A brief history of nation-states and currency

The following brief outline on global trade, world, and U.S. history will help your children, grandchildren, nephews and nieces get through two semesters of a boring college lecture ….

“To celebrate a fiat currency is to celebrate poverty and theft. It is an acknowledgement that nation-states, central banks, merchant banks, and government treasuries were created to launder money.

Original wealth is the result of theft. When property was created, the desire to steal increased. Land means ownership of productive power. To increase your wealth, you stole land and shared some with your cohorts who would then form a moat around you and protect you from commoners and other barbarians.

Trade is a method by which you claim a stake in another tribe’s resources. As trade with peoples outside your tribe and later kingdom increased, there had to be a way to exchange value without giving another tribe direct claim to your land. The solution: issue currency. The more currency you have, the greater claims to wealth you can make.

The first mistake made was assuming that merely producing more coin by digging for more gold would lead to more wealth. The only thing that caused was inflation. Inflation erodes value and spending power and also invites war because other tribes don’t like the idea of their buying power being eroded because you went off, worked South American native inhabitants to death, and shipped home more gold. In order to slow down the erosion, tribes, now countries, created central banks and merchant banks to launder money.

In order to launder money, the king had to seek out new channels for spending and investing gold. He laundered it by issuing debt from his treasury through his central bankers at which time the original holders of wealth i.e. land holding thieves with coin backed by land, could convert gold into bonds. The king also laundered coin by granting charters and investment capital to stock companies, companies that would sail to foreign ports and establish trading posts. They would purchase raw materials and slaves in one port, transfer the raw materials and slaves to another port, and finally transfer finished product to your country. Sales and taxes on those sales would increase your treasury and pay back your bond holders.

In order to further increase your booty, you would use different types of promotions and incentives i.e. freedom to practice religion, freedom from prolonged imprisonment, freedom from a nagging wife, etc., to get more people from various tribes to move to your new colonies voluntarily where they would produce more goods and services and pay taxes, hence increasing your largesse. These colonies, filled with various free and enslaved people who other wise would not give a shit about each other, would become a nation-state, which simply boils down to a forced confederation of people who have little in common and giveth not a shit about each other.

Later on, someone, probably a disgruntled cousin, would get the ridiculous idea to form a democratic government, but even with that tweak in how the oligarchy controls the economy and currency, the model remained intact.

The takeaway. Whether slave or freed person, your being here was a manufactured event based on false premise along with the creation of an artificial country. The nation-state is the result of money laundering.

Atlanta’s ninety-four percent have no leadership

On the occasions that I ride MARTA, I am always saddened by what I see in the ridership. It is mostly black, overweight, loud, low to middle income in dress and carriage. The body language of the ridership transmits defeat and a lack of control over its resources. Hell. We have no resources.

When blacks engage each other on the train, bus, or the grocery aisles, the conversation tends to center on food prices and domestic turmoil. Social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter have only served to increase the noise, giving a platform for ratchetness in text and in video.

On social media, it seems like blacks are interested in becoming video stars, drinking the Kool-Aid that Atlanta’s “Black Hollywood” narrative transmits. It is not uncommon now to see a bunch of twenty-somethings walking around the West End posing in front of cameras and smartphones shooting videos to be posted on Instagram or Facebook.

But when I visit Peachtree Center I see much less swag and more of “playing it safe, gotta keep this job” demeanor from the few blacks that I see there versus whites and Asians who carry themselves with more confidence likely due to their much greater representation in much higher paying jobs. If Atlanta is the “Black Mecca”, then its tribal chiefs are doing a poor job of representing it.

I say poor job because Atlanta’s black elite have forgotten the basic rule of leadership: you are only as valid as the prosperity of the people around you. Assuming that Atlanta’s black wealth is reflected in national statistics, then blacks are in pretty bad shape. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, 57.6% of blacks own an interest earning account, while 78% of their white counterparts and 78.5% of Asians own such an account. Fifty eight percent of Hispanics own an interest earning account.

Blacks are not as diversified as whites and Asians in terms of participation in the equity markets. Just over six percent of blacks own stock or mutual fund shares, according to U.S. Census data, while 25.2% of whites and 26% of Asians own stocks or mutual funds. Hispanics come in at 5.5% of their population investing directly in stocks or mutual funds.

Blacks have not gotten into the game of owning their federal or local governments’ debt. Three percent of blacks own U.S. government bonds while 0.5% own municipal bonds. Ten percent of whites own U.S. government bonds while three percent of whites own municipal bonds. Other ethnic groups are in the single digits as well when it comes to owning public debt. Four and one-half percent of Asians own U.S. government bonds while just one percent of Asians own municipal bonds. A little over two percent of Hispanics own U.S. government bonds while 0.3% of their population own municipal bonds.

Even with their numerical majority (which is waning with each passing year), black Atlanta couldn’t influence a political outcome without blowing its basic house budget. One is naive about American politics if they believe the vote alone can sustain any level of political power.

Decreased political power is a boat with a big hole in it, rudderless, with a stalling engine and a navigator that cannot read a compass. For 44 years, the Atlanta black political elite have benefited from enjoying a political largess that is increasingly scarce. Rather than dominance, the political elite appears willing to settle on being the minority pivotal vote. Will the Atlanta black political establishment fare well at its future deal maker role and will new pluralities in the future be willing to pay the bribe?