by evilgenius » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 11:29:15
The worst loss under a crypto currency dominated future would be the will to power that debt based systems give man. What people with desires or ideas can do today is borrow in order to fulfill their vision. Like the kings of old, they can fail and undergo bankruptcy, but there are provisions in the system for their credit to recover over time. The system will loan them money again. Most entrepreneurs are serial entrepreneurs. Many of those have gone bankrupt at some point in time. You can say that some version of begging, an online call for funds from a wide diversity of parties, might serve to make up the difference. That's a fair assumption, but I think it leads to compliance rather than an exercise of will. As it stands now, once an entrepreneur has been approved they can spend their money as they like. It is assumed they have a vision and will either fulfill it or not. Unless there are restrictions that come with the loan, meeting performance standards or making arranged payments in time, there is no callable attribute upon a person's vision. If they can qualify, they can take the chance. And the success of the chance is up to them. Mass appeals are a dangerous thing that runs counter to this, in that they force a level of compliance that threatens the personal autonomy of the entrepreneur in a manner that can threaten the nature of their vision before they start working at putting it into practice. It's one thing to face enforced change because of pitting one's self against the natural world, and having to realize your vision was too wide, and another to supplant your vision in order to prosper mediocrity. Mankind needs those who have vision. They are the people who have driven civilization forward. Yes, there is wisdom in the crowd, but that wisdom is a counting type of wisdom. It doesn't see what cannot be seen without the eye.
We all know that the system is corrupt, but the essential corruption doesn't lie in the structure. The corruption lies in the implementation. It lies in the greed to make loans to people for other purposes than the will to power. It lies in excusing paltry things, like restaurant tabs, as being, in some fashion, at least a shadow of the will to power. The egregious excesses are built out of wrongful use of debt. The bankers, whom so many call out as traitors, are there to help, but they can easily see how much more money they can make by making loans for purposes outside of fulfilling the will to power. It's easy for them to get away with it as well because the people want so many things and an untrained people who don't know the value of contentment are prone to give such high place to their wants that the temptation to allow excess is overwhelming. When people use debt in order to comply rather than to become they run the risk of falling into this trap. A simple way to see the difference might be to ask if the thing that has been purchased with debt provides an income greater than the cost of servicing the debt. If it doesn't, then it could be debt incurred in order to comply. Debt that is used to purchase assets that are too high risk is also dangerous. That's a shady line, though, because some people are good at managing high risk assets. Housing is the greatest driver of debt, and, yet, a house can't really be called an asset. You can't call a house an asset when upon selling the one you live in you immediately discover that you have to live somewhere else. Unless a person is downsizing, there is no profit in the scheme. You can see the corruption present in the system when you look at housing. The thing is, it would be much too pedantic to rid the world of it altogether. People do have to live somewhere. And people do have to eat. If they cannot have those simple things, then the very achievement of them can seem like the will to power.
I could wail on and on, but the basic truth is that becoming a debt slave is a person's own choice. It has to be. But the regulation in the system ought to be stricter, and the education of the people - before they get old enough to be considered personally responsible - ought to be greater. Along with those changes, there is another thing which hangs palpably in the air to me, and that is how we must address the role of privilege in society. We have attempted to use loose borrowing standards, which act against borrowing as primarily a tool to achieve the will to power in individual lives, as a means to address lack of opportunity and suppression that the prevalence of privilege spreads throughout society. We can only get so far with that, after which other things have to happen. Money can't do everything.