top of page

Eye opener for July 8, 2023

With the cost of food, gas and, well, everything you need to survive going up, perhaps we need an alternative to the current economic ststem. Maybe we need to question the motives of those who control the economy.

Whether that leader be someone like Jerome Powell (current head of the Federal Reserve) or Janet Yellen (current Secretary of the Treasury and former head of the Federal Reserve) or any number of award-winning economists, who have they seemingly failed a majority of Americans? Maybe the question should be asked as to why the Federal Reserve was allowed to inject 5 trillion dollars into America's money supply, why it was given to those at the end of the money chain (the rich), and why did they fail to predict the impacts that such an infusion of cash would cause to the economy.

When that five (5) trillion dollars was created out of thin air during the Pandemic I remember the concern was that it would cause inflation. What I don't remember however is anyone pushing back or attempting to stop it. I am certain there were those financially savvy individuals or groups who could explain why and how this money would harm the nation, just as I'm certain those voices weren't allowed to be heard. Think about it, the people who would benefit from all of the new money also control the media, so why would they allow for descending voices.

Looking back, I remember a time before COVID when money was injected into the economy and the same fear of inflation was present. What I don't remember was anyone in a leadership role pushing too hard against all of this extra currency back then either. I can only imagine how all of the giants in the economic field breathed a sigh of relief when inflation didn't hit in 2021 or 2022 and how deflated they must now feel as inflation threatens the lives of so many. To be honest, I actually can't imagine the wealthy being concerned about the impact inflation is having on the masses. For one their lives are not fundamentally changed by such things and, more importantly, they are the ones causing the inflation and even more importantly benefitting from it. They manufacture the products. They set the prices for those products so the reap the profits from those products.

While I get the greed and socialpagty that results, I am confused. What perplexes me how they failed to realize that the manmade inflation would hit home at some point. How did they NOT see that adding 5,000,000,000,000 dollars to the supply of money wouldn't increase inflation to the point where people would grow angry. You can't flood a market with 5 trillion of anything and not realize it would eventually lose its utility. We've seen what hyperinflation can do historically.

Perhaps they thought that controlling the Worlds reserve currency would protect us from hyperinflation. If that was the belief however, why then would you undermine that status through so many sanctions as to encourage so many around the world to abandon your currency as the world reserve? Why would you practically force so many people and nations worldwide to have to choose another means to settle trade and debts? While baffling, a more important question would be what can you do once inflation, especially the hyper variety starts to look like a possibility? Is there a solution?

Perhaps there is no answer on a national level. Personally, I think the Federal government is a lost cause as far as helping the majority of their constituents out, so let's avoid that hornet's nest for now. I think we should consider a smaller, much more local approach to all of the problems we face. We should consider an approach similar to mesh networking.

Mesh networking consists of individual computer networking with other individual computers to for small networks that create larger networks that serve to share data and information amongst themselves. Inherent in such networks is a redundancy that helps avoid any interruption of service, as one node or individual computer of smaller network can go down, but it's flow of data is not stopped, but rerouted as necessary.

Used as a means to share resources, implementing an equivalent to mesh networking would also mean less reliance on centralized systems. Instead of relying on a corporation to provide your internet, you would rely on several smaller companies or even individuals to provide access to the network, giving you the option to pick and choose from several providers. This not only increases competition price-wise but it also forces innovation and provides for better service. If Bob's internet is too slow, you switch to Suzanne's network.

But how would this work for other products and services? Well, if you can break up the internet into bite-sized pieces, you can break up a lot of other supply chains in a similar manner. Before there were warehouse clubs like Costco and BJs, there were neighborhoods in which people would pool their money together to purchase items they all needed at wholesale prices. They would basically buy an entire trailer of goods in bulk at much lower prices, savings hundreds of not thousands in the process. The only thing stopping us now is the will to do so and maybe some insane local law(s) that need to be changed.

Another idea might be to dig up every lawn in American, grow whatever crops you can grow, share amongst your neighbors and reduce the need to have you food shipped in from elsewhere. While you may not be able to reduce the need for outside supplemental supplies of groceries, you can reduce it and if your neighbors or neighboring communities grow different crops or raise different animals, you could have a much bigger impact than many think possible. Drive around, look at all of the lawns you see and imagine each one growing different fruits or vegetables.

As much as these ideas may seem unreasonable to some, consider how unreasonable relying on our government is becoming as we fund wars for other countries while we allow more people to become homeless. Does it really matter if the hundred billion plus we sent to Ukraine could house every homeless person? What if we could only house 10% of those without homes for that $100,000,000,000 dollars? What did we get for the bombs Ukraine bought? We did we buy with all the dead Russians and Ukrainians? How did we make our people safer? Who do we need to defend ourselves against? Do you really feel our democracy is intact when one of the only two viable political parties in our nation used the fact that they are a private organization that can choose whomever they want in their primary as a defense against rigging the election against Bernie Sanders? Look it up. You can't make it up.

0 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Eye opener for May 16, 2024: Is anyone listening?

When I ask the question asked in the title, I not necessarily talking about me. I am also not talking about the literal instances of listening with one's ears. I am wondering rather people are paying


bottom of page