To see if the Town will seek approval from the State Legislature to explore a reconfiguration of the town tax base away from property tax to something different, presumably an income tax, which could piggy back what the State is already collecting from wages, using Department of Revenue records, or act on anything relative thereto.

EXPLANATION: We have three levels of government and three types of tax. This idea would simplify the process and be more responsive to economic changes. With a yes vote nothing is decided or binding. This is to begin the exploratory process of creating a better solution.

It is a revenue neutral idea. It is not to raise or lower taxes, but will only change how they are collected, but it comes with important advantages. People’s property will no longer be threatened by seizure for failure to pay a tax bill, nor will taxes continue to be part of mortgage payments. It would eliminate the complicated need to assess property values. The net result is that it would be easier for the town to operate and easier for the citizens.

It could possibly increase the tax base to non-property owners, and become a resident tax. There will be similar challenges with regard to commercial property and non owner-occupied properties.

Proposition 2 1/2 was simply too little, too late, and property tax continues to be a topic of hot debate and angst. A more rational system is possible. This is a first step.

To see if the Town will seek approval from the State Legislature to explore the formation of a publicly owned Community Development Financial Institute (CDFI), in collaboration with the Division of Banks and the Division of Insurance, or act on anything relative thereto.

EXPLANATION: There are CDFI’s in every state and they are privately controlled and have a narrow focus, like building affordable housing. They are administered through the US Treasury. This is a different idea, more like establishing a public light company that Holden and Shrewsbury operate, but it is not an enterprise fund. Surplus would be withdrawn to lower the tax burden.

The initial focus would be to self-insure our homeowner property. Rather than paying premiums and profits to Wall Street, we could keep those monies local and reduce the tax burden. We could eventually use the CDFI as a public bank/credit union, so mortgage or municipal interest payments are circulating within our economy.

The purpose of government is enhancing the physical and fiscal strength of the community, but we have no actual mechanism of pooling our skills and finances to support one another. This locally controlled mechanism, subject to citizen input, would dramatically change our relationship with banking and insurance, two of the major expenses of both citizens and government.

Dear Town Meeting Member,

Forty-five years ago when I walked out my front door to study History, I understood nothing about taxes, mortgages, insurance, interest, or property tax, just like most young adults of today. If you told me that someday I would suggest to Town Meeting a dramatic restructuring of municipal finance, I probably would have laughed and asked, “what does that mean?” Years later, when I signed my life away for a thirty year mortgage, I barely understood the system any better. Chances are you were in a similar boat.

I have always been a voracious reader and regularly read texts that I could barely comprehend. Now I find myself writing and saying things that others find challenging. The two warrant articles I submitted certainly fall into that category.

While the Federal government gathers all the attention, blame and hope for the conditions of our lives, I have come to the opposite conclusion: the micro is the macro. Society is laid to waste in the smallest of decisions, based on certain assumptions that are not true, but are widely shared. Like genuflecting to a king, or believing the Earth is flat, tradition can be wrong, very wrong.

America got its start in Town Meeting. Certain decisions that were followed cannot be undone, from the Revolution, to the Civil War, to our modern elections which resolve nothing beyond reinforcing echo chambers of mutual animosity at great expense and distraction. Other decisions, however, are well within our grasp. We must keep the faith and trust the spirit. Good things do not come easily, but they do come when the time is right.

The predominate problem of society is in how we handle money. We spend a lot of time discussing money, but seldom actually discussing economics and flow. Town Meeting exists primarily to approve spending, and there is little discussion of where money comes from or questioning of longstanding assumptions. Politically, the poor blame the rich and the rich blame the poor. In this “duopoly” both sides are wrong. The middle class divides along these same lines, hence the two dominate political parties. We are stuck in a cycle that I call The Democracy Wheel of Confusion. It does not matter where the spinner lands, it will not fix anything.

What I have offered in these two warrant articles is by no means a comprehensive solution, but it does offer an opportunity to alter our direction. The inertia of the current system, with three levels of government and three methods of taxation, can only change if we change it. It is unlikely that reform will come from above. Even billionaires can’t change the system. They have no idea of why they are so rich and why others are so poor.

The trouble lies in the math. We have all played a game of Monopoly. Everyone starts out equal, but with just a few trips around the board, all the wealth automatically trickles up into the hands of one player. Neither the winner, nor the loser, had any control over their destiny. Luck, and random mathematical probability, is in control of one of the most important aspects of our lives.

The whole purpose of democracy is for everyone to win. The rules of Monopoly guarantees that the vast majority loses, or are at least perpetually stressed. We can engineer a better outcome for everyone. We are competitive where we should be cooperative. It is the division of labor that raises the standard of living, but the bookkeeping is working against us.

We are all playing by the same rules, but since the rules are forcing wealth to divide, the only way to have a peaceful and prosperous society is to change bad rules for better rules. That was the central and essential promise democracy offered over monarchy. When we changed who makes the decisions, we did not change how money was handled. That continues to be the primary cause of our enduring troubles.

What is the Monopoly board trying to tell us? It is based on the ideas of Henry George, who wrote a wildly popular book in 1879, Progress and Poverty. Separate from his ideas of a Land Value Tax, which has some merit, the game reveals the mathematical currents of “the free market.” People buying and selling are all operating from a single philosophy of ‘buy low-sell high.’ Unfortunately, there is a huge mathematical difference between TRADE 1:1, and PROFIT 2:1.

If we make ten million TRADES amongst thousands of people, everyone will stay equal 1:1. If we make ten million PROFIT exchanges amongst thousands of people, we will create inflation, volatility, and inequality. Our opinion is meaningless. The math speaks loudest. Compounding an imbalance makes the imbalance bigger.

The laws of mathematics overrule whatever we hope for our community. We must reap what we sow. The conversion of time and material goods into money is likely why James Madison called paper money “wicked and improper” in Federalist #10. The hypocrisy of keeping slaves notwithstanding, he recognized and rightfully feared some of its consequence. Paper money is only 300 years old, and is being rapidly replaced by something far less stable: digital currency.

The present and the future are determined by the numbers we write down. The only way to change the future is to write down different numbers. As “radical” as these warrant articles may appear, they are actually very conservative compared to the scope of the problem, but they do put us on a different path where other necessary changes could follow. A $34 Trillion National Debt is an obvious sign of a massive bookkeeping error. It is explainable; we should stop ignoring it. It’s an economic problem, not a political one.

Our municipal and personal and business finances are too isolated from one another. We are all working at cross purposes, attempting to shift the burden of inflation, rather than being part of the solution with a comprehensive and true philosophy of behavior. Thomas Paine opened Commonsense with these words: “SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them.” The same could be said of the difference between TRADE and PROFIT. Which is true: 2+2=4 or 2+2=5?

I realize that thinking of TRADE and PROFIT as distinctly different is a challenge. I have spent most of my life self-employed. It took me a while to see it, too, but that is exactly the problem of civilization.

It was not very long ago when a 10% profit margin was considered adequate, and materials were supplied at cost, as the attached roofing invoice by a Bryn Mawr Avenue roofing company in 1956 demonstrates. Labor and Insurance was $87.84. Materials supplied at cost. 15% Overhead was $26.41, and 10% PROFIT was $20.25. Total cost for the new roof: $222.72. Today, that would not cover the labor cost of one person for one day.

Today, both materials and labor are marked up, and for a significantly higher profit margin. What has happened is that profit margins have increased over time, and as a result, so too have tax rates, interest costs and wage demands. We are living in the midst of a mathematical chain reaction. Like a snowball rolling downhill, the problem is only going to get bigger and bigger. Volatility and inequality generates more volatility and inequality.

This is not a new idea. It is a forgotten truth. Adam Smith wrote: “The nation with the highest rate of profit goes fastest to ruin.”

Town government is the only entity that exists that can coordinate a solution. We can only fix the problem by acting as one. E pluribus unum. The formation of a CDFI (Community Development Financial Institution) can eventually become the equivalent of a public bank and insurance company. Both were the entire purpose of government all along. Banking and insurance are a form of mutual aid, but the bookkeeping is sabotaging our efforts. In the aftermath of the Civil War, many banks and civic organizations formed, but again with no distinction of the difference between TRADE and PROFIT. Henry George’s book was popular because of the light it shed, but it was not enough light.

The Founding Fathers were simultaneously merchants, insurance companies, bankers and law-makers. They all wore many hats and protected each other. That’s why land ownership was a condition of voting. You could not understand how to regulate commerce without already being a manager of some sort.

Town Meeting, like being a business owner, has to manage people, resources and money. The greatest challenge is the inflation We The People are creating. There is no King to blame anymore. Businesses are cannibalizing each other in an attempt to survive, and that does not create a happy society. The “Wealth of Nations” that Adam Smith chose for his book title was the social contract. Without it, there can only be social conflict.

Government, tax rates, and government spending do not exist in the Monopoly game. It is entirely a private sector model. It reveals the flaws of capitalism. Blaming government ignores why and how wealth separates, but math explains both. The problem lies entirely in how the players handle money. Buy low-sell high generates trouble, but as the 1956 invoice shows, buy low-sell low works better. We have been going backwards as profit margins have increased. Ironically, getting richer is making us poorer as a society. As the cost of property goes up, life gets harder, just like on the Monopoly board.

Many signers of the founding documents ended up in bankruptcy, both before and after the Revolution. Adam Smith warned about the consequences of high profit margins, but it fell on too many deaf ears. Instead, desperation and lust for opportunity drove more desperation and volatility, leading eventually to the Civil War.

America has been making up rules as we went along ever since landing at Plymouth. It certainly seems counter-intuitive that lower profit margins would make a society richer. Nevertheless, the faster the cost of living rises, the greater the volatility and the misery. Inflation does makes the rich richer faster, but it also makes the volatility worse, too.

In trying to escape the problems caused by inflation, we end up making the inflation worse. This eventually leads to civil war. There is a great book on the topic called The Great Wave by a professor from Brandeis. He shows the pattern starting in the 1200’s, well before the adoption of paper money and stocks. We have amplified all the problems of agrarian economies. Every renaissance occurs during a period of pricing stability. Low profit margins create a happy environment.

A divided society can only be cured through a coordinated effort, which is the promise that Town Meeting offers. We need a method of financial cooperation, to get everyone out of debt, and to halt inflation. These two articles put us on the right path. The road ahead is still very long.

A CDFI (Community Development Financial Institute) can get us thinking and working cooperatively with our money. The town currently self-insures all town employees for health care. We would apply the same logic to property insurance, and extend the net out to all residents. Why ship premiums and profits out of town, when it is going to be local residents that repair any insurance claims? We The People are the insurance company. That is what the Founders understood. Merchants founded the nation and attempted a solution that worked for everyone. They went as far as their imagination and circumstances allowed. Like them, I was a merchant with a deep reading of history. I have found critical errors. How I wish I could travel back in time to tell them, and prevent the centuries of misery that followed. I can’t, but that is the choice I put before you.

Property tax is a huge problem, as I explained in the petition. There are other articles on the warrant to extend property tax exemptions to vulnerable populations. They are fine as far as they go, but why not eliminate the property tax instead? An income tax would automatically be better for vulnerable citizens. An income tax will make town revenue a little less predictable, but it is already unpredictable because of variability in state contributions. Having multiple governments with multiple competing percentages (income, sales and property) makes zero sense, and property tax is the worst of the three. If you are taxed for owning something, then you never actually own it. It encourages inflation in housing values, and every recession has been related to a real estate bubble that then bursts.

A virtuous society requires virtuous people, and that always requires shedding bad habits for better ones. Property tax belongs in the dustbin of history. A municipally-owned CDFI will allow us to chart a different economic future. If we can be successful, other towns will copy our approach, and in time the world we want and everyone desires for the next generation will arrive.

Don’t underestimate your power. The State House is a body of 140 people. Town Meeting is almost as big. A YES vote will have an impact.

Sincerely,

Steve Consilvio

P.S. If you are for or against, or just unsure, I would welcome an email, text, or call, with your thoughts, questions or decision. Wishing us all the best future possible!

Read more at www.behappyandfree.com

At 100% Markup, everyone is making twice as much as the previous person, doing the exact same work.

At 100% mark up wealth disparity is acute and inflation is fast. If this were an apple, the farmer would be in a crisis trying to afford his own apple. He can never produce enough to cover the cost of what he needs to purchase. It's a volatile rat race, nothing is stable. Animosity and blame grows and false solutions result in violence, making everything worse.

At 10% markup, there is no wealth disparity. The line is flat, people are happy. Everbody can afford what they need. This is when renaissances occur. Art, beauty, and peace define society. Trade is 1:1.

(Note: This same chart also reveals why the GDP measure is a farce. A $16 million economy is no different than a $1.5 million economy. Socially, the allegedly bigger economy is worse to live in).

Money must circulate to lubricate, but as we know from the Monopoly game, it also trickles up into the hands of one player. Money circulates between government (taxes), Businesses (profits), Banks (interest) and Workers (wages). Markups create inflation wherever the percentage is applied. Everybody wants "more," but the actual solution is in working together and writing down smaller numbers.

Deficit Financing is the perfect solution for money, but we are using it wrong. Much like the steam pressure relief valve that Goddard used to launch his rocket, we can harness this mathematical pressure of "precentage added" to do things for a positive effect: a peaceful and prosperous society. Money is not a "forever problem" if we change our understanding and behavior.

YouTube Video
About 20 minutes long.

Pre-Town Meeting testimony, with some added material of why Trade and Profit are very different, and how inflation gets created. 



At one time, a king would be embarrassed by poverty in his kingdom. We should be more embarrassed to have poverty in a democracy.

Ronald Reagan once quipped, “There was a war on poverty. Poverty won.” A closer reading of events is that while he did not create the situation, to some degree, he gave up the battle. Supply Side Economics and tax cuts for the rich were supposed to increase government revenues by generating an economic boom, and the resulting growth would trickle down to the poorest of society, thereby lifting them up, and preserving government and a strong military without increasing the deficit. It never happened according to plan. Taxing Social Security to offset tax cuts for the wealthy made the safety net for the elderly and poor more threadbare. Inflation, national debt, and personal debt, have continued unabated, no matter how much the economy has grown.

A faith in the healing power of economic growth is hardly new. A generation earlier, JFK similarly claimed that “a rising tide lifts all boats.” This idea was floated three centuries ago. Growth was the reason behind the adoption of paper money. Originally started in France, it took root here in America when a young 26 year-old Ben Franklin in Philadelphia suggested it. His 1729 pamphlet, “A Modest Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper-Currency,” changed our world. We are all familiar with the good results. The bad result is that paper money has made inflation, debt, and inequality infinite in scale, too. Millions became billions and now we wrestle with trillions, an unfathomable number three centuries ago. Poverty endures with a new friend: volatility.

Growth as problem solver is ubiquitous. Every business pushes for more growth, more sales, more profit. Churches hope to have every seat filled. Local government, similarly, relies on New Growth to supplement the annual budget. Yet, after 300 years of growth, poverty is still “winning.” Boom becomes bust eventually, just like during a game of Monopoly.

While technology and manufacturing output has dramatically changed our standard of living, inequality has continued unabated. We are a somewhat less ruthless people, having ended slavery and child labor, but a lot of that cruelty was exported to overseas manufacturing. College students with over a trillion in debt is a dark cloud on the horizon. We chase the numbers more than we master them.

Whatever getting rid of the King was supposed to accomplish, it has not worked. Disagreements about taxes, anger at government, the blaming of fellow citizens, businesses, corporations, banks, insurance companies, landlords, churches and schools is as ripe today as it has ever been.

The game Monopoly offers an important clue as to what is going on. Everybody starts equal, plays by the rules, and all the money ends up in the hands of one player. The winner did not cheat; the loser did nothing different than the winner. The result is only luck, but it happens consistently. We must ask what, why, and how?

The first observation must be that the rules of the game force wealth to trickle up automatically. How do we create a better society where we all trade, but nobody automatically slides behind? The answer is in the math, and it is on full display with every game, if we have the eyes to see it.

If you compound an imbalance, no matter how small the difference initially, it will become very big. A piece of paper folded in half just fifty times would be thick enough to reach the Sun. Folded once more, it would reach to the Sun and back. A single penny, compounded fifty times, would be $11,258,999,068,426.24. A few trips around the Monopoly board is enough to drive all the wealth in the game into the hands of one player. Profit represents an imbalance, 2:1. Whereas trade is equality 1:1. My hour for your hour. Compounding trade lifts up everyone. Compounding profit divides society.

At the rate we are going, eventually the entire world will be owned by a single corporation. This is not what Franklin envisioned, but it may have been what James Madison feared in Federalist #10, when he called paper money an “improper or wicked project.” Bitcoin, NFT (non-fungible tokens) and stocks are all fuzzy derivatives of paper money. The rich will continue to get richer, and the poor will get poorer, until we have the courage to make bigger and smarter structural changes.

The enemy is inflation, and the method of destruction is the “percentage added.” We have brought this misery upon ourselves through routine bookkeeping called GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles).

When we adopted paper money, we converted all labor and materials into a mathematical construct. The $34 Trillion national deficit is a massive but explainable bookkeeping error, and debt in the private sector is nearly as large. There are better alternatives for ourselves and future generations. It is the numbers that enslave us and it is numbers that can liberate us.

For a brief time I was appointed to the local Housing board, which was in the habit of starting meetings with the Pledge of Allegiance. When I was chosen as Chair, I suggested we add the closing words to the Declaration of Independence to our pledge, which are: “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

Every society is in a perpetual struggle between man’s better and baser impulses. A virtuous society requires virtuous people. America is suffering from partisan discord because we have lost a workable definition of virtue. We love money more than justice. We are regularly too afraid or too proud. Often both. Public servants often swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. The Declaration pledge is different because it is both a “God is watching us” statement, but also a pledge to one another. A more perfect union does not come about by chance. Only a clear and precise understanding of our responsibilities, within a broader social contract, can prevent social conflict.

A willingness to sacrifice our lives and fortunes for the greater good indicates great trust. Soldiers do it routinely. They do not know or understand the facts or reasons behind orders, they only follow them. Yet, we put the Nazis on trial specifically for following orders. We were able to do so because a definition of virtue was broadly understood. Morality and the Golden Rule form the basis of virtue. All of the problems within and between every nation stem from a lack of trust or the failure to be trustworthy. Virtue demands a clear and true definition. Integrity matters.

Leo Tolstoy wrote that the truth is like gold, you refine it by removing impurities. The same sentiment is echoed in the lyrics of America the Beautiful:

God mend thine every flaw, Confirm thy soul in self-control, Thy liberty in law!

The greater part of wisdom is in self-restraint, which is why the Ten Commandments primarily constrain personal behavior. Part of the unfortunate truth of American history is that the Declaration of Independence is actually a declaration of treason. The trust of their fellow countrymen had collapsed. Lawbreakers fancied themselves as lawmakers. Slave-masters complained about impositions on their liberty while keeping others enslaved. Jefferson, author of the Declaration, and a slave-master, wanted Moses depicted on the new currency. This is a huge contradiction. Hypocrites can be eloquent and sympathetic, but the consequences remain. A few signers of the Declaration released their slaves after signing. Most did not. The majority were slave-masters.

They were angry at the Crown over economic issues, and claimed they would sacrifice everything they had for a better society for future generations, but somehow freeing their slaves and paying taxes was a bridge too far. This originalist contradiction continues to haunt us.

The founders believed they could be better men, and “mend thine every flaw,” but could not see the same struggle in others. All revolutionaries embrace similar contradictions. Jihadists will fly planes into banks to commit murder-suicide. Bolsheviks brutalized citizens to save them from the Tsar and imperialism. Nazis put people in box cars and camps. Crusaders baptized children before bashing their heads. Radicals manned the barricades and blocked the streets. Revolutionary movements constantly claim the ends will justify the means. Somehow, talking things out rationally, is too great a burden. An enduring peace was the great promise of democracy.

After 250 years, we have still had plenty of war. People are driven by emotion, but not necessarily compassion. They think their fear, pride and greed is commonsense, and beyond rebuke. As Jesus put it, they will swallow a camel whole, but strain on a gnat. We are all born innocent, become hypocrites, and must escape our own hypocrisy, both individually and collectively. That is what every great awakening and renaissance in history demonstrates. A better world is possible only if we are a better people.

Was murder the only path to democracy? Was murder the only way to end slavery? Discussing things rationally should not be so challenging, for those with or without power. The point about honor included in the Declaration is elementary. We must judge ourselves. “Enemies in War, in Peace Friends,” is not good enough. We now have a democracy. Every war is a mark of shame. We have failed our duty.

Ronald Reagan said in his 1981 inaugural address, “How can we love our country and not love our countrymen; and loving them, reach out a hand when they fall, heal them when they're sick, and provide opportunity to make them self-sufficient so they will be equal in fact and not just in theory?” Eisenhower thought even more broadly. “We must realize that no arsenal or no weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.”

The strong must help the weak. There will always be those stronger or weaker than ourselves. We must reach out to both to create a nation of justice. We must have the moral courage to choose love instead of hate.

Would you sign a pledge for a better world, promising your life, fortune and sacred honor? Will you trust, share, protect, and lift up your neighbor? The choice you make will be the world you leave behind for your children and grandchildren generations hence. Are you a beacon of light, or a guardian of darkness and selfishness? If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. No one can serve two masters. Take a measure of your hypocrisy. Do you love money more than justice? Don’t be afraid to change. Don’t be afraid of change. Take responsibility.

It can seem like America is in the midst of a culture clash between woke and anti-woke forces. Similarly, there appears to be a clash between “collectivists” and the libertarian wing of the Republican Party. Democrats are regularly accused of being Marxists, socialists, and communists, whereas the rightwing are accused of being fascists, Nazis, and dictators. America is quite an intellectual mess.

If we are not careful, it could boil over into a civil war. If that happens, it will not be a nice and neat conflict like North versus South. It will be like the angst we see around the world, where a civilized society descends into warlordism, and every neighborhood lives a miserable chaotic existence.

Lincoln is routinely feted as our greatest president, because he preserved the union and freed the slaves. Yet, every strongman that rules over a divided country takes the same drastic measures he did. Was the blood spilled by Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Mao Zedong, Stalin or Hitler and many others any different? Nations make war on their own citizens based on a competing set of ideologies. Lincoln did not do anything different than what the Crown did earlier, but we demonize the British and idolize Abe.

Would our history have been dramatically different if Lincoln was not assassinated? Could he have become President-for-Life like the other despots? Historians are not supposed to speculate, but politicians do it routinely with the blanket of great expectations that they wrap around every new law. When viewing the past at arms length, patterns emerge.

The Civil War marks the failure of the Constitution, and the Constitution marks the failure of the Confederation. Shay’s Rebellion in Massachusetts, in the seemingly best administered state of the Confederation, was a dramatic shock. Domestic upheaval and mob rule were things that the founders feared, just as it was feared by the Crown. Everyone wants a peaceful, stable and prosperous society. The road to Revolution began with passage of the Sugar Act of 1763. After victory in the French and Indian War, the Crown imposed a tax to cover war costs. It was met with a resistance that only grew as more attempts to collect were tried.

After the signing of the Constitution, there was similarly a tax on whiskey to pay for the revolutionary war. This likewise led to resistance, what we call The Whiskey Rebellion. We have all the same problems under democracy as we had under monarchy. Wars are expensive, and are fought over money. Nobody wants to pay taxes, either.

The condensed history I just described is NOT a culture clash. Civil wars are not a culture clash. It is more like two dogs fighting over two bones, each insisting on having both. Both too dumb to share. There is nothing sane about war, whether hot or cold. It is a vast waste of resources, but these disagreements are NOT a culture clash. These are battles of pride, fear, and greed. Stupid versus stupid.

An ongoing culture clash is part of our story, however, and it began over 500 years ago when Columbus accidentally discovered two continents. This clash between the continents of Eurasia and the Americas is buried under a mountain of gold, silver, jewels, paper money, and electronic digits. Eurasia used money for thousands of years; the Americas never used money. This was a culture clash of the most epic proportions. Native tribes lived a mostly peaceful, stable and prosperous existence. While primitive by our modern standards of technology, in many ways it was a superior society. Their advanced political systems were envied and copied by the colonies. There would have been no Confederation of the United States without the Iroquois Confederation.

Just like us, Native Americans enjoyed trade and new things that strangers offered. Some were good, like metal pots and horses. Others items created problems, like alcohol and money. Before long, they shared the same characteristics of the two dogs fighting over two bones. The insanity of Europe was planted in the new world.

War regularly follows trading routes. Japan was forced open to international trade is 1853, and by 1941, less than a century later, was attacking Pearl Harbor. The same problem repeats at the local factory, where the owners and workers cannot agree over money. The micro is the macro. Money distorts trade, and soldiers want to be paid in money. It’s a self-fulfilling vicious cycle.

Money makes people insane, even though it is completely make-believe. Native tribes understood this. They did not want to use money, whereas we never stop fighting over and discussing money. We have bound our survival to money. Both societies created advanced civilizations. This means that science fiction television like Star Trek, where money is obsolete, is entirely possible. We just have to choose to build that society, which is no less radical than ending monarchy after thousands of year. What seems impossible is not.

It should be commonsense that what we are doing is not working, and we “furnish the means by which we suffer.” Even if we continue to use money, we certainly need to change our understanding and handling of it. There is no Crown to blame anymore. “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

It is a great irony that Columbus proved the world wasn’t flat. Yet, when it comes to money, we hold onto marketplace ideas with the same dogmatic fear as resisting the world was round. Reformers are met with the same intolerance that the Pope treated Galileo. We have science, and a fear of science simultaneously. Thousands of years of problems with money all stem from our bookkeeping: 2+2=5. The belief in profit is as absurd as a flat earth or the divine blood of royalty. We have allowed money to become our master, and now we are enslaved by our habits. Even the Book of Leviticus bans profit and interest. A better world is possible, but we refuse to accept divine instruction.

Imagine if we continued everything we are doing today, but never used money in any transaction, the same as the natives did for thousands of years. Focus on the problem itself, not how to pay for it. We have doubled our troubles by trying to double our money.

How much less worry would there be without using money? Everything we created we could consume, or gift to one another. It is very easy for everyone to produce far more than they can consume. Our landfills are bursting, and we are destroying our natural environment, all because of money. And, stressing ourselves into a sad, sorry and psychotic state of mind.

When Columbus landed he was showered with gold trinkets. It had no monetary value. Everything was already a gift from the Earth; just add labor. The natives did not know a sword was sharp and someone accidentally cut themselves. Which was the superior race and society?

Woof, Woof. This old dog is not afraid to think outside of the box. We are not obliged to repeat the mistakes of the past.

250 years ago Thomas Paine was working on a timely critique of monarchy when the events of April 19th 1775 occurred. Following in the wake of the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party and other assorted umbrages over taxes, tariffs and monopolistic favors, his essay captured the imagination of everyone struggling to survive. A few key phrases drive the entire polemic:

1. We furnish the means by which we suffer

2. Time makes more converts than reason (reason won’t convince those governed by emotion and enjoying privilege)

3. The lord shall rule over you (monarchy is illegitimate)

Taken together, it is a broadside against patience. There is nothing to be gained from waiting.

We hear an echo of these sentiments in the Declaration of Independence. “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” The tariffs and monopolistic trading rights had forced the colonies to regularly engage in smuggling, which was both immoral and illegal. Any Christian would know that they were obliged to follow the law, even if they disagreed with it. Deists similarly recognized that law and order ensured a better society than one where everyone was at odds with their rulers.

Paine’s critique against the legitimacy of the King is very important. He tells the story of Gideon, the general, who after a resounding victory was lobbied to be their King. He refused the honor, saying, “the Lord should rule over you!” This is the intellectual foundation for small, limited government, personal liberty with high personal standards, and the death of monarchy.

The story of Gideon reinforces a previous point Paine had made about man in nature trying to forge a new society: Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness, he wrote, but also,* “the strength of one man is so unequal to his wants.”* We are stronger and happier united. A supply chain and the division of labor is what makes a society thrive. Government has an important role; it constrains the wicked and empowers the good.

The fear of wickedness explains why Madison was so singularly focused on a system of checks and balances. The Constitution was not created to protect individual rights, it was an attempt to constrain our baser nature. He only acquiesced to the Bill of Rights because politically it would not otherwise pass. The good needed protections.

They all recognized that a virtuous society requires virtuous people. Paine wrote:* “For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other law-giver.” *Conscience clear, requires an actual working definition and cultural acceptance of standards of behavior. Debate and consensus were supposed to provide that, but after generations of conflict, we must admit failure and seek its cause. It wasn’t the king.

“The law” can not be whatever we agree with; it must be what is objectively and rigorously tested to prove as true, good, and holy. We need to conform to the truth; the truth does not bend to our opinion. A definition of morality is critical. Without one, neither the people nor the government can act ethically.

The cause is revealed by the laws of mathematics. A $34 Trillion deficit should provide ample empirical evidence. Something is seriously out of whack with the bookkeeping.

Regardless of who is in charge or how decisions get made, there has been a perpetual conflict over personal and municipal finance. Even in societies primarily agricultural, where money use was limited, conflict has been common. Every revolution has failed to meet its promise. Democratic, communist, jihadist, nazi, monarchy, all anyone has ever argued about is money. Whatever is causing the conflict, it is old and universal.

The Crown is gone; we must accept the inevitable: “We have met the enemy, and he is us.” We are the ones furnishing the means by which we suffer, not the crown; not the top 1% or the bottom 1%, not the stranger, not the weak or the powerful, not a race, party or religion. It has to be in how we all understand finance.

Ideas rule the world. Good ideas work. Bad ideas don’t. We need to escape from the Democracy Wheel of Confusion.

As Paine wrote, we must choose* “the necessity of establishing some form of government to supply the defect of moral virtue.”* Government is our reflection, and is only as wise and virtuous as we are capable. What are we all missing?

The universal characteristic of money is to “buy low, sell high.” That is where the problem lies, and that is where the solution lies, too.

You are probably thinking to yourself, “Huh? What is the alternative?” When the Soviet Union fell, and the people were learning about capitalism, they were most puzzled by “Who will set the prices?” Like the collapse of monarchy, and “Who will make the decisions?” It matters not who decides, what matters is that they are right, and the system works. Can we admit that a $34 trillion debt marks failure, and that “non-profits” have some of the world’s greatest hoards, all tax-free? We can no more logically price an egg than a home. Yet we have convinced ourselves that the marketplace is perfect at distribution. The situation is absurd.

My favorite part of Common Sense is in the opening paragraph: “a long Habit of not thinking a Thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defence of Custom. But the Tumult soon subsides. Time makes more Converts than Reason.”

Time makes more converts than reason because we are taught falsehoods when young, and it takes effort to grasp mistakes we have internalized for years. At one time genuflecting to a king was common sense. For us, it is the widespread belief in marketplace theory. “Buy low, sell high” does not and can not work, but “Buy low, sell low” works perfectly.

To chase a criminal you follow the money, but to understand a problem you follow the math. Capitalism, as we currently practice it, can’t work. The bookkeeping is completely wrong, hence the $34 Trillion deficit. But with a few minor tweaks, it can work amazingly well.

Money must circulate to lubricate. It is the lack of circulation that creates friction. The ideal profit margin is zero. Break even. No profit, no loss. Zero is the most beautiful number in the world.

Imagine I farm potatoes, you are ranching cattle. By sharing, we both have an ample supply of steak and potatoes. Someone else has carrots and broccoli, we all trade equally, and our plates gets bigger and more diverse with the more people we add to our circle. This is the natural state of trade 1:1. Buy low, sell low.

Profit is a dramatically different thing. It is 2:1 or some random percentage that metastasizes like a cancer. Before long, one person’s plate is overflowing, while the other producers are going hungry. Even farmers that grow food directly go hungry. We know this is a fact. Farmers worldwide are struggling. It’s all because we are not trading properly. The numbers we write down are nonsense, but because everyone is doing it, we have no choice but to follow suit.

If you have ever played a game of Monopoly, then you already know the problem. Everyone starts out equal. After a few rounds across the board, the money automatically trickles up and concentrates. The winner is not better or smarter. The losers are not inferior or lazy. It’s all just luck. But, there is a mathematical impulse driving the result which we can easily eliminate. Everybody can win simultaneously, but we must change our thinking.

Big structural change is necessary. It’s as big as ending thousands of years of monarchy, but no blood needs to be spilled, and it can be painless. Paper money makes anything possible.

The Battle at Lexington and Concord is often referred to as the shot heard around the world. The big event actually occurred fifty-five years earlier, with the adoption of paper money. Which, even as late as the 1780’s, was referred to as a “wicked project” by James Madison in Federalist #10.

I mentioned earlier that money must circulate to lubricate. It cycles through government, businesses, banks, and citizens in a perpetual loop. We call their revenue different names: taxes, profit, interest, or wages, but mathematically they are all the same; a percentage added. The problem is that everyone is working at cross purposes. We are all attempting to cost-shift onto each other. This in turn generates inflation, and accelerates the cost-shifting. Profit creates a volatility where one can win or lose everything rapidly. We have turned ourselves into pawns of game theory. No matter how successful we may be, it is not sustainable. The one is always at the disadvantage of the many. Any random event can cause financial chaos. While corporations enjoy decided advantages, even they are perpetually gobbled up by another. At some point, one corporation will own the entire world.

Cost shifting is the root of blame shifting. Everyone thinks their revenue is too low, and someone else is to blame. The democratic revolutions blame government and taxes, the communist revolutions blame businesses and profits, the jihadist revolutions blame banks and interest. The unions just insist on higher wages. We are all creating inflation. Whatever our revenue is, it is an expense for someone else. That’s why ‘percentage added’ does not work, but “trade” can: my hour for your hour. The Earth is here for all of us. All we need to do is add our labor and coordinate our efforts for best effect. Many hands make light work, if properly managed. We can only overcome these mathematical problems through consensus, cooperation and intelligent regulation.

We must pour new wine into new wine-skins. The process needs to begin at local government. We have three levels of government (town, state, federal) and three forms of taxation (property, sales, income), but the micro is the macro. If we get the towns right, then we will get the nation right. It is in the towns where the blame and anger takes root that leads to revolution, but the towns have brought all their problems upon themselves. That’s where we all live. We have all acquiesced to an absurd mathematical framework. Everyone in town is living off one of the four different revenue streams. We need to stop harming each other financially.

The wisest thing to do would be to declare a jubilee and start over. If that is a bridge too far, then every town should form a CDFI (Community Development Financial Institute). This would work as an insurance company and a public bank. The goal is to eliminate debt and inflation. We would also need to change how the real estate market operates. I think the easiest way to regulate that is to have all property brokered through town hall. If you want to sell your house, the town buys it. If you want to buy a house, you choose from the town inventory. This way we can control prices, and by controlling the price of real estate, we can regulate everything properly.

Most people don’t know the most important parts of our colonial history, including myself until recently. There were going to be no taxes under independence. (Read that again!) The idea was that government revenue would be fully funded by tariffs and the selling of native lands. They could imagine a government without taxes, but could they imagine a world without war? That’s what I am after.

The seeds to the American Revolution began with the Sugar Act, which was imposed to pay for the French and Indian War. The colonies wanted the defense, and the government spending, but not the costs. The Crown had also made two other decisions which antagonized the colonies. One, the Appalachian Ridgeline was to mark the end of colonial settlement. Everything west was to be reserved for native tribes. Two, slavery was to be abolished. There was no appetite for these regulations, but they would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.

Instead we went to war. And to pay for the war, after the Constitution was accepted, Washington imposed a Whiskey tax, just like the Sugar tax. This led to the Whiskey Rebellion. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

We have been dealing with the fallout of paper money for 300 years. It has been a crazy experiment and a wild ride for mankind. New money, new continents, new technology, new ideas, new politics, but the same old problems of poverty and war. The problem is in the math, and the solution is in the math. The truth does not change. We must change to meet it. The time has come again “to abolish the forms to which we are accustomed.”

Leviticus 25:36: Take no interest from him or profit, but fear your God, that your brother may live beside you.