What to expect when many people default on mortgages

Every loan is the bank balance of another. In order to pay-off a loan of X value requires a new loan of X+interest value to be created. By paying off loans, more M3 money is created for someone else. Paying off loans is not an erasure of money by a rollover of debt from old debtors to new debtors. Only a default is a genuine erasure of money, monetary contraction, because new money was not created to pay off some existing debt. Less money in circulation at zero economic growth and a steady velocity translates into lower average spending, therefore lower price level. When people anticipate or observe a drop in the price level, they further reduce spending because they expect their money to have more purchasing power in the future, thereby reducing the velocity of money, further reducing the price level.

Some narratives are too socially damaging to be simply ignored. It is important to identify the implications and consequences of Nativist Supremacism, which underpins the concept of First Nations and tribal sovereignty. The underlying toxicity needs to be unpacked and contextualised, so that people have the right vocabulary and understanding to deal with the associated social pressure and resentment. Those who live in Australia face this narrative and are forced to choose (to collude or to dissent) on daily basis. When they do dissent they need to be able to defend their position with more than “it is divisive”. If they fail this, they will become more resentful, and the narrative of resentment will still succeed in its aim. My approach is not merely to defeat the narrative of resentment but to replace it with a higher order sense of unity: All humans share the same ancient ancestors, we are all related, we are all the original owners of the Earth. Reason unites us.

How to identify emerging Nazi movements

Some people think that Nazis must love Deutschland and the Aryan people, as if the same ideology applied to any other race or tribe would be morally different. If we separate the essence of Nazi ideology from any particular race, the following ideological features remain: a) nativist prioritarianism - the idea that the natives have absolute priority and inherently better rights than citizens of any other tribe or race (non-natives); b) The idea that races/tribes belong and have a sacred relationship to the land, so that nobody else can legitimately belong there. Although points a) and b) of themselves entail racial supremacism within the native environment, Nazis may promote c) some additional, more explicit marker of racial supremacy, some mythological or mystified biological feature that non-natives do not possess. This both amplifies and psychologically justifies the discriminatory demarcation and dehumanisation of non-natives.

It is not good to have faith in a higher being, unless it is the right higher being, and, arguably, at no time in human history have many people had the right idea of a higher being. I make a distinction between ‘belief’ (conviction/certainty without a proof) and ‘faith’ (openness to persuasion). A belief in a being signifies merely the conviction that the being is real/true but not necessarily right or worth of having faith in, whereas faith in a being signifies being open to persuasion by that being, which is a reflexive, constructive attitude that precludes conviction. Only ‘faith’ can be the right relationship to the right higher being.

All idols are false.

Facial Recognition Profiling Begins at School.

Did your kids have their school photos taken this year? Did you read the terms and conditions under which these photos are taken? Do you know what happens to those high resolution digital image files after you purchase your prints? Are they deleted or someone gets to keep them? Who owns this data? If you did not check these details then your child is probably already on a facial recognition database. I have investigated this and one major company which is contracted to take photos in many public and private schools retains all photos indefinitely, “just in case you would want another copy anytime in the future”. Moreover, when contacted they refused to agree to delete photos if ordered to do so; your agreement to have your photos taken without the contract including explicit provisions prohibiting data retention (to which they refused to agree) appears to gives them artistic ownership. And this is legal, and if you do not read the fine print and see what is missing then you are part of the problem.

https://www.oaic.gov.au/updates/news-and-media/clearview-ai-breached-australians-privacy

My submission emailed to the senate inquiry into COVID-19 Vaccination Status (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill 2022 and the Fair Work Amendment (Prohibiting COVID-19 Vaccine Discrimination) Bill 2023 was neither acknowledged by the committee nor included in the list of accepted submissions. https://michaelkowalik.substack.com/p/submission-to-the-inquiry-into-covid

The Australian parliament ignores the arguments it cannot refute. https://t.iss.one/NormalParty/2721

Profound historical changes that occurred without the use of force: humanist ethics, emergence of the global moral conscience, human understanding of the universe, logic, maths. These changes occurred imperceptibly on day to day basis, but are noticeable over centuries. The rapid changes that are based on the power of the gun are fleeting, defeated by new exercises of the power of the gun, which amounts to no lasting change, just the same old animal violence. The change that comes out of the barrel of the gun is not the right kind of change, not even true change.

Incompetence is a perfect cover for corruption and conspiracy, and for this reason every predictable effect of a policy must be considered as intentional and the individuals in change of the policy criminally culpable.

I take faith and belief to be opposite attitudes. If one believes (has conviction) what one wishes to be true, then one is closed, at least partially, to being persuaded by evidence or argument to the contrary. In personal relations a person who believes that X is true will resist being persuaded by another person’s arguments that X is false, and as such converses all along ‘in bad faith’, or without faith in the other person’s capacity to reason, which is precisely their personhood, the basis of their moral status and worth.

The Meaning of 1

One/unity (1) is the basic numerical concept of identity and the most basic example of the law of identity - one of three fundamental laws of logic which states that everything is identical only to itself and different from everything else. All other numbers are multiples/sets or fractions of that identity-type; for example, number 4 represents a Basic set of units, which may be instances of the same identity-type, with a certain size {1,1,1,1}. The law of identity dictates a distinction between specific identity (this One) and identity-type (any One). For example, the ‘apple’ identity-type that all specific apples belong to is also a specific identity in its own right, but only as a type (an identity/unity of a higher order), which is different from indemnities/unities that belong to it (first order identities). By making the type-distinction, the consistency/sense is maintained in relation to the identity of each unit, uniquely positioned and counted in a Basic set, and the identity of ‘1’ as a symbol for any unit belonging to the Basic set, or for the unity/count of basic sets.

BREAKING NEWS: Time Magazine is named one of the most honest and factual political magazines in the world by Anton Albanese: ‘A symbol of hope and inspiration to all sovereign logicians, who believe only they get to decide which laws of logic apply to them’.

How “censorship” ought to be defined to take account of social collusion.

I propose that he kind of silencing of public speech perpetrated by ideological proxies who themselves desire to silence argumnets and points of view contrary to the official dogma, also ought to be classified as government censorship. Every totalitarian or corrupt system relies on intentional, systemic collusion by corporate agents with the government, so these two types of agents cannot be logically uncoupled. Even in a perfectly democratic society the government is an agent of the people, elected by the people, majority of whom will see the actions of the State as fulfilling their own intentions and serving their interests, so the private, corporate and government dimensions cannot be meaningfully disentangled if they appear to acquiesce to one another’s discriminatory actions, especially in regard to silencing those who object to the official dogma, which for the ruling majority is the common dogma. In this latter case the government may be engaged in censorship by merely acquiescing to the unjust actions by the power who elected and endorses the unjust government.

Does free speech contribute to racism?

There is no evidence or good reason to believe that free speech, as a matter of principle, contributes more to racism than official/controlled speech. There is also no evidence that free speech falsely convinces people more than official/controlled speech. Nevertheless, in the case of racist propaganda and radicalised blame the problem is not just the false attribution of certain wrongs to a race, but the inhibition and disruption that such speech causes to free speech. When people of certain race are attacked and vilified on a platform they may be in effect silenced from presenting their rational arguments and points of view out of fear. Racial vilification creates a psychological impediment to free speech, and is therefore contrary to free speech.

If there ever was any doubt what ideology does the ruling majority in Ukraine identify with: https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-738940

A hilarious conversation with GPT-4 by a philosophy professor: https://justinehsmith.substack.com/p/my-dinners-with-gpt-4

A violent, unarmed individual is dangerous but is as vulnerable to defensive violence as the victim is to offensive violence. A violent mob attacking a person is so disproportionate that it should be invariably regarded as an attempted murder (a lethal weapon used with the intention to kill), leaving the victim entirely at the mercy of the mob’s primitive instinct.

Does a nation whose 90% of adult population meekly acquiesced to the taking away of the right to free medical consent from their own children and future generations deserve to retain property rights, let alone their ownership privileges associated with citizenship? Or should they be replaced by new citizens, hopefully with a more developed moral conscience? All this aside, the kind of people who can be coerced to give up their right to bodily integrity can be just as easily coerced to give up their country too, so the question is purely academic. The deal is done.