This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Undebtors: Sworn Enemies Of The Vampires Of Debt
Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,
Those who refuse debt, regardless of the sacrifice, are starving the parasitic, exploitive machine; those with debt are feeding it.
We hear a lot about debtors, and very little about undebtors. I define an undebtor as an individual or entity that has sworn off debt or considers debt a necessary evil that must be paid off as quickly as possible regardless of the sacrifices required to do so.
Undebtors are created by these conditions:
1. People with cultural/familial values that eschew/fear debt.
2. People who have been crushed by debt in the past and refuse to repeat the experience.
3. People who recognize debt as the status quo's favored instrument of oppression, control and exploitation.
4. People who understand that paying off debt is the easiest way to earn a zero-risk significant return on one's money.
If you pay off a 12% credit card, that's the equivalent of earning 12% on your money.
There's no mystery as to the low profile of undebtors in the mainstream media: undebtors are the equivalent of the cross to the vampire-parasites peddling debt.How can banks and other financial parasites make money off the undebtors? They can't, and therein lies the problem for the status quo, which lives off the blood of debt extracted from debt-serfs.
The profits skimmed off debt fuel the speculative gambles that benefit Wall Street, and fund the politico lackeys and toadies who enforce the power of banks and Wall Street.
Debt also funds insurance companies and pension funds. Remember, every student loan dragging a starving student into servitude is owned by a pension fund or insurer as a solid, high-yield asset and every subprime auto loan that is extracting a pound of flesh from a marginal borrower feeds Wall Street's profit machine.
People talk about starving the machine. You want to truly starve the machine? Get out of debt and stay out of debt, regardless of the sacrifices needed to do so. I personally know many immigrants to the U.S. who paid off 30-year mortgages in four years or less. How did they do it?
1. Everyone in the family 16 or older worked.
2. Everyone's earnings went to pay off the mortgage.
3. No money was squandered on cable, dish TV, eating out, new clothing, costly vacations, etc. Zip. zero, nada.
There was a saying in the 1960s--you're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem. Those who refuse debt, regardless of the sacrifice, are starving the parasitic, exploitive machine; those with debt are feeding it.
Yes, I have debt, too, but we are doing everything in our power to pay it off as soon as possible. That's all anyone can do. But it's important to do so, starting now.
»
- 38352 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Sure - now I have no debt but the beast finds ways to suck me dry - property tax increases, inflation, sales taxes.........
yup. Paid off the house but I still have HOA fees, prop taxes, and utitlies, so that's $1000. Take the bus and train instead of driving but that's another $300. Then there's health insurance $500 and food $500. Thrown in $200 for house maintenance and even with no debt, just surviving takes $2500. You're a debt slave even when you're not.
BKbrolier. Right, b/c once you are really free there is no salary to tax. ObomberCare is my biggest monthly expense by far. The Matrix needs to be fed. My neighbor is selling his cadaillac b/c his medical insurance tripled for some reason. Just he and wifey - no kids.
I have zero debt, own an apartment, a car and still have a lot in my bank account (which in Norway is guaranteed up to a certain level, and I'm within those limits).
Never felt so good about life as now. While all around me people go neck deep in debt. When this cardhouse collapses it will be nasty, but also it will create oportunities for investors with available capital (like me). So I'm just waiting...
Won't pretend to know Norway's banking laws, but if they are like the rest of the EU, and now the US, when things go bad your money is going to be Cyprus'd.
And, yes, we have that BS "guarantee" too.
So did Cyprus.
Expenses of owning a house, eating, transport, obamacare, hoa, etc are high that's why we're all lucky to have that generous fed-fixed 0.01% yield on our hard-earned savings.
That's why it's a struggle, life-death, for those 3 remaining Middle Class private sector people to stay afloat while they row the boat for the FSA.
Norwegian banking law protects up to about 300.000 USD in current NOK value from bankrupcy. Can they slime their way around it? Perhaps, but there would be a huge uproar if it happened. I've already started looking into diversifying more into 1 ounce gold coins.
I actually have 2% yield on my savings :-) not a huge amount but its something at least. It's really fucking hard to find a secure way to protect the nest-egg. I dont want any complicated crap that backfires. And the stockmarket I see as incredibly overvalued. I'll rather sit out the shitstorm until the timing feels right, then jump into some solid longterm business (energy/pharma) with good yield. In that respect loosing 2-3% annualy due to inflation is acceptable for a short term.
"Can they slime their way around it? Perhaps, but there would be a huge uproar if it happened."
They send children off to war to be killed. They don't give a rats ass about uproars...
Norway is not quite the same as the US though :-) I agree that our politicians are also slimeballs, but Norwegian politicians dont have the enormous security aparatus that you guys have. I think they would be quite nervous about stepping too hard on our toes. Norway aint that far behind the US in guns owned pr household. And once Norwegians gets pissed off...it's not that far to Oslo.
And yeah, I think there should be a law stating that "All politicians must enlist their first born son or daughter in a frontline first in, last out regiment at the time they are elected". And if the country is ever enganged in war or warlike situations, that regiment is the first to be sent in, no names excluded.
Put some personal loss on the line, then lets see how hardball they can play with other peoples lives.
I agree. I also think if a cop uses deadly force for whatever reason it means permanent automatic removal from any patrol job and either a desk job with no weapons or retirement from the force with or without a pension.
These cops need to be held accountable for the use of deadly force, not have it as a first choice.
Have you been a cop?
I doubt it, with that silly comment.
Try putting your ass out there for a few years and see if you don't change your opinion
Killing people is not an acceptable way to arrest them. it's complete BS.
"Try putting your ass out there for a few years and see if you don't change your opinion"
I've got 2 kids that are cops starting in 1989. Over 35 combined years between them and they have never had to kill anyone. I'll bet you I've given this more thought than you have.
If you pay off a 12% credit card, that's the equivalent of earning 12% on your money.
Where can you get a 12% credit card today? Did this article arive from the 1970s?
I have an 8.9% card through my local CU. $5k limit, they would probably bump it to $10K if I asked. They're pretty hungry for yield.
That's a truly brilliant idea.
I have had a similar idea to solve the problems with the multicultural "paradises" within probably two months: private schools forbidden for children of politicians and they have to be sent - for their own benefits ofcourse! - only to public schools and to prevent racism, ofcourse to the schools with the highest diversity enrichment.
And to make the legislative package a whole, their generous parents, being responsible politicians loving all people, they should be encouraged not to hide in closed villages, these backward monocultures, but instead should be forced by law to have their main place of residence in the capital's culturally most enriched and diversified district.
And since journalists are also so keen about diversity, we should be generous and also the press and media owners should be included in this law.
I guarantee that within a few weeks the problem was solved and 90% of AIPAC supporters - which probably is half of Congress - would leave for their other passport's country...
Oi veh!
Bank guarantees can be changed easily. Was 30k EUR here in Netherlands, upped it to 100k 'temporarily'. My advise: keep a very close eye on a small message in the paper that the temporary measure is no longer needed and/or the amount is lowered again.
Second advise: do not reply on goverment (in any way). If shit really hits the fan and 'guarentee' can probably not be upheld by the already broke governments. Chance of a bail-in (like Cyprus or Austria more recently) is 100-fold larger.
Chance of a bail-in (like Cyprus or Austria more recently) is 100-fold larger.
Sorry, you have been hugely disinformed:
How can it be a bail-in if a private company, like a bank, goes bust and the customers of that company lose money?
It's no bail in, it's the most natural thing in the world. You give money to a private bank, the private bank goes bust, your money is lost. Where's the bail-in?!
And where's the bail-in if debt owners of bancrupt companies do not get their money back?!
The bail-in takes place, if TAXPAYERS have to pay for the losses of others! That's the bail-in!
Congratulations, you are the perfect Goyim.
UK BofE minutes suggest they have considered not declaring a default and bailing in depositors, repaying them with equity in dead bank. Who wants to own a share of a floating shit? they don't or they would not suggest it. By not defaulting, no FSCS pay outs. They just couldn't do it, back in 2006 it was over 160B GBP against a tiny 4B recue fund. Hate to think what it is now
Likely we will quickly see an event, capital controls right away. Already they are pushing in a system to verify VISA on exit on mass not just on entry. Shortly after I'd expect to see a bail in; likely include pensions, can't see how they could not. All transfered to some future equity with legal proceedings lasting years, or at least as long as gov in power. The assets they've been pushing like housing will be taxed to hell over night. Its the main reason I see them pushing ownership because it is so easy to control and you can't walk off with it if you dont like it
Two. One got fired yesterday.
Welcome to the club, guys. Lots of those fees mentioned above you would have to pay regardless of whether you are carrying debt or not. Others can be avoided outright (like HOA fees if you make sure where you live doesn't have a HOA).
There's ways around some taxes, too, if you're inventive. Probably more trouble than it's worth unless you're talking about a lot of money, but it can be managed.
Some of you 1099 guys who are incorporated probably know what I mean. Getting out of debt is 'First Gear'. But there's a reason the transmission in your car has more than one forward gear. Different gears are efficient at different speeds. But unless you've got off the line in 1st gear, the other gears don't matter and might as well not exist.
More than the money savings (and a modicum of freedom it affords), I like that being debt free makes me INVISIBLE. I am like a ghost. I pass through places without hardly anyone ever knowing I was there. Yes, I have FICO score and a credit report but there's not much in it the last 10 years and everything just reads "pays as agreed". In a world measured in debt, I CAN NOT BE VIEWED USING THEIR TECHNOLOGY. I can hide in plain sight.
Marketers descend like vultures when they detect money. Buy a house or a new car and the data miners sell your information and you're smothered in "offers."
My throwaway phone with no voicemail that I only use one or two days a month used to be relegated to online dating, but it's the number that companies that insist on a phone number for big transactions get now. My real number can stay silent for days thanks to this.
Paying cash whereever you can makes you surprisingly invisible as well. It's not just the NSA that's watching your credit transactions.
You aren't kidding. I just paid off my wife's care about a year early on a 4 year loan that she had before we got married, and new we get letters and phone calls all the time from ford and GM. And the car just hit 5 years old, so any factory warranty it had is gone, so shortly after it's 5 the birthday we started getting calls trying to sell us extended warranties. And they almost all call my phone too, which means Ford either gave or sold them my number, since the only place that vehicle was ever linked to my phone number was when I took it in for recall servicing, my name wasn't on the loan at all, which really bothers me. Prob won't buy another vehicle from them, which scratches the last American manufacturer from my list, since the other big 2 are bailout queens.
Seriously? Fukking hell. Really time to get out of the US guys, despite it's amaing landscape and all.
Got a new law here some time ago "do not call me register". You can get in/out and then it is forbidden for any company to call you for any sales pitch or other. Works great - not 1 call in 4/5 years or so.
We have that law in the US. It scared the marketers off for about a year. Now they break the law and use fake phone numbers. There's no enforcement. The phone companies know exactly who's doing it, but since they're getting paid by the asshole telemarketers, they pretend like it's out of their control.
I have to assume the main reason it' not happening in other countries isn't the law but the enforcement. We also have issues with scammers and telemarketers that aren't even in the US calling, and there's almost nothing that can do other than kill the phone company trunks coming in from outside.
What if we could get just 1% of the US population to outright REFUSE to comply with ALL tax laws? Are they going to come after 3.5 million people all at once? If anything is going to change in the US there must be solidarity and a willingness to sacrifice some of the "good life" for our principles. Compliance is the key to the manipulative skimmers success. Why do they get to screw us with our own money?
BECAUSE WE GIVE IT TO THEM !!!
Lets give them the collective finger and say in no uncertain language NO MORE !!!
We MUST withdraw our consent, it is the only real power we have left. Voting is a total waste of time as is the entire collective political process. Submitting our consent gives the whole scam the veneer of legitimacy that is left.
Probably not.
It would be easier for them to delegate/sell your debt to private collection agencies.
The problem with this is the people who actually pay income taxes are the people with something to lose from fighting the system. The people with nothing to lose have no ability or need to fight the system. Only a fallen plutocrat has both the ability and the motivation to fight the system. That is why you see people like Lenny Dykstra, Wesley Snipes or Kent Hovind going to prison. They have / had assets but now are pretty much destitute so compliance is not a rewarding path.
"Are they going to come after 3.5 million people all at once?"
Yes, they will. Since these people are legal, working, residents the U.S. government will absolutely prosecute them (must make harsh examples of all of them). If they were illegally here breaking multiple laws regarding work, voting, and taxes the U.S. government will leave them alone, giving them loads of "free" (other people's) stuff, claiming that the number is too high to do anything and that we must "reform" (delete) the illegal immigration laws that are not enforced.
I have reduced my debt footprint as low as I can go without selling my home and car, both of which I have no loans for.
BUT, In the Federal Reserve System there is no money, only dollar denominated "notes" and currency which are debt obligations with interest attached to it. As you can't buy much of anything with "money" you can only use "notes" to gain "title" to something. Having the rights to the "title" means you only get to use something for which the right to use it was "purchased" with debt. The Fed. is designed to keep you from complete ownership and always in debt to them.
In other words, we don't own anything. The Federal Reserve has an "interest" in what you think is your property. The Federal Reserve System does not use money.
None the less, use their debt slavery system as little as possible.
Sell your house to your wife (or brother or ?) for 25 silver dollars. Have multiple witnesses sign the affidavit with a notary. Record it.
Then have them sell it back to you and repeat the process.
When you purchase something with lawful money you own it.
You sovereign nutters are always good for a luagh. The idea that paying for something in hard currency as opposed to notes makes any difference. Such a lark. The only difference it makes is that the feds will bust you if you try to coast under the radar on major transactions, and you can get in trouble for not reporting barter transactions to the IRS. The idea that a court of law would ask what currency you used to pay for something as opposed to what dollar figure: do you really think that would ever happen under a modern monetary system? I can't even imagine a judge understanding what you're trying to assert. He probably would order the bailiff to club you on principle.
"When you purchase something with lawful money you own it."
Until you don't pay your state/county government their $900/month property taxes. Then they forcibly evict you and sell it. It's hard to claim that that is ownership on the part of the individual. Seems like ownership on the part of the government to me.
And so what? Next you guys will tell me the secret adhesion contracts that the corporation quietly attaches to us aren't fraudulent?
I understand they claim ownership? Doesn't make it lawful though does it?
I can't understand why people even sign up for that. I told my account to go ahead and have us pay the 'fine' for being uninsured, it's a helluva lot cheaper than paying those premiums.
I dread the day they put a water meter on my well - that is the final nail in so called freedom
That would be the day before I break it off..
Guess you municipality hasn't begun to tap the 'annual well testing fee' market. On Long Island NY, this rip is worth >$500 per well per year. But true, the EPA hasn't started to carbon tax your well water consumption . . . yet.
Just wait until you get the Maryland (aye hole ex-governor O'Mally (D) - about to run for president) RAIN TAX. It is based on area that doesn't allow rain to directly touch and penetrate Mother Earth. Have a roof on your house - RAIN TAX it. Have an asphalt/concrete driveway - RAIN TAX it. Have a shed (with a roof) RAIN TAX it.
Collecting rain water is illegal in Colorado, unless you are a designated business.
You cannot collect the run off from your roof. That law has been in effect since the lumber, railroad and cattle barons ruled the West.
Government is now our God. Taxing our very respiration is already in the works.
That law makes absolutely no sense. If you're using it for domestic use, I't going to be returned to the ground eventually anyway. Whether you use it to flush your toliet, water your garden, drink it, wash your car, etc.. it all ends up back on the ground. You're just borrowing it for a little while. It's almost like that law was created simply to control people... hmmmm.
Wickard vs. Filburn 317 U.S. 111 (1942)
The federal government made it illegal for a farmer to grow crops to feed his own family; upheld by FDR's recently left-turning Supreme Court.
America's biggest problems have their roots in Two events from 1913:
1) Establishment of the Feeral Reserve
2) Establishment of the Federal Income Tax
[we are doomed...]
Survival is not guaranteed / a "right". You don't have to pay $2500 to survive; you could go live in the wilderness and forage for your own food instead of buying it from others.
If you don't work, survival is guaranteed. I know a girl who gets $900/month from the state for claiming her kid is autistic, $500/month for food via food stamps, free health care that would cost $1000 via medicaid, and free rent via Section 8 that would cost $1600. So she makes 4K/month for not working.
If she started working, she would likely make $2K a month, take home $1600 after tax, and not qualify for any of those other perks, leaving her unable to survive. It's hard to believe but hard to blame her.
well why are you living in a neighborhood with a HOA? I built my own house in the woods on land I don't legally own to avoid property tax. I live on about $300/month but I have tons of fun, and I rarely have to work!
If you don't own the land you can't get a building permit. if you build without a permit it's an illegal structure that utitlies won't service and well drillers won't touch. Apart from the worry of the state evicting you, unless you drink from the stream, carry propane tanks to your property, and have a hell of a solar system, I don't see how this is possible. If it is, then hats off to you.
BK, I'm in a similar boat. Is just the GF and I so I run 1KW of Solar, a 1,6Kw peak wind generator. The cabin is 375sqf, built with cash. Haul my water is from a friend until I can save enough for the well. And yes, I lease a 500 gl propane tank from a local reseller, don't haul it anymore.
Paid 300 a month for the land ( paid of a few months ago) 180 a year land tax, zero for electricity, about 1600 a year propane (AC in the summer) and zero for water. Trucks are paid off.
You can reduce your economic footprint to below taxable.
great post, nice to know it is possible. man's gotta have goals.
there are a thousand ways to beat taxes--just follow the tax code--Its written with loopholes galore by the entities that require the loopholes--just use them and be legal--
yup...this.
Exactly if you 'own' property but don't have an allodial title to it, you don't own it period and always wind up in debt to whoever or whatever you need aka a falsely disguised want to under some sort of coercive means to pay property taxes to for the right to 'own' properity.
You would think the founding fathers purposely obfuscated this little fact of natural law, since they probably were well aware of allodial titles and natural law.
>>>Exactly if you 'own' property but don't have an allodial title to it, you don't own it....
I like the allodial title concept, but to play the devil's advocate, I would expect that over a long enough period of time, in a finite world, the entire human population will eventually be in one of two camps: 1) hereditary land-owners, or 2) landless laborers.
But what the Hell; the system we're using now is reaching the end of its run, so I'm game for a little experimentation, neo-feudal or not.
"People talk about starving the machine. You want to truly starve the machine? Get out of debt and stay out of debt, regardless of the sacrifices needed to do so."
I disagree with this statement. Parasites will continue to feed as long as there are sufficient producers to suck off. The gov't will go in printing money and bailing out the parasites. The only way to get off this train is to stop the train. This system will only end when there is no longer sufficient producers feeding the system.
I plan to accumulate debt and service it with more debt, with no intention of paying it off. I forget where I came up with the model...
Howard Jarvis proposition 13, Better than Jesus Christ himself saved me.
So quiet you can hear a pin drop.
A bit of an oversimplification, especially considering the numerous tax breaks one can get if one takes on more debt.
In any case, tick tock motherfuckers...
If you run the numbers, the tax breaks make always for less than the compound interest you owe...
Not very familiar with sarcasm are we? Moron. But still bullshit, if you or I could get a billion dollar loan at 0.25%, I guarantee we too could become very profitable limited liability companies and our profits would far outweigh any interest, compounded or otherwise.
So, what are you waiting for ? Go grab your billion at 0.25% and live the good life, why don't you ?! Key word in your entire story is "could". Well, you cannot ! Besides, profit does not come automatically from borrowing money, you still have to generate it... meaning, you still have to have something to sell that other people want. Now, go away and get rich (/s)... jerk !
yeah but if you have growth--then its alright and everything.
If you pay off a 12% credit card, that's the equivalent of earning 12% on your money....if you happen to live where all investment gains are not taxed.
trav7777 wrote about this 5 yrs ago........
'the debt-money system is the master and all must serve it and if you do not borrow, the govt will borrow on your behalf'
I miss trav...
I've spent most of my life avoiding debt like the plague along other bad habits like a fondness for shiny metals but after all I'm merely a knuckledragging barbarian who lacks the sophistication of our betters.....
"zerohedge @zerohedge 49s49 seconds ago
LEW SAYS U.S. FULL FAITH AND CREDIT REQUIRES HIGHER DEBT LIMIT. #Ref!"
ROFLMAO
What a complete and utter retard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=11Ee02WLxGk
They are actually just the opposite, Racer - and therein lies the sobering consequence.
My wife pulled together $25K in credit card debt with one of the cards at a 28% interest rate. I had no fucking idea about it. Went to go file for divorce and then found out I would be responsible for 50% of it even though it is all in her name alone. I can stay out of debt, but me wife can't. Cheaper to keep her? Who knows...
Maybe a lesson to not have the credit card limit set beyond one's means?
Cheaper to keep her? If you could assign a $ value to misery, I'm guessing that wouldn't hold true most of the time. Don't ask me how I know.
cheaper to kill 'er.....
Since CSI that is a fool's errand
You obviously don't take your Honey hiking in mountainous terrain, with the occasional precipice and nary a human being nor camera in sight.
At least that how Montana gals get rid of pesky husbands....
There are no limited liability marriages.
When you incorporated by getting married you essentially gave your wife license to spend your money at will. Furthermore, it is obvious that you do not trust your wife with credit cards given her behaviour, but what do you think she is doing to your credit when she engages in self-entitlement by ringing up the card to 25k at 28% interest charges? Sounds to me like this is a passive aggressive tug of war that will end with _YOU_ paying off the entire outstanding debt that your wife incurred. In brief, she has your balls in her purse and she likes going shopping as a way to passively assault you right where it hurts the most.
NOTE: I was raised by a Chartered Accountant who was careful with money. While dad was always careful with the dollars, my mother was the exact opposite. In the long run, my father had to pay off my mother's credit cards when he retired. In your case, you will have to pay off your wife's cards, and her lawyer's fees, when she opts to divorce just to one up you when all is said and done. Clearly, being piled high and deep has not made you a good judge of character, Professor lost-his-Head!
stop making payments on it . When they ask for a "payment", say sure , just show me the contract signed by both parties and validate the debt i.e prove you had some "money" to lend me in the first place and explain where that "money" came from .......crickets
Yes, there is no "debt" and there is not contract. Unfortunately, 3rd party bottom feeding "debt" collectors (who don't buy "debt", but merely a list of names addresses and amounts with no documentation or validation - in other words, the presumption of a debt) no longer roll over when asked to prove up their claim. They just go straight to court and you can try to wrestle it out of them in discovery. If you answer the summons you have just accepted the position as presumptive debtor and you have an uphill fight on your hands and you better know what you are doing. Part 5 of Judge Dale's The Great American Adventure" (google it) has the best solution I've come across yet. Return the summons and complaint to the clerk of the court within 3 days (avoid tacit procuration) certified mail with a notary's certificate of service. Poof! It's over. Twelve dollars for the certified priorty mailing and 5 to 10 dollars for the notary. I have used this process successfully 3 times now.
Judge Dale advises to stay out of "THEIR COURTS". They are a private, for profit business in the business of adjudicating disputes. They really have no jusrisdiction over you until you give it to them by either ignoring a summons or filing an answer. Answer a complaint and pay the answer fee and you have just contracted with them to referee your issue and you are now subject to a whole ream of presumptions you probably don't know exist and don't know how to rebut. The summons is just an invitation to hire them. Decline the invitation, and be sure to send back with the notary's certificate of service. (Find an example on the internet and make one up with your personal information for the notary to sign)
(For UCC types, the complaint is a negotiable instrument and the summons is the presentment of it. You are refusing for cause without dishonor. UCC 3-501, as no liability is evidenced and there is no contract. See the work of Winston Shrout)
You are a moron. A complaint is not a negotiable instrument. A negotiable instrument is defined under the UCC:
§ 3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT.(a) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), "negotiable instrument" means an unconditionalpromise or order to pay a fixed amount of money, with or without interest or other charges described in the promise or order, if it:
(1) is payable to bearer or to order at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder;
(2) is payable on demand or at a definite time; and
(3) does not state any other undertaking or instruction by the person promising or ordering payment to do any act in addition to the payment of money, but the promise or order may contain (i) an undertaking or power to give, maintain, or protect collateral to secure payment, (ii) an authorization or power to the holder to confess judgment or realize on or dispose of collateral, or (iii) a waiver of the benefit of any law intended for the advantage or protection of an obligor.
(b) "Instrument" means a negotiable instrument.
(c) An order that meets all of the requirements of subsection (a), except paragraph (1), and otherwise falls within the definition of "check" in subsection (f) is a negotiable instrument and a check.
(d) A promise or order other than a check is not an instrument if, at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder, it contains a conspicuous statement, however expressed, to the effect that the promise or order is not negotiable or is not an instrument governed by this Article.
Yeah, I know. Hard to believe isn't it? That's how they get away with it. Defies common sense and leaves you incredulous.
Those complaint/negotiable instruments are monetized by the courts by depositing them with the Fed. They make "money" win or lose. Why do you think they allow all those defective debt collection suits? Gotta fund the judges retirement account somehow. Taxes don't cover it.
The only way to win is not to play, to the extent that that is possible for any given individual. You literally can not keep up with their ability to change/ignore the rules. To say nothing of the fact that if you can't counterfeit "money" like they can, you're bringing a knife to a gun fight.
I keeped getting calls from debt collection about a gyno in SC past dueing me for a pap smear. shit--I live in FL. and have been a male all my life.--lol ---I just added fuel to the fire when ever they called--gave them phoney insurance and credit card numbers. what a hoot. It went on for years.
Check it out now:
wowDOTsecretdivorceDOTcum
Your turn.
He is talking the Your Money or Your Life philosophy... by Joe Dominquez if interested.
Problem is not the debt but "the clarion call to inflate it all away."
This is the value of MONEY as the antitode to "inflated money."
With enough cash that cancels out the "obligation monster."
Eventually the value of this ACTUAL money will be borne out.
This ain't the ruble...this is America. We have credit to extend...and indeed we do, indeed we do.
I remember buying a wedding ring some 15 years ago. The sales people were super nice. I told the one salesman that I planned to pay in cash in a few days after I cashed in some stock options. I guess he didn't believe me because I was young and the ring was like 5k, so he said I'd have to put a down payment on it and open up some sort of credit line just to hold the ring. Whatever, the sales people were all smiles and nice. I sold my stocks and paid for the ring in cash a few days later. You should have seen the disappointment on this guy's face. I guess stores like that give more commissions when they get people on the hook for credit lines that end up costing much more than the original sum. He was cold and a bit rude after that. That opened my young eyes to the game afoot.
When I bought my wife's ring at the local jeweler I got a discount for paying cash.
gladyou still with us, old school :)
I bought my daughter a new car for her college graduation present a few years ago. She shopped and did her research and found a Toyota something or other that fit within the budget we had given her to work with. I live about 500 miles away from her. When I called the salesperson at the dealership and said I would like to buy this car for her he was very helpful and happy until I asked where to wire the money to pay cash. He literally wouldn't return my phone calls after that. They basically refused to sell me the new car for cash. Told me a lot about where the profit margins are in the auto industry. I know that what they did was not legal but I sure as hell wasn't going to pay a loawyer and the aggravation.. My daughter moved on to another dealer and another car.
Had nearly the same thing happen to me, I got the hard sell at the dealer not on the car, but on the financing. I was paying cash and they were offering 0% financing, and just would not drop it until I told them they were going to lose the sale entirely if they didn't. It was obvious the manufacture kickback on the credit was bigger than the profit from the actual car.
yea, the auto industry does not sell cars...they sell car loans, you just get a car at the end. positive interest on a depreciating asset, that if you dont pay they reposess and sell to the next fool in line.
My understanding is you negotiate the price and financing as separate transactions. Be sure to go to a bank or credit union first if you actually intend to take financing. I bought a Honda in cash, and I told the salesguy we wanted to come to an agreement on price. We already had financing we were comfortable with, but were willing to listen to his offer after we had agreed to buy the car. He didn't seem to care, and when we paid in cash (check) he didn't blink.
Absent incentives/rebates from the factory, selling a new car does not make a dealership much profit, especially since they are paying floorplan financing to the bank to have all those shiny new cars sit around on the showroom floor.
Dealerships make much more money in the F&I (Financing & Insurance) office, where they can sell you the loan, the gap insurance, the undercoating, the rustproofing, the vacation timeshare in the Everglades, etc.
The modern eCONomy basically can't function without people entering into life-long debt slavery.
That's it? Com'on, you can't end the story like that. What happened to the ring?
I thought the whole "used car loan for leverage" article put this bed?
Debt for leverage is a very handy tool for making money.
Take that $10,000 used car loan at a 7% interest rate, leverage it at 20:1 for a total $200k investment money, put it on an S&P ETF, and wait full Bulltard to make a comment.
AND, SHAZZAM! that 200k goes up 15%, you pay off the loan, and have a bunch of monopoly money for the next FED induced market pump.
Now there's the growing title loans market where they lend at 36% collateralized with a vehicle even 20 years old.
Desperate or stupid people use those loans, then. Lose the car to repo, then get sued for the difference.
Ain't usary great?
I live in Illinois where property tax liens are sold at auction. Been to a few. Banks have their buyer reps there in droves. They get you no matter what.
The government borrows, you repay.
Used to live outside of my means, then (as someone who realizes how short life is) I started noticing how far in the future I had pledged my wages towards debt. Only so many paychecks in a year right. Not owing adds to easing lifes tension.
Went and tested a 1989 e30 yesterday and applied for a loan before going. Slept on it and decided the original ultimate driving machine wasnt worth the payments and decided against it. This article was a little bit of reassurance.
Nobody worthwhile knowing gives a shit about your car. Good call on your part.
I drive a 1995 Civic with 193K on it. I can fix pretty much anything that breaks on it myself. People give me static for driving it but they always shut up when I ask them what their car payment is. Have a nice day.
Good for you. It's a fucking tool. If you get a woody from paying too much for tools, good for you I guess but be mindful of the trade-offs. I've always made a living by using one tool or another, and I buy good solid ones that will last. People laugh at me when I roll up in my 2007 Yaris hatchback (bought new with cash) and pull out my 1991-vintage Porter-Cable cordless drill, but I haven't spent a nickle on either of those items since one Bush or the other was President. I didn't have to pay anyone else to get the money to buy them, and they've been earning me money ever since.
Cheap tools are shit and not to be bothered with. No Harbor Freight for me, nor Acer computers. But buying a diamond-studded framing hammer because I can would get me what I would deserve.
New cars are downright dangerous with all their "safety features" and blind spots. Standard transmissions are becoming a luxury item. Roads (at least where I live) are becoming bogged down with low speed limits, pointless stop signs and traffic lights. Driving used to be fun. It's still fun for me, but these are dying days.
you're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem
Doesn't that remind you of
"You're either with us [in the fight against terrorism], or you're against us [and maybe a terrorist yourself?]"
"If history could teach us anything, it would be that private property is inextricably linked with civilization." - Ludwig von Mises
If Mises is right, our debt is decivilizing us as we tend to never actually own anything. I guess the same could be said about property tax.
I found one way to get back a little - use my visa card with auto pay in full each month - but have the card that gives 2% cash back. Good for around $500 each December. And yes, I know someone else is paying that bonus or convenience for me.
You may have gotten 2% bonus but the merchant had to charge you more than that to pay for his use of the credit system. The use of credit cards make everything cost more, period.
Unless the merchant charged separate cash and credit prices, the costs are socialized across all his customers.
Putin undebtor bastard
paying off debts is the wrong move here... in the end you still feed the beast. refuse to pay the debts, end up paying nothing or settling for pennies on the dollar. THAT'S how you attack the system.
I hear States pay $1 Trillion each year for Education K-12.
So I'm assuming that is coming from Property Taxes.
Federal Budget spends $100 Billion each year too.
So, if we starve the system, reduce our debt, reduce our consumption... would we likely see high Property Taxes??
Except states that don't have property Taxes, Texas
"And if you live in New York, New Jersey, or Colorado your taxes were in some cases five times more than the national average."
Au contraire, Texas has property taxes. What we don't have (yet) is state income taxes.
I think the idea is less government and public goods and more reliance on private transactions. They're either assuming the economy wouldn't collapse or that economic collapse of the current system is inevitable / a good thing.
Bingo...winner.
One must understand the hyperinflationary nature of our current environment. Yes debt led to the problems we now fACE BUT IT IS TOO LATE TO UNDO THE MESS. GOING FORWARD one should keep the debt that can be serviced. Paying off low interest debt that can be easily serviced is foolish at this point and would lead to unneeded pain.
I'm not suggesting taking out a huge loan and buying gold but that has worked in the past. If I knew the timing of the great unraveling I just might.
YEP, just abuse the crap out of it. I have seen people who are barely getting by, yet they have a pile of cards that for whatever reason they simply fail to understand how to use.
Dead end job that allows them to just get by. A home with a mortgage that will never be paid off. Jesus, get with the program already. Overleverage the house, sell off anything too large to move, take out every loan possible, payday loans, max out the cards with impromptu cash advances, and then just fucking LEAVE THE COUNTRY. START OVER. Get a few hundred grand out of this and you are good to go in most countries in the world.
I am sorry, but there is good debt and bad debt. Always has…always will.
I bought a building to move my business into. Now I rent from myself. The left pocket/right pocket transaction allows me to siphon some of the business profits into the rent payments that I now don’t have to pay social security on and I’m building equity in real property. Good debt.
I buy everything on credit cards that I can. I have a 1 ½% cash back card personally and a 2% cash back card for the business. All cards are paid off monthly and at the end of the year when I cash in the rewards, there’s between 3 and 4 thousand dollars of free money. Good debt.
The measure of good debt and bad debt is your ability to pay the debt come hell or high water. I have my bullion stash, if I can ever find it again from the boating accident and a cash stash similarly lost at sea all available to pay down debt if required. It doesn’t matter if you have a debt free house if you can’t afford to pay the taxes. Then, it’s bye bye house anyway
This is really the ideal situation for our government: they take from you, they leave some loopholes allowing you to get a fraction of it back if you put in effort and work for it, and then you go around feeling proud of what you got back. You are distracted from thinking about what you've lost and resigned to it, you waste your time and energy playing their games, and you even take pride in it.
Debt is only good if you're benefitting from it.
We also have to consider its sustainability. We could all benefit from debt in the short-term, but we'd have to pay for it eventually in the long term.
You don't waste your time and energy playing their games? What do you do all day?
Hey - But this time it's different!!
March 12: "Canada household debt ratio hits new record of 163.3%."
March 16: Australian households awash with debt: Barclays
March 10: “It is clear that Korea's growth outlook has worsened,” said HSBC ... South Korea's household debt-to-income level stood at 144% at the end of December 2014"
Alright let's not get goofy about taking on some IOUs. "Moderation in all things"-style.
Match the length of the debt to its EUL and should be okay. E.g. 30 year mortgage on the house.
3 year on your (2-3 year old used) ride but 5 okay too if it's new (and change the oil every 3-4 months)
Then cut the gentleman's club visits to 2-3 a month - not week - you horn dogs!
PS - And Buy your old lady some flowers while you're at it "Happy wife Happy life"-style.
I love Mr. Hugh-Smith. He points out, eloquently, our problems and failures.
I also love his "we can still fix this" optimism.
I'm no longer there.
I used to think exactly like him, little to no debt, starve that beast. Then I looked around.
Those that lived high on the hog got to keep their stuff and walk away from the debt. Those that bought houses above their paygrade, were gifted them. Those that bankrupted their employers - the car companies, banks, government - were bailed out, entrenched and gifted MORE.
So, here I am, Mr. Sucker, "starving"' the system, not playing on a shiny new tablet, nor reaching new heights in Angry Birds, nor even buying a pair of flipping blue jeans.
Meanwhille, my mandated costs have exploded and now I can't even afford to be poor.
I realized a couple years back that there is no fixing our system, and that there is going to be no mass movement of Americans "starving the beast." Nor even standing up and demanding the rights to their own bodies, or children.
Nope, we are going to sit back, just like pre-war Germany.
So, I figured out I was denying myself in pursuit of some "fix" that will NEVER come.
I now buy what I like, what I can afford, and use the banksters zero percent offers to foot the bill.
My real bonus is that when this puppy finally crashes and burns, I'll be sticking the executives with the debt.
You can't get blood from a turnip, nor garnishments from a part-time, minimum wage, EBT supported, American.
Ponzi on folks.
Keep your debt manageable and have the hard assets to back it up.
That's how I now get rental houses. I fix them myself. If I am on travel, a friend fixes them for cash.
Then my accountant writes it all off.
It's amazing how much money you can 'lose' repairing rental property.
A very bad businessman can lose much of his property income on repairs and 'maintenance contracts'.
I may not make the rules, but I'm smart enough to have paid for expensive advice one time that pays annual dividends year after year. The ambiguity of legal language doesn't always have to work for the 1%.
Debt is not a moral failure. Any legitimate debt also provides an asset. That is if I borrow money, I have money. If I get a home loan, I have a home. Consumption is not a sin. Isn't it odd that saving and producing are considered virtuous, while borrowing and consuming are considered sinful, and YET without borrowing and consuming there is no saving or production. By definition. End of story.
Its the USURY attached to the (Rothschild) script created out of thin air that is the problem.........nothing wrong with accessing your own credit, interest free......afterall, it is your credit and not the banks........the bank does not own your credit nor can a bank lend its own credit
Usurious. somebody gets it !
What does "accessing your own credit" mean? You don't borrow credit you borrow assets. You can't borrow your own assets because they are already yours, and the bank certainly CAN lend you their assets. That is all the bank can lend. Fiat currency is irrelevant to this discussion.
The utter ignorance on ZH and society at large about how money and banking work is jaw dropping. The bank does not "lend you their assets." Good grief.
The money on deposit at a bank is a debit to the bank, because the bank owes that money, plus interest (if any, hardy-har), to the depositor. The loan to you is an asset to the bank because you owe the money, plus interest, to the bank.
This stuff is Econ 101.
I disagree with your objection. You are correct that when you deposit money in a bank, the bank is taking on a debit (your demand account), in exchange for an asset (your money). Your money now belongs to the bank, and they can do whatever they want with it, usually loaning that asset to other people. The money the bank loans is their asset. Once you deposit moeny in a bank it is not your asset anymore.
Sex is considered sinful by some. Yet without it, none of us would be here in debt. Fuck debt, get laid.
We'll said! Simple, yet powerful.
I assume this is sarcasm?
You're going to get slammed here. ZH may be the best at speaking truth to power, but there are a lot of economic illiterates hanging around. "The earth is flat because my street looks flat" type foolery.
You are right, it isn't debt - it's living beyond your means, that is the moral failure.
Respectfully, you are incorrect. In our society, it is the borrowing and consuming that is praised (wrongfully, of course). Also, one can produce without consuming (Unconsumer production is called "savings". Saving can either be stockpiled or invested). In order to consumer, one must either produce, exchange, or be gifted with the consumables.
You are missing the point. Sure "one" can produce without consuming, but ultimately all that is produced is consumed in one way or another. What do you do otherwise? Throw the production in a lake? Stockpiling to my mind is a form of consumption, and investing is lending, which then is being borrowed.
In a debt based society.
Let's differentiate between short-term debt (necessary) and longer-term debt (much less so).
When I work at my office, there is no steady drip of pennies into a jar. My employer borrows my labor and repays his debt two weeks later.
When a vendor sells a product with payment terms Net 30, he can charge a higher price and reach more customers than if he demanded COD. Etc.
Debt is inseparable from economic activity, but like government and fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
Personally, I recently paid off my last debts and am debt-free for the first time in life at age 38. The feeling of moral righteousness is almost reward enough, but what's truly amazing is how quickly net worth increases when there are no bankers eating your lunch. Maybe it's good to struggle with debt in early life to become the fiscal equivalent of Harrison Bergeron.
Arguably debt even increases the productivity of a society - since there is a need to hold a steady job in order to pay the bills.
Likewise, Eqyptian slaves needed to build the pyramids in order not to be killed or starved. This certainly increased productivity measured in pyramids.
But who knows what those slaves might have produced if they were free? Who knows what today's debt-slaves might produce if they weren't building debt-pyramids? Might they actually produce even more if they could invest their surplus in their own capital goods, rather than turning it over to their creditors?
True, but the individuals that I am talking about, are not ambitious, and if they were not working to pay off debt they would have nothing to show at the end of the day.
So the difference I am referring to, is one who harnesses himself to future debt in return for immediate pleasure and things, and is then driven to produce in order to pay for the pleasure and things. In the end he may consider himself better off - since he has had the experience of having pleasure and things. As opposed to someone who didnt produce for anybody - including himself - thus could not experience the pleasure and things.
Very good points. I think the moral of that story is that those with high time preference will end up serving those who take the long-term view, and strangely enough, both parties are better off for the exchange.
I like to differentiate between productive debt and it's counterpart, consumption debt, Borrowing to increase your capacity to earn may be risky but more often than not it increases income whereas consumtion debt for enjoyment of a depreciating asset is fine as long as you are willing to pay the cost, and more importantly, can afford to miss that income pulled forward to service that debt.
The fact is, you already have to have a good amount of wealth to afford consumtion debt.
The problem is most who have that kind of debt do not.
Totally agree except for "more often than not", because that depends on entrepreneurial acumen and valid price signals. Think of all those student loans borrowed to increase capacity to earn -- a failure of acumen. Think of all those residential mortages borrowed because of suppressed interest rates -- a classic misallocation of capital due to corrupted price signals.
If we ever got back to honest markets, and borrowers paying the full price of their own mistakes, I think you'd be right about "more often than not"!
Why payback at all, JUST DEFAULT, oh but all u poor saps are worried about your precious credit ratings. WHat a joke this site has become, it's the end of the world as we knew it, and you guys are all busy giving advice about financial management. HA! GFY bitches.
FICO 552 and dropping like a stone. I'm very proud of this.
Rock on Fat Bob ! Thats three of us that get it . (usurious does too )
But, how can I default if I have no debt?
Do I borrow a bunch of money just so I can default?...that'll teach 'em!
Not recommending it, but if you really wanted to do it why not just:
1. Buy as much gold, silver or bitcoins as you can;
2. Have a boating accident (or in the case of bitcoins, simply "forget" the passphrase for the wallet);
3. Go bankrupt (maybe not if it is student debt), emigrate, or disappear;
4. ???
5. Profit
Exactly.
What good is it saying this when it is simply false? There's always an alternative.