The fact that different cities around the world, holding population size constant, have different crime rates, must lead us to conclude that there is a reason for crime and that it doesn't have to be a fact of life. This idea that whatever the system is, out of six billion people, there has to be some opting out, is the most likely probability. But there must be ways to control the level of opting out.
I'm just saying, if people can be manipulated in a way to increase someone's wealth (the 1% of the world's population), I think they can also be manipulated to end crime once and for all (with minor incidents decreased towards nill).
Mind the assertions. There is this overwhelming idea eminating from the general theme in serious and critical articles that when u try to fix something, something else has to get screwed up regardless of intentions. It's also in movies - like this guy who tries to go back in time, using a time machine, to save someone's life, only to find out that he can't, or that he screwed up someone else's life, like in The Butterfly Effect movie. It is this idea that If u do good, you don't know that "bad" is happening elsewhere, because all events lead to other events; cause and effect, action and reaction. We cannot calculate all the results of our actions; the endless domino effect.
Or like when someone says: "the more you talk, the more mistakes you're going to make," and such similar ideas almost became part of world history and culture. The chinese have the Yin and Yang, the concept that in everything bad, something good comes out of it, and vice versa.
I understand all this. But sometimes I wonder: why does it seem that certain evil people, doing horrible evil things, seem to live a good life and get away with everything? Like say George W Bush. That genocidal vampire is too dumb to even feel guilt or any human emotion. He gets to play golf, fish, and collect insects. He gets to eat chicken wings in Texas. He gets to electrocute people and do whatever the fuck he wants. He will never face punishment, not in this life, and apparently there is no other life but this one. So this idea of "zero-sum" gain doesn't apply to people like George W. Bush. And it also doesn't apply to some five-year-old girl who gets raped by a pedophile and then buried alive. Her life doesn't get any justice and the rapist may get away forever. So if we have managed to set up a system that is so invincible where a US president can get away with all that Bush got away with, why can't we set up another system where the US president can never get away with anything, not even with smoking a cigarette in a non-smoking room!
I mean they talk about this "checks and balances" in the US system and they're so proud of it. Well, our great checks-and-balances system can only work if the government was actually in control. If a bunch of unelected CEO motherfuckers can sit together and use their trillions of dollars to buy the judges, senators, congressmen, the president and his entire cabinet, as well as the military generals, the news editors, and the TV hosts, then the checks-and-balances becomes obsolete, because now all four sectors of the government are owned by the same oligopoly, which is unelected, unquestioned, and untouchable. When the economy crashes, they prosper. When the economy booms, they prosper. When people get bombed and raped, they prosper. When people get saved, they prosper. When the world is on fire, they prosper. What kind of a system is this? Where is the Yin and Yang effect with those guys?
I must prove, beyond any doubt, that there is a system beyond human control. Adam Smith called it "the invisible hand." His famous quote goes:
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages."
The inefficient barter system has been replaced a long time ago with a more efficient means of exchange called money. But in order for "money" to function properly, it has to be an item that the entire population agrees on and trusts in. Therefore, whoever supplies the agreed upon, trusted money is in control of the entire system.
But even this 'money' in all its forms (collectively referred to in economics as M3) can be used in more efficient ways. This is why an entire economic system was set up in place in order to best control the flow of M3 throughout the world. Rules were made, others were deleted, in the ever-evolving economic system, constanty figuring out ways to make the butcher, the brewer, and the baker the happiest.
Money became the center-piece of our system. In this system, everything has a price. We all seek money, and there is no amount of money that can be labeled as "sufficient." And in the name of piling up money, all the rules and regulations have been set up, starting with private property and its protection. Even churches and mosques require money in order for God to do his miracles. Missionaries, printing copies of the Bible or Quran, require money, not divine intervention. Even grassroots movements and anti-Capitalists require money in order to achieve their goals. For a church to tell people that they must give up their money, it requires money to get that message across. Thus a church could never preach that, because it will be self-defeating. As for the church that does preach the true aesthetic life, no one ever founds out about it because it didn't have the means to reach those people. Even missionaries riding bicycles and never shaving their beards require money to stay alive.
Corruption would not exist if there was no monetary gain out of it. If it wasn't for money, an overwhelming majority of people would quit their jobs immediately. People would stop signing up for college or saving up college money for their kids. The examples that follow are almost self-evident.
All of this is well-known. But what is unknown is whether we, as human beings, are in control of money, or if money is in control of human beings. I argue that it is the latter, and I don't say this as a poetic gesture, but I claim it to be a fact.
The Invisible Hand Example:
This invisible hand is all cause-and-effect, no magic involved. Take for example a company CEO who's goal is to increase the company's profits (because that is his job, and if he doesn't reach that goal he shall lose his job and no longer be able to pay for his mortgage, children's education, all types of insurance bills, etc). As a successful manager, he tries to identify gaps and find solutions to eliminate them. One obvious consistent gap is workers' productivity. As a bright manager, I will notice that these rigid rules of 40-hours per week, 8-hours a day, from 8 to 5 every day work schedules are causing a lot of inefficiency in production and creates waste (i.e. loss of money). If I want someone to work an extra hour, I'm gonna have to pay him over-time, which is costly. So, in the name of increasing profits (i.e. doing my job), I adopt a flexible schedule where some workers come in at 9 or 10 in the morning, and stay until 6 or 7 in the evening. This way when I need a quick task done after five, I don't need to pay over-time rates. Moreover, when they have different time schedules, they socialize less and thus work more, leading to higher productivity. So I might as well give each worker a different schedule altogether, different days off. So I'll make Bob's days off Monday and Tuesday. And let's see, who's Bob's favorite friend? Jessica! I make Jessica's days off Wednesday and Thursday. That way, they actually only meet on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. And just to shuffle things up more, I'll give Bob the morning shifts on those three days, while Jessica the night shifts, as to descrease their contact at the work place as close as possible to zero.
Husbands and wives work at different working schedules, have different days off, and have less time to socialize. Neighbors no longer have time to socialize because they have different working schedules. Besides, the working hours are set up to be too long, with almost no breaks, and excessive amount of tasks, so that by the time the worker actually makes it home, he/she would be too tired to do any extra-curricular activities. They get back home and just want to relax after a long day. Socializing is thus relegated to weekends, except Bob's weekend is different from Jessica's weekend. Jessica doesn't get to spend enough time with Bob. Their relationship gets colder with time, and we wonder why we end up having less friends as we grow older.
The manager gets to increase the company's profits, and thus keep his job, at least for a couple more years, until he has to figure out another way to increase profits. How about announcing to all workers that the one who puts more working hours (without extra pay) will get promoted by the end of the year to a "supervisor" position? (This actually happens). Divide the boys and girls at a McDonald's into teams and tell them that the team that sells most gets to have free ice-cream sundaes with unlimited chocolate fudge, then you wonder where they get all the motivation to work so hard, fast, and still manage to smile at you and tell you to come back again soon.
Eventually, the CEO will run out of ways to increase profit rates, and to keep his job, he must make the difficult decision of either buying another company (expanding) or merging with another corporation. The merger will leave so many unemployed, because they are no longer viable to the company's new strategy towards making more profits. Think of unemployment and its psychological and sociological consequences (all well-documented).
The next step for increasing profits even beyond that point is through crazy advertising and marketing techniques. The CEO, who is only innocently interested in keeping his job, must now make decisions on advertising campaigns that are most effective. The goal is to sell more, and he will do whatever gets him the highest sales. And what better advertising than the one that uses sexual denotations and connotations to drive the human instinct and manipulate them into buying those products in larger quantities? Why not sponsor a few events, build a nice monument, set up a charity fund, or call for green technology? Yes those tactics will manipulate people and lead to higher obesity, focus on sex and kill the human spirit, but the CEO just wanted to keep his job, and so did his subordinates. If the company doesn't make profits, it sinks, and so will its employees.
And here comes the greatest instance of the invisible hand showing its true catastrophic nature. Suppose that the CEO decides not to follow his own interests and refuses to kill the human spirit, or fire workers to cut down on costs. Well, the company will start losing money, and its stocks in the market will plumet, which will lead the stockholders to fire the CEO and replace him with someone else; someone even better at this game than the previous one, which means we should only expect things to get worse (more people fired, and more spirits killed). Just when we thought that it was the CEO who was in charge, we find out in this very instance that he wasn't. It was the drive for profit that was in charge. And when the CEO lost his drive for profit, he was replaced. Who replaced him exactly? The people did, the true owners of the company. And if they don't, then the company will be destroyed, making room for its competitors to climb up in its place.
So let's get this straight. The people keep those companies alive by their unlimited wants and desires (They want cell phones, so cell phone companies exist and continue to grow). But then in order for those companies to survive, they have to continue convincing people (with advertisment for instance) that they must have those cell phones! We are collectively, and without a leader, giving life to these companies. We gave life to these fake entities called corporations. We even turned them into legal persons! We allowed them to own everything on this planet, including the most vital resources (food, water, electricity, oil, etc.). So, without them, we are doomed. And without people (consumers), these corporations are doomed. They need us, as much as we need them. And we can't stop them. They are not human. They are not tangible entities. We created them, yet they are in control.
Corporations select our government officials, through the mechanism of money. They also select the way our banking system functions. They select what schools are, and what they teach, in set curricula designed to perpetuate the existence of this system. This non-human system acts just like a living organism: It acts in its own self-interest, and will do anything to protect itself from death (bankruptcy).
The System Evolves:
This system is also an evolving one. Put Blacks in the back of the bus. If they don't like it they will be arrested, beaten up by well-trained cops, put on trial, fined, pissed on (figuratively speaking), and then thrown back into the jungle that is 'society' and told to behave properly. Then you have them constantly followed by White slaves (known as policemen). Whenever a crime takes place in the neighborhood, these Blacks with former felonies are the first to be detained and interrogated. The system was unable to calculate the effects of one Rosa Parks. The Blacks united like never before, and collectively and effectively boycotted the public bus system. The system responded by saying: "This boycott won't last. They will come back because they need it." But they didn't show any sign of returning back on the bus until their demands were met. The system revised itself and found out that certain changes have to be made:
1 - Kill Black leaders and influential speakers and figures: Malcolm X, Fred Hampton, MLK, etc.
2 - Write new laws and bills guaranteeing rights (on paper) for Blacks.
3 - Put more Black people on TV, and give them more important roles in films (the smart scientist, the fantastic basketball player, or the great boxer).
4 - Promote drugs, guns, and alcohol among Black communities.
5 - Shift the blame of the Black's economic failure on the Blacks themselves.
6 - Substitute slavery (work in return for food and shelter) with freedom (work in return for money that barely provides food and shelter). As a slave, you were guaranteed a place to sleep with food and water.As a free man, you get to choose whether you want to work or not. If there is no job that pays enough to cover shelter and food, then you are to blame for your own demise, and as a free man you actually believe it is truly your own fault that you couldn't provide your kids with food.
7 - Promote Rap and Hip Hop culture in order to perpetuate the class structure and the feeling of self-hatred. Bill Cosby does a good job, regardless of his intentions, in promoting self-hate among Blacks. The system provides Bill Cosby with the microphones to express his views.
When the system, for example, figured out that it is impossible to conceal the truth from people, it adapted by filling the media with way too much conflicting information about every incident. History has more than one official version, often opposite versions, and news anchors present both sides of every story, including stories that do not have (or do not require) two sides. The American/ized people are now completely brainwashed to believe that the media's job is to give you as many versions of the story as possible, and give you the freedom to make up your own mind. This is how the system evolved. It continues to conceal the truth, by revealing it within a potpourri of other conflicting, related and unrelated, theories or news items. This is a much more effective way to conceal the truth. To simply hide the truth and wait for some smart-ass journalist to blow the whistle has proven to be harmful to the system. Instead, blow the whistle yourself, and follow it with a "so what?" attitude, and then unleash the spin doctors just to confuse the people to the point where they no longer care to know the truth any more. Take for example Obama's health reform plans. Does anyone even knows what they are any more? The media refuses to take sides, in the name of unbiased reporting, and leaving the American citizen the freedom to make up their own mind regarding the issue. Distinguishing fact from fiction would be seen as taking sides, and free Americans would actually have a problem with a news agency that sticks to one story and falsifies the other.
As for opposition groups fighting against the system, they were also taken care of. The system evolved and adapted in ways to allow for their existence yet turn them completely impotent. In the 60's they almost managed to stop a war, bring justice to government, and lift up misery from millions of people around the world, but with the loss of money. The system adapted, and created more freedom, particularly the bill of rights and the freedom of speech. The violent opposition movements (who could actually break down the system) were eliminated with actual bullets, and replaced with new leaders who focused on "peaceful" resistance, which simply meant "no resistance." The peaceful speakers were allowed to live, and the violent ones were disappeared or shot dead. MLK for example, was at first peaceful, and thus supported by the system and made famous because it served the desires of the system. But later on he turned into more violent ways of resistance, like organizing strikes, which are harmful to the system, and thus it became time to eliminate him.
The armies of the world, along with paramilitary, police, secret service, intelligence organizations like the CIA, NSA, and so on, have all become the human servants of the system. Their job is to maintain the system and it stability, because within this stability the system thrives to its maximum. They identify threats, look into them and eliminate the serious ones and keep an eye on the impotent ones lest they grow. And just as the system itself evolves, these human servants evolve as well and become more effective and potent.
The system, of course, is not necessarily intelligent. It is just a running program. This is why it does not pay any attention to the well-being of the planet or any living organism unless it simultaneously serve its purpose. So if decreasing the emission of CO2 would lead to its progress (more money), then it shall pursue it. If not, then it won't. If killing human beings, directly or indirectly, made more money than keeping them alive, then that is what it will do.
The Counter System:
What is the counter system then? And why is it necessary?
People are incapable of regaining any control over their lives as long as the system is in control, and they are clearly unable to take control away from the system, as explained above. If life may seem not so terrible for those who are reading these words, I urge you to think again: It is those who do not have access to these words that are going through the most of the suffering, and they are the majority. Every four seconds, a human being dies due to starvation (and not because there isn't enough food. The world is producing enough food to feed 12 billion people to the point of satiation, according to World Food Program statistics). They are starving to death because they can't afford to buy the food that already exists and sitting in supermarket shelves. Yes, lack of money. The food corporations want to maintain a profitable price for food, and thus would be willing to let food expire on their shelves and throw it in trash than to hand it out for free. If food was handed out for free, before its expiration date, it will drive those food prices down, which will mean less profit and probably even incurring losses to the companies. The system cannot allow this, and so approximately 900 million people (1/6 of the world) must starve, as you read these words.
Action must be taken to stop this madness. If it's not clear why we should 'care' for one another, then think of the most selfish reason of all: "you might be the system's next victim." If this doesn't drive you to care, then you can only be described as suicidal. The leading cause of death in the world is smoking (thanks to the system, we get a lot of it in all shapes and forms, especially second-hand smoke), followed by stress. Stress is the second leading cause of death, and if we were to preusme that smokers usually smoke because they're stressed out, I think we can easily move stress to the number one place. Stress leads to heart attacks, strokes, domestic violence, and the rest of the psychological/sociological consequences, including all sorts of crime. And what leads to stress but the difficulties in life, from working too much and getting paid too little, to getting way too many bills for necessities like utilities and healthcare? The system is killing us all, sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly. How can we not see our own interest in standing up against the system?
We said that action must be taken. But what action exactly? How can this system be defeated? Even if the whole world finally realizes that buying food, driving cars, using electricity, are actually leading to environmental disasters, as well as our own demise, what can they possibly do? It is highly unlikely that people would simply give up those necessities, or give up their jobs, or simply stop seeking money. Suppose that we successfully boycott a certain corporation's products until it goes bankrupt. But then what about its employees who are not jobless? And look at how many more unemployed worldwide there will be for every corporation we destroy through boycotting its products. By boycotting these corporations, we would be shooting ourselves in the foot. We would be destroying our lives with our own hands. The system has evolved over the past centuries in a way that entertwines its fate with ours. If the system goes down, so will we.
This is why I strongly believe ... that the only way to defeat this system, without killing ourselves in the process, is to design another system to take the current system's place, gradually. This way, the counter system will be like a cancer to the current system. It will kill it from within, and without harming us because for every 1% of deleted files from the current system, there is a 1% uploaded files from the new "counter" system. So at any given moment, the system is running at 100% capacity.
This will require a very careful and prolonged study of the current system. From the brief observation we have presented here, the current system's fuel seems to be money (M3). This intangible spirit, dwelling inside our currency bills and coins, credit cards, debit cards, instruments, and electronic bank accounts, seems to be the system's main life valve.
I propose we design a new form of money (i.e. means of exchange) that is designed to make a better world. In other words, a form of money that cannot be gotten through robbery, corruption, injustice, war, crime, hunger, etc.
To be more specific, I propose we set up our own central bank which supplies this new money.
We may not be able to change the laws of physics, but we can surely change the laws of money. If we create a money system (a banking system) that is crime-proof, would crime continue to rise, or even exist? If no crime can ever be rewarded with money, will crime still continue to exist? The answer is no, and thus the development of such money becomes the solution to almost all our problems.
If we end up living in a new system where money cannot be gotten through war, war will no longer exist. If money cannot be gotten through robbery or bribary, then they will cease to exist. Democracies will function once again, and society can truly begin to progress.
Money in the Counter System:
There will be a new Central Bank. It may start nationally, but in the end must be tied into all others across nations, into an International Central Bank.
1 - In this Central Bank, a bank account is like an ID card. It can only be created in the name of an individual. Bank accounts cannot be created in the name of a company, office, or any organization no matter how large or small. Bank accounts must belong to actual individuals (human beings). In this system, corporations will no longer exist (cannot exist even if they wanted to).
2 - There will be no cash or coins (physical currency). Thus, one's money is entirely accounted for in those bank accounts. Cannot have money outside your bank account. So let's say Johnny wanted to hide his company's profit in some offshore account, he can't. Johnny has only one bank account, as he has only one ID, and only one bank. Johnny cannot hide or accumulate any money other than that which is shown in his bank account.
3 - All transcations shall be electronic, using a magnetic card similar to the current system's credit cards or debit cards, except it shall function more similarly to a debit card. There are no loans in this International Central Bank, as the bank's goal is not to make profit.
4 - When Johnny swipes his bank card at a store, the money will be automatically transferred from Johnny's account into the shop owner's account. Since they all deal with the same exact bank, and with the technology available, this is easily achieved.
5 - Salaries and wages are paid electronically and instantly. So when Johnny swipes his card at, say, a supermarket, then the amount of the transcation will be transferred from Johnny's account into Sam's (the owner's) account. But then a percentage of that amount will be automatically transferred from Sam's account into the employees' accounts based on their salary rates.
6 - These bank accounts have caps. A cap shall be determined through a mathematical formula designed based on CPI and other relevant measures to account for inflation and deflation of prices.
7 - The amount of money in one bank account cannot exceed the cap. For example, let's say the cap is set at $100,000. The supermarket owner (Sam) already has $95,000 in his account. And within a month, Johnny and his friends continue to buy groceries from Sam, and thus Sam's account reaches $100,000. At the next transcation, Johnny makes a purchase for $100 worth of goods. The $100 is deducted from Johnny's account, but can no longer enter Sam's account because it has reached the cap, so the entire $100 will be transferred automatically to Sam's employees' accounts. Then suppose all of Sam's employees' accounts reached their caps of $100,000. In that case, the amount shall be transferred automatically to those who have the least amounts in their bank accounts system-wide, increasing by $1 for each account. This means 100 accounts (with lowest amount of money in them) will increase by $1 each.
8 - Following the concept of "rational choice," Sam would find it in his interest to constantly keep the balance in his account below the cap of $100,000. Thus, he would be more inclinded to spend his money, which stimulates the economy. In other words, in this system, it is the "richest" who will be forced to stimulate the economy by their spending, not the poor. Another probability: The rich Sam may find it more worthwhile to hire extra workers. So at least the money that he can't keep (beyond the cap) is actually transforming into labor that benefits his store. This shall increase employment (decrease unemployment), following rational choice.
9 - There will be some rich people who are not business-minded, and will not constantly worry about how to keep the account under the cap, and thus will just let the account overflow and allow the system to take care of their excess profit (beyond the cap) as the system sees most fit.
10 - The claim that this will demotivate people from working hard and producing more is invalid in this system. Yes, maybe Sam will be demotivated to enlarge his supermarket, turning it into some kind of Wal-Mart of Sam's Club, but it will not demotivate Johnny, the construction worker, from working harder because he still hasn't reached his cap (probably far away from it). In fact, this exactly what we need. We need to demotivate the rich from becoming richer, while simultaneously motivate the poor into wanting to become rich.
11 - In accordance with the previous point, there will be less waste in the economy. There will be no over-production as it is guaranteed not to generate excess profit or income. Suppose the demand for a certain product increases, all Sam has to do is hire more workers or increase the workers' pay (because he can't retain the money for himself). If a bunch of workers become rich enough, they may want to start their own supermarket, to meet the excess demand.
12 - One would ask: If no one person is allowed to hold more than our estimated cap of $100,000 at any single point in time, then how will anyone be able to start up any business? How can Sam have his supermarket to begin with? The $100,000 are barely enough to cover one's daily expenses. The answer will be given in the following points (13-16):
13 - Because it is too expensive for one rich individual to start up a business, partnership becomes extremely necessary. This is a good thing. Sam has to have several partners, who will profit as much as Sam does. As a matter of fact, it would be better, in this system, for Sam to turn his supermarket into a Co-operative. In other words, the employees become the owners; the owners are the employees.
14 - We already have an actual example in the "current" system where a company can propser without too much start-up costs. Take Carrefour for example (a French-based supermarket giant). All the products on their shelves have not been bought by carrefour. The contract that Carrefour drew with goods suppliers states that suppliers may place their products at Carrefour's shelves but cannot ask for any money until after three months from the date of sale. For example, the coca-cola company puts 500 six-packs of coca-cola in Carrefour's warehouse and shelves. Carrefour doesn't pay coca-cola anything at this point. Then within the first month, Carrefour sells 200 six-packs for $600. Carrefour then gets to keep those $600 in their bank account, let it sit and accumulate interest for three months, then coca-cola company is given their money which they had asked for three months ago "$550," for those 200 six-packs. Carrefour gets to keep the $50 profit, as well as the 10% annual interest accumulated for three months (which is $10). Apply this system to all the products in carrefour, and you can see the crazy amount of profits that carrefour makes, with almost no cost and no risk. You see, coca-cola only receives money for the six-packs that have actually been sold. In the new system, a similar concept may be followed, except on a smaller scale, and without interest accumulation.
15 - In the new system, coca-cola will put 50 six-packs of coca-cola on Sam's supermarket shelves, without asking Sam to pay up in front. Whenever those six-packs are sold, coca-cola collects, automatically. So for example, when Johnny swipes his card to buy two six-packs for $6, $5 will be transferred into coca-cola's supplier's account, while only the $1 profit will go into Sam's account, and then distributed to his employees (or partners).
16 - How can coca-cola company exist then? The same process that applies to Sam's supermarket will apply to coca-cola or any other company in the world. If a company like coca-cola cannot sustain itself within this new system, it may have to dissolve, or re-establish itself in a way that is fit for the new system. In the new counter-system, coca-cola company wouldn't be interested in forcing Indians to drink coca-cola instead of tea, or stealing water from Indian acquafers to be bottled and sold to those Indian villagers in the shape of Dasani-like bottles. All such inhumane acts will no longer be taken because the profit motive will no longer exist. Indians will thus continue to drink tea and get free water from their acquafers, while those who wish to drink coca-cola may still do so.
17 - In this new counter-system, we don't have to worry about food-safety, because food suppliers will be on smaller scale, and most likely owned by people we actually know and live close by. The meat, milk, veggies, fruits, and so on, will no longer be injected with hormones or pecticides and such harmful chemicals, because the profit factor no longer exists. In fact, employers will find it more useful to spend their excess profit (which they cannot retain as profit) on actually enhancing the quality of the meat. They will be spending excess profit, if any, on better safety standards, and that will become their competitive edge in the market. Rational choice, in this system, will lead to this result.
18 - In the counter-system, we don't have to worry about harmful medication and drugs, or doctors who try to give us surgeries or prescribe medicine that we don't really need, because the profit factor is no longer there. Doctors cannot be persuaded by pharmaceutical companies because there can be no financial gain. Plus, those pharmaceutical companies would not have enough money to spend on such campaigns.
19 - In the counter-system, advertisement will become so cheap and available and accessible to everyone. Because of the lack of profit, business people will find it too expensive to advertise their products. This will push advertising costs down, as the demand for advertising falls. TV programs won't be interrupted with 50% commercials, and newspapers and magazines will become lighter.
20 - In the counter system, the media and news agencies will actually be more inclinded to report truthful news, because they will no longer allow companies to control them with money. It will no longer be in their interest to mislead the population because there is no profit factor in misleading people any more. Companies would be too small to have the power, or desire to persuade their viewers of certain aspects.
21 - In the counter system, radical education will become the norm. Radical education will become part of the curriculum, replacing the old profit-motivated curriculum. School owners, administrators, and principals will no longer be interested in having their students get higher grades, because there can be no personal monetary gain from having a high rate of passing exams, as is the situation in the current system. If there is no money to be made from faking exam results, then examination will become more honest, and corporations will no longer have a vested interest in colleges around the world.
22 - In the counter system, poverty will be automatically eradicated, without waging a war on poverty or taking any steps. The caps on bank accounts will ensure that money will continue to be distributed towards the less fortunate ones.
23 - In the counter system, all housing will become affordable, as there are no interest rates. Since high profits are not sought after, it would be pointless to over-price any housing units. It would also be pointless to own an entire apartment complex, or an entire high rise, as the incoming rent or mortgage would always exceed the cap on the account, and thus overflow and go back into the system, which means go back to the people who need it most, which means everyone will be able to afford housing. Thus, real estate agents, engineers, builders, will be more focused on quality rather than quantity. The quality of the housing unit will become the competitive edge in the market.
24 - In the counter system, couples will no longer get divorced because of fights over money. All statistics show that in the current system, the number one reason for divorce is money-related arguments and problems. Divorce and suicide rates will continue to shrink in the counter system.
25 - The counter system cannot be forced upon people. They must choose to become part of it. In other words, every individual must choose, willingly, to open a bank account at the counter-system international central bank. This is where "radical education" comes in handy. People must be educated to see what is the counter-system, and how it will make a better world for all of us. In this radical education, there can be no brain-washing (because brain-washing effects can be undone). On the contrary, this radical education must also teach the benefits of the current system, as well as all kinds of theories, theses, and anti-theses, and let the individual grow mentally and spiritually to the point where he/she can "see" for himself or herself why the counter system is badly needed.
26 - The counter-system is not like communism. Individual freedom will still be emphasized. The cap on bank accounts is justified as one's duty to family, city, country, and all humanity. So yes, live your own way, do whatever job you want to do. Seek entertainment and enjoy life to the fullest, and seek more money. But know that you are not allowed to save that extra money. Either you spend it now, or we will spend it for you. This counter-system will secure your own life (housing, healthcare, education, jobs, etc) so it is in fact in your best interest as a free individual.
27 - Once the counter-system picks up momentum, it will grow exponentially, and the current-system will slowly die at first, but then its death will speed up. Once the current system is dead, there will be no one capable of "opting out" of the counter system. Just like the current system, the new counter-system is invincible and cannot be destroyed by any individual or group of individuals. You can't opt out of it, no matter how hard you try. The counter system is not only invincible, but also invisible (intangible). It will be everywhere and you can't escape it even if you could fly into outer space.
28 - This has been the overview of the counter-system. The technical procedures of how to set it up and get it actually running will require further study and research. This is why I would like to put together a team of super intelligent human beings, who can actually work on this and make it happen. We need to locate the gaps and holes and figure out how to fix them, and how to set up contingency plans in case of minor or major system failure.