Ready to Rock?
The single biggest problem that plagues humanity, robbing people of their rights and freedom, is our debt money system. Unending interest payments, compounding generation upon generation, have turned "we the people" into indentured economic slaves of the rich. You know the truth, and millions of Canadians are also starting to wake up and figure it out, but they don't know what to do about it.
So here's my suggestion. Use this website to rally people together to plan a powerful protest against interest. If enough people can be found who are willing to act together to support the protest (minimum a million) then, on a day in the not too distant future, they all simply refuse to pay any monthly bills that charge or contain interest charges. All at once, mortgage payments, credit card bills, loan payments, etc. stop.
The corporations, collection agencies and courts don't have nearly enough resources to process a million or so simultaneous credit defaults. Each person who is participating simply informs their lenders that they are part of a class action suit that is challenging the legality of charging interest. Each refers their creditors to the legal team who will be representing the borrowers (obviously, this team will have to be established before the protest date).
Surely the government will not allow millions of Canadians to be evicted from their homes simply because they have decided to defend their liberty. In fact, doesn't the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provide us with the right to protect the life, liberty and security of the person. Apart from being harassed by telephone calls from creditors, individual protesters will face no harm. No one will lose their jobs or their incomes. They may not be able to borrow any more money, but their monthly expenses will go down.
let's hear what you think
I think its not wise. Anyone with a job would get their wages garnisheed and anyone with bank accounts, savings, RSPs etc would have them taken. And yes I think they would take the house but even if they didnt, the resulting wage garnishee, savings removal etc would effectively mean you couldnt live in a home and would be forced out, poor and homeless.
All that even without a cent charged in further interest
Anyone with a job would get their wages garnisheed and anyone with bank accounts, savings, RSPs etc would have them taken. And yes I think they would take the house but even if they didnt, the resulting wage garnishee, savings removal etc would effectively mean you couldnt live in a home and would be forced out, poor and homeless.
None of those actions that you mention can be taken without first winning a legal judgement against you. As a class action, involving a million or more people, it would take quite a while to get the case into court and of course any negative judgements would be appealed all the way up to the supreme court of Canada. In the meantime, the banks & corporations would be losing billions and the monthly payments of individual protestors would be greatly reduced.
I like you idea but I think circumstances will make it not necessary since everyone will likely default soon anyway.
Individually we are vulnerable, together we are impenetrable. Individually we have no voice, together our voice can be deafening. News of the protest will help all to understand that, due to a deliberate concealment of the truth about the nature of money and credit, we have been mislead and coerced into paying unnecessary interest.
Yeah. I hear you. I am not sure there is a really good baisis of organization here. However, I think the subjects you are bringing up are good things to talk about.
Good news and bad news on your idea.
But neither first. Its an interesting concept, regardless of how viable it is.
Bad news first. And rather obvious: its the old prisoners dilemna thing. Sure, they cant move against everybody. Not even half of everybody. The catch of course if that it wont be everybody of half of them who would particpate, ever- even if it was safe, let alone with risks. And as far as building enough people- legions of someones have to go first. And they will be skewered if the rest dont follow. Yould get a bunch who are either going under anyway, or for whatever reasons will make the calculation it wont kill them. But thatsa a trickle. And if the trickle doesnt turn to a flood, everyone will be picked off... and the gradual progress of that wont even gum the system.
Good news. There are weak points in the system. Broad sweep approach will leave people exposed. But focused approach maybe not. First and foremost: residntial mortgages. In the US, they simply cannot deal with 5% being in foreclosure, and 10% being behind. I unfortunately know this too well in dealing with my fathers house. But its incredible- they cannot make anything work. I'd say 3/4 of those people are in a program for getting their mortgage modified, and most of them will qualify.... and like 2% of all of them have been dealt with, with no improvement of pace in sight. The peoblem isnt money, or will [its in everyones interest this works]... its just too complicated. Same think even with the hopeless forclosures.
What they are finding out is that the system is capable of dealing with less than 1% of mortgages going sour. Does ine when thats the scale. Beyond that, its gridlock- cant help people who are capable of being helped, cant kick more than a small percentage of people out [fewer than are being added to the que], cant give up....
And thats with no deliberate civil dsobedience, and as near as I can tell the few people who are actually told you have to leave now, them acquiescing.
Similar thing if enough people who can afford to do otherwise just stooped making credit card payments. There would be some relative safety in numbers as far as any serious consequences at all.
But in all of this people have to be willing to torch their credit ratings. I dont think like Cueball and others that widespread defaults are around the corner anyway. They might be, they might not.
But even with default numbers being sustainable to the house of cards system.... there is a minimum tension going on: more and more people will be coming under ever more severe pressure.
Which opens them up to "Really, what do I have to lose?"
Now all that said- about the practical subversive potential.
The green anti-consumerist doesnt like the side of this that if the subversion were to grow, would organically delevelop. Many, many people would seize the opportunity to buy even more. Hell, I can be the consumer I always wanted to be. The process of the subversion will teach them the real rules of the game and they can run with fun, and come back and play the game the same as anyone else, when its all over.
And I'm not talking a fringe- it would be a hell of a lot of people.
I could not personally condone anything like this that was not as explicitly anti-consumerist as well as anti-capitalist. In other words we dont even go down this road unless we have the will and the reasonable expectation that we can sell everyone on the mission of breaking your ties, breaking all of our bonds..... and not just doing something we know we can get away with.
Truth be told, I'd be as opposed by nature to doing this as I was oppossed to the 60's Weathermen politics of vandalism.
But I'm enough of a pluralist about methods, that vandalism that really is only around property is something I can at least see as something for people to discuss.
My objections would boil down to opposition to the politics of vandalism anyway. Because if this sort of thing worked, it would be bringing capitalism down around everyones heads... and they werent asked. Of course, if we're going to have any kind of reolution, or even a 'pushy evolution', then in principle you need no where near everyone with you. [For one thing you've got at least 20% of outrigh enemies to some degree or other, no matter how lovely and benign what you were doing, etc.]
But something that 2% are doing to bring the house down around the rest... thats not a politics I can be part of.
Geez, since we paid off our mortgage we have not incurred an interest charge.
The problem isn't interest per se but capitalism which continues to keep large groups of people in economic slavery.
Abolishing pay day loan institutions would be a good start.
I agree that interest in itself is not the problem.
Opposition tio interest at least borders on the theological. And I mean that even if the Koran said nothing about it.
Interest as a pressure point in capitalism is a another matter.
And as far as building enough people- legions of someones have to go first. And they will be skewered if the rest dont follow. Yould get a bunch who are either going under anyway, or for whatever reasons will make the calculation it wont kill them. But thats a trickle. And if the trickle doesnt turn to a flood, everyone will be picked off... and the gradual progress of that wont even gum the system.
...on a day in the not too distant future, they all simply refuse to pay any monthly bills that charge or contain interest charges. All at once, mortgage payments, credit card bills, loan payments, etc. stop.
What I mean here is that up until that day, people simply sign-on to the idea but take no action individually. Once enough people are ready to move forward together, the payments stop. Most likely however, before that day ever comes, news of the growing movement will have prompted the lenders/government to take notice and serious negotiations to avoid the action will have begun. We may never need to actually carry out the action.
But in all of this people have to be willing to torch their credit ratings.
Again, only if the action actually proceeds, and even then, can they really afford never to supply credit again to all those who participated ...such a large portion of their target market?
if this sort of thing worked, it would be bringing capitalism down around everyones heads... and they werent asked ...But something that 2% are doing to bring the house down around the rest... thats not a politics I can be part of.
The corporations, banks and government built this house of cards so they could feed off the labour of the rest of us. Their greed is bringing capitalism down around everyones heads whether this idea proceeds or not... and we certainly werent asked! It's the 2% at the top who are responsible.
I'm not saying that you and I and 2% at most bringing down the house is necessarily political vandalism- though I think it would be.
But the fact that less than 2% of capitalists do it without permisssion doesnt make it any less political vandalism to our neighbours if we do it.
Your plan doesnt solve the problem by the way. You can have a million people signed up, but on the day of reckoning every one of these people still faces the classic prisoner's dilemna.
Which is why I proposed the variant that can be cumulative organisation that goes with what you get along the way. If you are strategic about which debt you collectively stop payments on, it takes very few for a great deal of security in numbers.
I think that is potentially doable, and very much doable if the numbers of people at or near the tipping point of not much to lose- even a lot families with kids- begins to grow. But I dont see it is good politics for the reason given.
But since the canadian government CMHA or whatever, in other words...us...is the largest holder of mortgages, backs up banks mortgage losses etc, would we then bankrupt the country and lead us into a massive collapse?
Why does this remind me of the fable "Belling the Cat"?
But the fact that less than 2% of capitalists do it without permisssion doesnt make it any less political vandalism to our neighbours if we do it.
Right now there is only one tap to control the money supply and only the BoC and the private banks have access to it. They can turn the tap whenever they want, for whatever reasons they want, and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it. What I am suggesting is that we add a second tap, a tap that debtors control independently. The possibility that we could use it would force the government and the banks to start taking the needs and desires of average working people much more seriously.
Think about this idea as a strategy of financial deterrence. From Wikipedia... "Deterrence is a strategy by which governments threaten an immense retaliation if attacked, such that aggressors are deterred if they do not wish to suffer great damage as a result of an aggressive action."
We don't have to use it, we just have to be prepared to. If we are not, they will continue to do as they like and our children and grandchildren will bear the cost, becoming little more than the ignorant debt-slaves of a global imperial class.
It's time to get serious folks and stand up together for what is right. Babbling alone will get us nowhere.
But since the canadian government CMHA or whatever, in other words...us...is the largest holder of mortgages, backs up banks mortgage losses etc, would we then bankrupt the country and lead us into a massive collapse?
It wouldn't have to go that far before they started taking us seriously. You may not believe it yet, but a massive collapse is coming anyway.
Why does this remind me of the fable "Belling the Cat"?
Because you're thinking individually, not collectively?
Geez, since we paid off our mortgage we have not incurred an interest charge.
The problem isn't interest per se but capitalism which continues to keep large groups of people in economic slavery.
Abolishing pay day loan institutions would be a good start.
- I think you're quite mistaken here. Private banks create virtually all of our money in Canada (>95%) - and of course they charge interest on it all. When you are paying interest on your entire money supply every year, inflation is built in. It is because of this interest that we now require two working adults with half decent jobs to provide a decent life style where one working adult could do the same 40 years ago. It is the reason that savings are far lower and debt far higher than 40 years ago.
Think of the national debt - most of that was accrued as money borrowed to pay interest. During the last 30 years when govs both Con and Lib have been slashing programs in the name of debt - they have paid some 2 trillion dollars in interest on the national and provincial debts. Not a problem? Au contraire - major problem.
And etc - more detail here - What Happened? http://www.rudemacedon.ca/what-happened.html .
Capitalism is indeed the main problem - and control of the banking and money systems is their main weapon. You don't solve one without solving the other.
Caissa's point- and I agreed- was about attacking all interest. That banks and money supply are a crucial issue does not say that all interest is a problem
Although, it now seems apparent that isnt a point.
Think about this idea as a strategy of financial deterrence.
We don't have to use it, we just have to be prepared to.
To be a deterrent it has to be credible. That means a million plus poised and ready to push the button- an organizational feat I'm not the only one skeptical of. AND there has to the belief that people will not just say they are going to take the leap. And thts a biggie that even fantastic organization in itself would not solve.
Its not to my mind the most likely issue to galvanize people into that kind of organization.
Which is why I suggested an alternative organizational goal and strategy that isnt all or none and is cumulative from whatver you have to work with.
It's time to get serious folks and stand up together for what is right. Babbling alone will get us nowhere.
True. But it is the age old question: What is to be Done? Its unfortunate people get lost in the discussion itself, but you cant skip over it.
Along those lines....
If you think a very big collapse is iminent- when it gets rolling is when you might have a chance to galvanize people around an idea like this. And I mean the initiators and leaders, let alone the potential million plus.
I think its not wise. Anyone with a job would get their wages garnisheed and anyone with bank accounts, savings, RSPs etc would have them taken. And yes I think they would take the house but even if they didnt, the resulting wage garnishee, savings removal etc would effectively mean you couldnt live in a home and would be forced out, poor and homeless.
All that even without a cent charged in further interest
- and that, in a nutshell, is what capitalism wage-slavery is all about. Do as you're told, or suffer. That's freedom and democracy in action!!
Why does this remind me of the fable "Belling the Cat"?
Because you're thinking individually, not collectively?
Maybe "Belling the Cat" wasnt the best example- where the problem is the "little detail" that ONE mouse has to do the nearly impossible task that- if it succeeds is very much in the interest of all mice.
But no, she wasnt 'making the mistake' of thinking individually rather than collectively. You are making the mistake of only thing about the rationality of the collective endpoint.
And the prisoners dilemna does apply perfectly.... where not only is it in your interest to let someone else take the risks, but you actually have to make the choice to expose yourself before being able to know that the safety in numbers will be there.
The answer to that was that first you get your million commitments. But the prisoners dilemna is for when people have to follow through. And the knoweldge of the prisoners dilemna undermines the credibility of the massive debt default threat.
While thats a contributing obstacle to the 'organizing credibility' of getting something like this off the ground... I think the bigger obstacle is that the passion/motivation required to get a million people signing up is not even latent on this issue. Not in present conditions or conditions that all required can agree are near enough term.
- and that, in a nutshell, is what capitalism wage-slavery is all about. Do as you're told, or suffer. That's freedom and democracy in action!!
And that, in a nutshell, is what the old "Socialism or Barbarism" chestnut is all about. Do it All, or you are doing nothing.
For the record, I'm inclined to agree that we are going to have to "do it all".
But agreed or not, there still have to be first steps.
And I am yet to be convinced that knowing just how big and long and arduous the road is, materialy changes the questions of what is to be done for those first steps.
Agree
This is a serious problem for the population of Canada in general. Amongst the yuppies, who think they have 'made it', there lays little thought to future generations, as it is all about the now, and self. This in the face of their benefitting off of their ancestors work and exploitational destruction of the indigernous populatios, in order for their descendants to have a better life.
Most of those who think they have made it, figure the next genberations can take care of themselves, in a state of high cognative dissonance, this would be outside the bounds of their children's lives being micromanaged by them as parents, intent on their children making them look good and thereby handicapping them for actual social justice abilities built upon practical experience, that was self gained.
For the record, I'm inclined to agree that we are going to have to "do it all".
But agreed or not, there still have to be first steps.
And I am yet to be convinced that knowing just how big and long and arduous the road is, materialy changes the questions of what is to be done for those first steps.
"doing it all' can happen in various ways.
The French Revolution was one way - create a citizenry of deprived peasants and push them over the edge, and you get the Terror.
We could try something else - try countering the capitalist propaganda so the citizens become aware that the masters are treating them like lemmings and the cliff is rapidly approaching - we still have a functioning democracy here, and we could elect either independents or some party truly committed to grassroots democracy which would challenge the capitalist masters - if the people understood the real choices they were making (or not, for the many not voting).
Or we could have a faux-alternative party which was pretending to work 'for the people' but was really just a kind of escape valve, letting off some steam without really planning to do anything to challenge the system itself.
Or we could carry on with the status quo, and before you know it we will have our Brave New World.
I don't vote for option 4, but if I was a betting man that would be where I'd think my money was safest.
Armagedon was yesterday.
Today we have a serious problem.
Why does this remind me of the fable "Belling the Cat"?
Because you're thinking individually, not collectively?
Yes and no. I think you're thinking a bit too collectively - as in, everyone's situation is the same.
The work that I do is project-based and dependent on financing. If I happen to be among that first wave that will be hit with bad credit rating, etc, I have to look for a new profession because I can no longer do business. If I have a job, I just have a bad credit rating - I still get to eat, I'm not going to lose my house, etc. So from that standpoint, we collectively may have something to gain, but individually some of us have more to lose than others. Bigger risks. That's the individual POV.
Collectively, somebody's got to be in that first wave. So who? Much like belling the cat, I think. People are not that good at lock-step - much more like herding cats.
Caissa's point- and I agreed- was about attacking all interest. That banks and money supply are a crucial issue does not say that all interest is a problem
Although, it now seems apparent that isnt a point.
Good poison, bad poison? ...my thoughts on interest are here: www.monetaryreform.com
To be a deterrent it has to be credible. That means a million plus poised and ready to push the button- an organizational feat I'm not the only one skeptical of. AND there has to the belief that people will not just say they are going to take the leap. And thats a biggie that even fantastic organization in itself would not solve.
True the organizational challenge is daunting, however one could start by targeting the millions of people who have already filled for bankruptcy or are currently looking into it.
As to the prisoner's dilemna, do you believe that it also limits the credibility and effectiveness of nuclear deterrence? If you believe that our world leaders really are a bunch of psychos who will push the button once they believe their survival is assured, then we better get this financial deterrence concept started quickly. If you do not, then how credible is the idea of nuclear deterrence? It has certainly been used effectively to justify pumping trillions of dollars into the war machine.
Its not to my mind the most likely issue to galvanize people into that kind of organization.
Which is why I suggested an alternative organizational goal and strategy that isnt all or none and is cumulative from whatver you have to work with.
Could you expand on this a bit more, I'm still not sure what you mean.
I'm not going to argue the viability of nuclear deterrence.
But thats a model of 2, or possibly a few players. Prisioners dilemna becomes much more operant the more players you have.
Expand on which? If you mean, the alternative, its in post6 and 11.
...the prisoners dilemna is for when people have to follow through. And the knoweldge of the prisoners dilemna undermines the credibility of the massive debt default threat.
Let me clarify here that personally I would never recommend actually using (fully closing) the second tap. Since the global economy has become so highly leveraged financially, the devastation caused by a serious financial collapse would extend far beyond anything the world has ever known, including the "Great Depression". I am not a terrorist.
That being said, we may need to demonstrate that the tap actually works. This might be along the lines of Timebandit's "first wave" and could involve your idea of galvanizing residential mortgage holders only. Whatever could be agreed on and implemented as a test rocket, to demonstrate to our leaders that the threat is credible.
Once we have their serious attention, one of our demands should be to launch an ongoing, truly open, public education campaign (or channel) in the mainstream medium, that clearly reveals and explains the "other side" of the economic arguments about money and credit, globalization, resource depletion, environmental destruction, etc. This campaign must also include a look at some of the best alternatives to the current system of free-market cannibalism ...a review of the information that has conveniently disappeared from our university textbooks and the discussions in the mainstream media completely.
I'm not sure about that (but I'm an optimist). I think the passion is there but the perception or belief that we are powerless is keeping people silent and docile. It is also fuelling their neurotic escapism into entertainment, technology, alcohol, sex, anything that helps relieve the day-to-day tensions that our current situation is causing. No it won't be easy, but for the sake of our children and our grandchildren, is it not worth the effort to at least try?
We're not far apart on this. Which isnt to say I'd want to put something into it- and its been some time since I added anything new to what I already do. But it at least catches my interest.
Saying it wont be easy doesnt mean a lot. My point about the passion is that you are talking on a scale which is only possible at all if its something that is that people are already passionate about- even if that is diffuse.
You are really looking for an issue that will move more people than those who have some degree of passion about wanting to be rid of or fundamentally transform capitalism. And in a sense- debt peonage is a good leverage point: addressing it pretty inherently leads you to challenge or at least ask questions about the whole capitalist system.
But the organizing attraction is the issue itself- the hook- not where it can end up. And I would suggest that debt peonage doesnt really move a lot of people. All those reasons for it dont really matter when the question is whether this is a good starting place from where we are now. In the short term of getting people moving, those are all givens.
In principle, I do think there is some 'pressure point(s)' where there are opportunities to get people to look seriously at "you know, does this really work for me?"... and begin thinking of turning their back on it.
It would be difficult to convince people that they are not likely to lose their houses or anything else important- no more likely than the potential for that exists for all of us, whether we think about it or not.
But one thing that they would have to accept to entertain this- is torching their credit rating... not being able to use credit for some time. And thats a big hurdle to expect to clear with a collectivity of any size.
As Timebandit said, she couldnt do that. Like a lot of others, wouldnt hurt me. But you cant do something on a mass scale that depends on participation of those who have nothing major to lose.
Now a LOT of those reluctant folks would be better off if they did not use credit- with the exception of a mortgage. [Existing mortgage could be protected even if you go through with defaulting. But the ability to get another is another story.] Getting people to realize they ar better off without consumer credit would be useful in its own right... but how you get there is well, how do you get there?
You are really looking for an issue that will move more people than those who have some degree of passion about wanting to be rid of or fundamentally transform capitalism. And in a sense- debt peonage is a good leverage point: addressing it pretty inherently leads you to challenge or at least ask questions about the whole capitalist system.
But the organizing attraction is the issue itself- the hook- not where it can end up. And I would suggest that debt peonage doesnt really move a lot of people.
Well... since 2001, more than 100,000 people a year have been declaring bankruptcy or filing proposals, 1n 2009 the number reached 158,441. Plus, between 350,000 and 400,000 students are carrying direct government (OSAP) loans. Together that's 1/2 million plus that should be interesterd in the subject of debt peonage. Add to them the people who are running out of unemployment benefits and others who are approaching a financial crisis point and we might be getting close.
The problem isn't interest per se but capitalism which continues to keep large groups of people in economic slavery.
I agree that interest in itself is not the problem.
I too agree that interest is just the tip of the iceberg.
I'm pretty well acquainted with the sense of debt peonage 'on the ground' across Canada, and in the states of Michigan and California.
The proportion of people in those 2 states dwarfs what is going on Canada- both the numbers, and the fact that in those places everyone except the very wealthiest is well aware of it on a daily basis. If you arent in it, someone(s) you know pretty well is really up against the wall.
We just arent in that league in Canada. Maybe we will be. But at bottom thats speculation. And even in the hardest hit areas of the US, it takes some time for this to percolate through. In the US there is the kind of widespread angst and desperation that you are talking about that one can argue is ready to be built on, but not yet in Canada.
In Canada it would have to be a movement built mostly on the basis of "this would be a good think for all of us".
There is already a nice example of the procedure used to thwart interest and payments…It’s called BANKRUPTCY…and corporations use it all the time with impunity.
People have been raised and brainwashed to feel shame for filing but it does exactly what you wish…Wipe your slate clean etc etc. ..the only institution that always gets it’s pound of flesh tho is the government via student loans..everything else is wiped.
The thing is you don’t have to have a mass exodus of people protesting high interest…the simple degradation of the economy will do that and is doing it. The banks and loan companies will do most anything to avoid the …shhhh bankruptcy situation cause they totally lose. There are all kinds of bill payer programs and consolidation programs , all kinds of people trying to make money managing your finances, or extending it so they can milk you for every single penny.
Bottom line is ..if a couple million Canadains did what corporate Canada does you might even get a tax break or government bailouts or reduced interest..etc.
We just arent in that league in Canada. Maybe we will be. But at bottom thats speculation. And even in the hardest hit areas of the US, it takes some time for this to percolate through. In the US there is the kind of widespread angst and desperation that you are talking about that one can argue is ready to be built on, but not yet in Canada.
In Canada it would have to be a movement built mostly on the basis of "this would be a good thing for all of us".
You may be right, but the decay in Canada is accelerating very fast, and some serious lead time is required to be "Ready to Rock". I think there may already be a fairly widespread public sentiment leaning towards "screw the banks" that could be built upon and this movie, due out in October, is really going to stir things up... http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810157411/trailer