forum hosted by the University of Colorado. Someone else then invited me to join, and to respond further.

A well known capital markets analyst denounced not mathematically perfected economy™ itself, but the proposition of inherent collapse which it solves (in addition to what else it solves), saying such a collapse would never happen because we would simply "write down our debt."

Of course, even on its surface I think that's a relatively preposterous notion of how a whole economy could or even should "save" itself. But let us consider this expert's proposition hypothetically.

First of all, if we had to avoid collapse by writing down our debt, and if we could avoid collapse by writing down our debt, then we could only do so to the effect of maintaining an equilibrium on the margin of utter systemic failure, with the preponderance of individual cases being the constant verge of individual failure as debt multiplied yet further. Why then merely write down our debt, if we can solve the cause of artificial multiplication of debt, and if artificial multiplication of debt in no way serves us?

Secondly, the very proposition we would rely on such recourse itself concurs that the inherent disposition of the system imposes collapse. No justification of that disposition is offered (and certainly it would be disputed if it were), and no satisfactory alternative is proposed — while at the same time, the answer is the most dubious prospective recourse for practically the entire actual system. After all, how many of us are actively writing down our long and short term debt to maintain solubility?

Fourteen million families are about to lose their homes right now, and marginalization is far more extensive than this recent statistic can reflect. But even if we revert the inherent, perpetual consequences of the system to whatever degree might allow us all to tread water, what real benefit is that but to extend our involuntary servitude to the maximal dispossession possible? Can we write down our rent? Can we write down our mortgages? Can we write down our short term debt? Can we write down the price of gasoline?

If so, then why aren't we? And if we were wise enough to do so, why then would we not write down our debt to the very value of the property we had obtained by it; and why would we not write down our interest to zero then as well, that we could pay for the production of others with an equal measure of our own production?

After all, then alone would we not be forced to perpetually write down our debts; and of course, we have just arrived at mathematically perfected economy™.

This then is a litany, perhaps of ineptitude, or perhaps of great, elaborate corruption in concert with one of the most striking deceptions of history. I leave it for you to decide.

The following are basic accounts of each president or candidate's and/or their staff's response to the proposition of mathematically perfected economy™. I can only say that while usury has only been perpetuated by all this evasion, and while the failure of all to account or deny mathematically perfected economy™ indicates no qualification whatsoever to lead us down the path which indeed has engendered such debt and consequences as I projected long ago, silence or evasion are hardly the vital spirit of a succeeding republican form of government.

RICHARD NIXON

I thought much about proposing mathematically perfected economy™ to Richard Nixon. I never trusted him enough to do so.

GERALD FORD

Owing somewhat to the manner in which he ascended to the presidency, I was lukewarm on proposing mathematically perfected economy™ to Gerald Ford. I sent matter-of-fact presentations, to which no response was ever returned. To my great curiosity, certified delivery receipts were never returned either. Was I an outlaw or threat to cite Jefferson, Lincoln and McFadden?

JIMMY CARTER

I estimated President Carter to be a decent and responsible man. But neither did Mr. Carter respond to my proposition of mathematically perfected economy™ and projections of escalating accumulation of debt. The delivery receipt for my materials was returned, but not for 6 months.

RONALD REAGAN

Ronald Reagan prevailed in the presidential debates when he turned to President Carter and pronounced the some $150 billion in federal debt Carter accumulated in just 4 years to be "unforgivable."

Appeals for "change" are never of genuine substance unless a proposition of solution is definitively articulated, and that proposition can withstand the tests it should be subjected to. Because I could provide proof of singular solution, I therefore warmed to Ronald Reagan's appeal for change. Much as Ron Paul has recently raised the areas of vital concern, so did Mr. Reagan.

Because Mr. Reagan denounced the federal debt President Carter had accumulated as "unforgivable," I considered it reasonable to anticipate that a diligent identification and solution of a process which inherently and irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to a circulation, eventually to collapse, should stand out against the propositions Reagan was asserting would succeed, and which my research already disproved. On the heels of more than 8 wasted years then, I first called the Reagan staff when he was the Republican nominee.

As with all presidents and candidates I have approached, I offered proofs:

  1. that any economy subject to interest ultimately terminates itself under insoluble debt;
  2. that there is one and one only integral solution to:
    1. inflation and deflation;
    2. systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property;
    3. inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation;
  3. and in Reagan's case, I further offered a mathematic proof that his proposed three years of ten percent federal tax cuts were impotent even to offset the double-digit price inflation we were suffering, much less solve its cause (as he asserted).

This initiated years of intercourse which moved slowly, if at all. No difference, and not even a challenge was ever raised. Little clarification was asked for. But there was never any formal congealing from the top as one would expect from proofs which could not be refuted.

After our first telephone conversation covered the propositions exhaustively, I was asked to please re-substantiate my case with exhaustive written material. This failed to engender either any discussion of disproof, or the alternate, expected agreement.

As the Reagan people would neither commit to a positive or negative position, I sent further arguments showing how their claims of success against price inflation only falsified the issue. I demonstrated exhaustively that the systemic cause of price inflation is multiplication of debt; that maintenance of such high interest rates as preclude raising prices sufficiently to maintain former profit margins against the elevated costs of conducting business on a more expensive currency could only marginalize the vitality of business and multiply debt at even faster rates.

As the failure of Reagan's ill conceived program against price inflation was soon demonstrated empirically, David Stockman, Director of OMB was required to revise formulas by which the government purportedly expresses the vitality of our commerce. As prices continued to rise and business thus continued to flounder to an ever greater degree, Stockman was required to prejudice cost of living indexes and so forth to attempt to hide the failure.

My material during this while was either CC'd to Stockman or sent directly. Eventually a controversy erupted. At the climax of this controversy, Reagan is reported to have taken Stockman "to the wood shed." No real details of this strife were publicly revealed as would expose the inherent course to controversy, but I still deduce the intent was more or less to force Stockman to remain true to the President's intentions, even while all the reasons to do so were false, and Stockman (besides myself) would have been the principal witness that severe damage was being inflicted on the public.

As to my own estimations of these internalized events, I'm compelled to point out that Reagan never dared challenge my arguments, quite evidently because his people had no prevailing or deserving counter-argument even to the first question of the course they elected to persist in — how a currency subject to interest will not multiply debt in proportion to a circulation until it engenders such a sum of debt that even the entire circulation is insufficient to service it.

Reagan's incongruous commitment to retaining usury therefore put him in a pickle. It forced him to the vain affair at the woodshed; and so, with Stockman quite evidently understanding all these improprieties (as we should expect), Reagan does not win. Stockman resigns.

I had been asked if I thought it was possible to project the maximum possible/practical lifespan of an economy subject to interest. I answered that this would be a simple matter of calculating borrowing necessary to replenish interest. Months were spent developing computer models capable of calculating the maximum possible lifespan for any plausible managerial scenarios. The most probable managerial scenarios we ran anticipated that if federal/public debt accumulated parallel to the inherently escalating rate of multiplication of private debt, that Reagan would triple the federal debt of the entire previous history of the country over two terms of office.

Not only did those projections for federal accumulation of debt hold true, the modeled accumulation of debt has held true ever since. As we projected for more aggressive de-escalation of interest rates than have been deployed over this timespan, the projected accumulations are actually somewhat conservative. Even so, to most purported experts these numbers were hardly even imaginable in the early 1980s.

For more aggressive de-escalation of interest rates, the models projected a maximum possible lifespan in the vicinity of 2020 AD, and a general practical lifespan therefore of approximately 2015. Accounting for the higher rates of interest deployed would downwardly adjust the general practical lifespan to approximately 2010. Thus withstanding artificial suspensions of consequences and so forth, we can expect near term full fledged systemic failure.

As our industry floundered under the higher interest rates, we suffered the greatest stock market crash since the collapse which precipitated the first Great Depression. As our industry has disappeared, trade deficits have escalated, and ever more falsified booms are all we are left to look to, we've been held together by smoke and mirrors ever since.

Reagan then indeed tripled not just the relatively minuscule "unforgivable" debt accumulated by the Carter Administration, but of the entire previous history of our country. We descended from "the greatest creditor nation in the world" to "the greatest debtor nation" in his first 7 years in office.

In the end, Reagan only sent what appears to be a form letter, thanking me for my "ideas."

In the final analysis, Reagan had doggedly moved ahead with a plan that couldn't possibly work. Despite my appeals, he left an imposed process to destroy the house by further irreversible multiplication of debt to the eventual terminal state. In that, he may be no more guilty than any and every president since the 1912 campaign. But too, these events certify we require a higher genre of leadership — at least capable of resolving the intellectual challenges of identifying, presenting, and prevailing in solution.

GEORGE H. W. BUSH

"George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography," (Webster G. Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin) alleges that Adolph Hitler's personal banker was none other than one Prescott Bush.

Connecting the dots submitted by Congressman Louis T. McFadden then, this may have placed the Bush family squarely in the middle of regular transfers of U.S. monetary gold reserves to Germany to finance German military preparations, and even to pay the debts of Japanese military preparations to German munitions manufacturers, prior to World War II.

Perhaps this explains the Bush family presence in power. In any case, the George H. W. Bush Administration would not reply to my propositions of mathematically perfected economy™.

JERRY BROWN

In the developing 1992 presidential election, I called the San Francisco campaign headquarters for Jerry Brown and was invited to meet with his people there to discuss the same material.

I closed shop and arrived just two hours later. Even as I announced in a subtle tone that I was there to explain mathematically perfected economy, several of the staff overheard and stepped closer to hear and ask questions. I was surrounded immediately, and just a few sentences later I was asked to stay and speak to a national meeting to take place in just an hour or two. To pass the time, I helped several staff set up several hundred chairs, answering eager questions as we worked.

As Mr. Brown's national field organizer mistakenly concluded the late-running meeting without having me speak, various staff in the audience immediately reminded her, and after a brief apology she introduced me as everyone was intending to leave. A few who had already stood sat back down, and beginning with an apology how I hadn't prepared a formal presentation for the occasion, I announced that I was there to present mathematically perfected economy™, and simply entered into my usual explanation how interest inherently multiplies debt in proportion to a circulation, and that there is one and one only solution to 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 the circulation and/or wealth it ostensibly represents.

Because this 60-second account so obviously stirred the audience, I continued briefly, citing Jefferson's concurring observation and concluding with an abbreviated colonial history now contained in our present page, Parable of Perfect Economy.

Such interest and excitement were expressed even at the late hour that it was necessary to stay quite some time afterward to answer many further questions. A close friend of Mr. Brown asked me to prepare special papers on the matter that he could personally introduce me to the candidate.

I spent the next two weeks on those papers; attended the fundraiser where we were to meet; received the appreciated courtesy of Montana Podva's personal invitation; shook hands with Mr. Brown; and delivered the papers he had been told to expect.

As we shook hands, the candidate had the oddest look on his face. I interpreted it at the time to infer either that he presumed mathematically perfected economy was impossible, or that I had somehow, to his amazement, not understood that the central banking system was untouchable.

In any case, I never heard a word from "the next president of the United States," and all further attempts to engage him failed.

BILL CLINTON

In a state of the union speech, President Bill Clinton boasts that he had balanced the federal budget — "something which not long ago had been thought to be mathematically impossible." This is a direct and even errant response to material I provided the Clinton Administration.

While it is improbable to balance the federal budget within a system which multiplies even federal indebtedness, the processes which multiply private debt are not the same as those which may or may not multiply public debt; and therefore it is possible to balance the federal budget, even as, contrary to his claim, it is doubtful Mr. Clinton actually accomplished such a thing.

Without even taking the initiative to ask, President Clinton evidently misunderstood the scope of my material to assert the contrary. But did Mr. Clinton actually balance the federal budget?

How so?

Did real industry increase so much as would have augmented revenue so much? Were federal tax rates so substantially increased? Was federal spending so substantially reduced?

Not at all. Not even altogether.

I asked the question for years, and no one was ever able to account for this purported balancing of the budget until one day, someone who may have known and may have confessed too much said bah to Clinton, asking "You don't know how that happened?"

According to their ostensibly privileged tale, a windfall received from Kuwait in the wake of the gulf war fought under G. H. W. Bush accounts for Clinton's "balanced budget."

For my trouble I never heard a word from the Clinton Administration. But I did somehow receive 8 Christmas cards from the Clinton family. If I recall, I only opened the first of them.

KERRY AND EDWARDS 2000

The Kerry/Edwards 2000 campaign would not reply to my proposition of mathematically perfected economy™.

GEORGE W. BUSH, 2000 TO PRESENT

Like his father, George W. Bush would not reply to my proposition of mathematically perfected economy™. Even so, for several years I maintained an online open letter asking why not?

RON PAUL 2008

The Ron Paul Camp's months of reluctance to engage in discussion or debate of mathematically perfected economy™ have been surprising and extremely disappointing. I've loved the man. I've believed he was genuine. I have supported him with a huge measure of my own efforts, until recently when a great deal of effort has failed to stir a word from him. Worse, he appears to be vacillating on his commitment to rescind the so called Federal Reserve System; and his propositions and arguments against it can only fail to solve the perpetual, escalating erosion that system can only engender.

He now calls for transparency, which of course implies retention; and he calls for multiple competing currencies, which of course if they retain interest, can only result in further multiplication of debt to collapse.

He will make no commitment against interest. How then can he rightly even project collapse then, if he fails to recognize the cause of it?

Thus he has refrained from explaining the mechanics by which he ostensibly asserts the government's deficit spending policies are "inflationary." The real effects thereof certainly do not even comply with any proper definition of the term. I've sent his people repeated explanations how a return to the gold standard not only may not even be possible, but that it would have no power either to stave further multiplication of debt to collapse (because interest must be eradicated to solve multiplication of debt), or to sustain the circulations necessary to supporting prosperity potentially far exceeding monetary reserves. Much of this material is repeated in the present site, and particularly in PFMPE™ blog articles.

After writing failed to raise any response, I called in late December of 2007, asking if I could speak to whatever personnel should hear my proposition of singular solution, mathematically perfected economy™.

The telephone receptionist replies without hesitation, "There is no such thing as mathematically perfected economy."

So I asked, because the mathematic solution is so obvious, "Do you mean to tell me that if inflation and deflation are defined respectively as increases or decreases in circulation per goods and services for instance, that we cannot solve inflation and deflation?"

Not answering even for their own initial assertion, they replied, "I can't debate that with you."

To those who may be unfamiliar with "Austrian Economics," it may not be obvious that this is a characteristic evasion of the purported discipline, because remarkably, "Austrian Economics" dismisses the whole idea that mathematics can even be applied to "economic" phenomena, purportedly because mathematics cannot account for indeterminable human behavior.

By definition however, inflation and deflation are not human behavior; inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt by mere maintenance of a circulation subject to interest hinges on no indeterminate human behavior whatsoever; neither then does inherent, inevitable collapse under insoluble debt hinge on indeterminable human behavior.

In fact, "Austrian Economists" *advocate* interest; and they regularly race to denounce all propositions of solving its consequences.

Recent articles here therefore answer to the questions posed. Meanwhile, there is little reason to expect more from the Paul Camp than the few non-committal responses I quote as follows:

12/31/2007

It has been forwarded to Mr. Becker. As an economics major from a famous university, your research below interests me. Please don't take [telephone receptionist's name]'s comment you quote as gospel. Also please note that Dr. Paul and his competitors are doing 18 hour days in IA, NH, then SC, etc. Surely, you know Dr. Paul can understand and is closer to your analysis than other candidates — you definitely should be on or involved with the transition team. Maybe be patient and positive — there is time to connect you with Dr. Paul.

2/2/2008

Dear Mike,

You provide interesting material for evaluation. Please promote your analysis on the internet and we will follow it with great interest.

With the disassembly of the campaign team of course, I have no idea if anyone even remains in the Paul Camp "to follow with great interest." Meanwhile, I have to say it's a shame to have squandered all the opportunities so far to present the real issues and their singular solution to the American public and the world.

Denis Kucinich 2008

Immediately after receiving Ron Paul's telephone receptionist's assertion that "There is no such thing as mathematically perfected economy," I called the Kucinich Camp and upon submitting the same question, was immediately transferred to a thoroughly enjoyable discussion with a far more professional staff person. We had a great laugh, anticipating what possible process or advantage the Paul Camp could possibly devise by anything other than mathematics. We also had great laughs on the proposition that there was but one obvious solution to inflation and deflation; that there is but one solution to inherent collapse as a consequence of multiplication of debt by interest; and to the proposition it is possible for the system to manipulate the cost or value of money or property if interest, inflation and deflation are eliminated.

My proposition was immediately referred to Chicago offices of the Kucinich Camp for further response. Although I received none, in fairness I must remind posterity that at the same time the Kucinich Camp disappeared off the radar.

John Edwards 2008

John Edwards has earned points on my scorecard. But the John Edwards 2008 campaign would not reply to my proposition of mathematically perfected economy™.

John McCain

Anyone who claims to pray, and who can smile after being reminded of the country's disposition against a bogus war, and who responds with an unaccounted commitment to a hundred years, serves something other than humanity, or the American people.

Hillary Clinton 2008

Anyone who has seen the Mena Arkansas material regarding the Clintons would have difficulty attributing integrity to the Clintons. But after the sleight by which Mr. Clinton claimed to have accomplished something which was thought to be mathematically impossible, and after eight years of Christmas cards without a word regarding mathematically perfected economy, I've written the Hillary Clinton camp only as a matter of courtesy and record. As any reasonable person would expect, the Hillary Clinton 2008 campaign would not reply to my proposition of mathematically perfected economy™.

Barack Obama 2008

I've written both Michelle and Barack Obama, so far without reply to my proposition of mathematically perfected economy™. I will say however for what real little it is worth, that I appreciate his taste in style, and his ability to project that style. I note however that his appeal for change so far lacks the substance which certifies the groundwork which will restore America to the intellectual and principled foundations by which it again will succeed. I remain open and even hopeful for interaction with the Obama Camp. But unless he warms to the proposition of mathematically perfected economy™, I assert instead that there is little chance for success on many fronts which direly require sincere, accomplishable attention.

Where are you, Barack? You're about to be the next president of our falling country. Free us from usury. Talk to me.

WHY?

As none of the present players will commit to the arguments which ostensibly justify usury, we must decipher why; and the answer to this question hinges on another:

If the purposes of evasion were legitimate, why not justify in absolute terms how we can even maintain a vital circulation without suffering perpetual multiplication of debt to ever greater detriment?

If the central banking system were not imposed, this question would have been answered in 1913.

It is because this obvious and crucial question cannot be answered that evasion is consistent instead with recognizing alternative arguments can only be defeated by the foundations of mathematically perfected economy™. This makes all evaders culpable for our oppression, for nothing less than mathematically perfected economy™ can serve us.

Until we settle for nothing less than full accountability then, we will have neither accountability, representation, or solution.

"To find the players in all the corruption of the world, 'Follow the money.' To find the captains of world corruption, follow the money all the way."

mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)

While 12,000 homes a day continue to go into foreclosure, mathematically perfected economy™ would re-finance a $100,000 home with a hundred-year lifespan at the overall rate of $1,000 per year or $83.33 per month. Without costing us anything, we would immediately become as much as 12 times as liquid on present revenue. Transitioning to MPE™ would apply all payments already made against existent debt toward principal. Many of us would be debt free. There would be no housing crisis, no credit crisis. Unlimited funding would immediately be available to sustain all the industry we are capable of.

There is no other solution. Regulation can only temper an inherently terminal process.

If you are not promoting mathematically perfected economy™, then you condemn us to monetary failure.

© Copyright 1979-2008 by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.Copyright 1979-2008 by mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, Mathematically Perfected Economy™, Mathematically Perfected Currency™, MPE™, and PFMPE™ are trademarks of mike montagne and PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, perfecteconomy.com. The trade name, Mathematically Perfected Economy™, may only be used, and may freely be used, only by permission, and only by countries complying with the prescription for Mathematically Perfected Economy™ herein.

THANK YOU FOR VISITING PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™!

Firefox™.BEST VIEWED WITH MOZILLA FIREFOX™ AND FULL USAGE OF A BROWSER WINDOW AT LEAST 1450 PIXELS WIDE.


Search perfecteconomy.com     Search Web