Money trading and fractured economies
The most ridiculous invention, designed to serve personal enrichment and the rise of national economies, is trading in money (bank capital, securities, lending, investing with future profits, etc.). Equally, blatant speculation includes small bank loans, lows for purchases as collateral for personal property, etc. Have you never received a bank “offer” to buy $ 1000 for $ 1300 by mail? Of course, in annual installments! Pardon me, what did the ordinary usurers do? The same principle is the basis for the work of “currency exchange” offices, which in Russia, for example, are more than tobacco kiosks. People related to them live only on the difference in prices between buying and selling currency. From the point of view of the interests of humanity and justice, it was impossible to come up with more nonsense.
Those. some people get rich simply because they borrow or exchange money “at interest”, that is, in fact, they trade in money: from the universal and conditional equivalent of value, which itself has zero value, money itself becomes a commodity! But they exist only insofar as the division of labor between members of human society is expedient and necessary. Naturally, such “trade” is not accompanied by the appearance in the world of anything generally useful in material or humanitarian terms. This is what Henry Ford called in his book “a decent way of stealing.” Then why such trade is necessary? Yes, simply because the general organization of the human economy is absurd and accidental, and exists only thanks to the “legitimacy” of personal egoism and strength,
Usurious interest represents amounts that are simply expropriated from those who earned them by creating real products. The money expropriated in this way is used for the personal enrichment of the owners of the initial capital and investments, i.e. money is sold again and so on ad infinitum.
Such economic mechanisms of accumulation are unnatural also because capital is selected from an external source until it is completely depleted or until such a profit can be obtained. The “scooper” does not care that it is possible to “scoop out” everything to the bottom – the source is, as it were, likened to a mine for the extraction of natural resources: to scoop up everything and throw it away.
Speculative currency transactions are also mentioned in UN documents. They indicate, for example, that the “Tobin tax” [32] on income from virtual currency transactions in the amount of only one-tenth of a percent, allows you to receive more than fifty billion US dollars a year! This means that the total global “income” from these virtual transactions is expressed in the figure of 50 trillion dollars a year – almost 10 annual US budgets! This virtual money corresponds to real values in which human labor, ingenuity, time, raw materials, and materials are invested. It is not surprising that the “result” is further mass impoverishment and the illusory nature of all attempts to break out of the grip of poverty and hunger.
The psychology of a borrower is understandable, but no one voluntarily takes money “at interest” – they have to do it, because there is only such a wild mechanism for getting out of a difficult situation. The mechanism is completely artificial, reflecting only the greedy philosophy of the giver: “I will give you a loan, but you will give significantly more than you borrow and provided that you have something that I will take in case of no return.” It is hopeless to hope for the harmony of human relations with such a philosophy.
In a single economy, the type of product and the scale of production must obey the principle of priority – mankind will never be able to do everything at the same time! The concentration and directions of investment in all areas should serve the routine goals of people (food, housing, health care, transport, etc.) or the highest goals of mankind (science, promising projects, etc.), and not the profits of a random person who have become an end in itself.
The selfishness and commercialism of entrepreneurs temporarily serve the development of the economy and infrastructure, corresponding to the current stage of socialization. They have made it possible to dramatically accelerate technological progress, but have sacrificed (and continue to sacrifice) generations of people [33] without asking them if they want to sacrifice their lives for the accelerated development of technology, increased productivity, and an abundance of goods for the uncertain. next generations.
And in order not to strengthen the myth about the naturalness of such economic methods, it is necessary to openly explain the inevitability of such economic management only for a limited time. Those. its transience and the need for gradual replacement. This should be clearly stated, and people employed in this area should shyly avoid advertising their “financial successes” so as not to generate myths about the cleanliness and universal acceptability of these forms of national and personal enrichment.
Thus, the existing situation is contrary to common sense and can temporarily be used as the most affordable means of increasing the efficiency of investments, but only temporarily! Because of the development of society, although it happens “for the time being,” but not due to the desire to “build”, but to make a profit. The absurdity of the picture is obvious when, for example, the production of drugs serves not a more effective treatment of patients, but the development of the pharmaceutical industry! Understanding this should be as unconditional as informing the patient that the prescribed medication should not be abused due to deadly side effects.
It is difficult to get away from stereotypes of thinking, including economic ones, especially if you are personally surrounded by relative prosperity. But people have already stepped on the rake of apparent well-being so many times that only a mystification of consciousness can explain the continuation of universal blindness. It’s time to start calling everything by their proper names.
