HOW TO JOIN KUMEKUCHA'S CLUB1999 TODAY

HOW TO JOIN KUMEKUCHA'S CLUB1999 TODAY
Click on the image for all the information YOU need!

Saturday, August 01, 2009

From The Archives: Kumekucha Classic

special weekend edition classic kumekucha throwback from the archives

7 Things That Will Happen To Kenya If Kibaki Is Re-elected

Most Kenyans are like the proverbial Ostrich that when faced with a rapidly approaching forest fire, prefers to bury its' head in the sand and hope that the fire will just go away.

The rapidly approaching "fire" is the re-election of President Mwai Kibaki for a second term. Kenyans are well able to stop this happening, especially the young people of Kenya who just need to unite and speak in one voice.

There are even those Kenyans who feel that a Kibaki re-election may not be such a bad thing after all. The feel that the economy has recovered and is growing at unprecedented levels and Kanu is out of power.

The facts on the ground are a little different. One thing in particular that Kenyans have failed to see to see, or feel the effects of, is the so-called economic growth. I tend to agree with the economist's view that I feel is very close to the truth that points in a different direction for the answers to the current so-called strength of the Kenyan economy. It is believed that Kenyans who are now scattered all over the world have been sending money back home for investment and upkeep at unprecedented levels which has kept the Kenyan shilling very strong and cushioned the economy against current adverse effects like that of rising world oil prices. Apart from that the economic miracle of the Kibaki government is a mirage at best and a bad tasteless joke at worse.

Whatever your opinion may be, here is what Kenyans should expect from a Mwai Kibaki Re-election victory in 2007;

i) Disaster And Civil Unrest On A Massive Scale: Continuation of the current policies that ignore the plight of the majority of ordinary Kenyans especially in the area of job creation (the position of the Kibaki administration: Interest rates are low and banks are now eager to lend, why don't the penniless get working, go to the nearest bank and borrow money to start a business?). This administration believes that the Constituency Development Fund is enough to cater for the millions of Kenyans now living below the poverty line. This is a terrible mistake because this is a time bomb that will surely go off. We have already seen some tiny explosions in terms of rising levels of crime that are overwhelming the better equipped and much larger police force we have today. This big time bomb is bound to go off within a year of President Kibaki's re-election. Only a brand new administration headed by a new younger generation of Kenyans, preferably non-golf playing individuals, have any hope of seeing and addressing this priority with the urgency it deserves. It would also help if at least a few influential faces in such a new administration have used a pit latrine recently.

ii) More Commissions Of Inquiry: If you thought Moi had overused commissions of inquiry, then President Kibaki has taken them to new heights. He is now spending taxpayers money to constitute commissions of inquiry to probe members of his own immediate family. Something that can be sorted out in a 10-minute family meeting one lazy Sunday afternoon long before even the public gets wind of it, now takes up public funds and the valuable time of public officers. How else would one view the Artur's saga?

For the uninformed, commissions of inquiry are never meant to get to the bottom of anything. The idea is to be seen to be doing something while time passes so that people forget about the thorny issue at hand. Name one commission of inquiry in Kenya that has produced results to date.

Expect many more commissions of inquiry in a second Kibaki administration and no real solid action.

iii) Dozing off during cabinet meetings. The President will be 76 next year. By the time he completes his second term he will be 81 years old. Surely, let reason prevail as you answer this question. Is this the right age to deal with the problems facing the world today, let alone the problems facing most Kenyans that need radical new ideas to tackle?

The Vice President is the President's age-mate and then there is defense minister Njenga Karume. Those who are familiar with folks this age, please answer the following question; What are the odds of this cabinet staying awake and alert through a 30 minute cabinet meeting (no cabinet meeting is that short)?

iv) More Youth Funds Special funds are usually set up to help people who can otherwise not help themselves. Refugees, widows orphans etc. When a fund is set up to help the people who should be the most active in the economy of a country, then you know that there is something very wrong. In a second Kibaki administration expect the same policies that make Kenyans refugees and less fortunate in their own country so that more youth funds will be constituted to be administered by the same politicians who are experienced in handling funds like in the Goldenberg saga and Anglo Leasing affair.

v) Meanwhile Current Crop of youth leaders are growing old By the time the next elections come in 2012, Kenyans born at independence in 1963 will be approaching 50, 5 years away from the usual retirement age of 55. Is that the right time to hand over leadership to them? Mwai Kibaki joined the cabinet when he was 28 years old. He wants to leave when he is 81. Somebody help me make sense out of this.

vi) More Anglo Leasings And More Goldenbergs The financial scandals never end. There are those Kenyans who believe that because they are being exposed, somehow they will stop. Did you hear about the recent scandal where Cabinet Minister Njenga Karume sold land that he could not previously sell to the government. This administration says there is nothing wrong and everything was above board. Expect many more deals between senior influential cabinet ministers and the government that are "transparent and above board".

vii) We Will always do things the way they were done in the 60s So you are excited about the information age and what modern technology is capable of? And maybe you see it being put to good use to improve the lot of Kenyans? Forget it. Have you tried to talk to a person over 60 years of age recently? They see things very differently, the way they have always been since the swinging 60s. But Osama Bin Laden didn't exist then and neither were automatic weapons so easy to acquire for use in a crime. A second Kibaki term will be quite similar to this first one, a field day for wazee hukumbuka buffs, disaster for the nation.

If you are reading this and you still intend to play Ostrich or believe that there is nothing wrong with a second Kibaki term, then I have only one last thing left to say to you…

Will the last person leaving Kenya remember to switch off the lights…

Chris

35 comments:

Taabu said...

Chris,
Please confirm or deny that you were the last person BISHOP Owuor baptized in some swimming pool last weekend.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Bwana Chris, with due respect, the more one reflects on what is really going in Kenya, and the rest of the world, the more he or she realises that, whichever party is in power or persons, there will be no REAL change in the circumstances of the majority poor. This will be untill the common people understand how our current FEUDALISTIC monetary and banking system works.

Let us illustrate why most people and especially the young and old will continue to sink into poverty no matter who is in power.

In this year's budget, UK promised to borrow to the tune of 109 billion KES. Now, this money and interest will be paid using our tax, i.e. there will be more tax to pay this debt, or, there will be reduction in social spending areas such as health, education and infrastructure. Simply, expect more poverty in the years to come.

But, what is really going on? The public debt is nothing but Gilt Edged Securities, i.e. IOU's from the state for NOTIONAL MONEY.

The Kenyan Govt. borrows this money from so called BONDHOLDERS. And, the bondholders borrow this money from the BANKS which are AUTHORISED by the Govt.

Can all see the madness going on here? The State, which is the ultimate issuer of the National currency and the ULTIMATE MONETARY AUTHORITY in the first place, is borrowing from the PERSONS it has licenced to CREATE money.

Funny enough, these banks create this money OUT OF THIN AIR. To make it worse, since this amounts to MONETIZATION of the debts, it will drive inflation even higher. This will mean higher prices for the people who are already dead poor. You need to get scared about our future.

So, if banks can create money out of thin are, why can't the state do so? Why should citizens of any nation borrow money when the state can create it?

Abraham Lincoln wrestled with this question during the American civil war. Since bankers were asking intrest to the tune of about 30%, he decided to create his own money, i.e. the Greenback. Thus, Abraham Lincoln was able to win the war without burdening the American citizens with debts.

The money changers that Jesus drove from the Temple, wasted no time in reacting to this. In the London Times. They responded that:

"If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

Well, we know that Abraham's head stopped a bullet. And, as they say, the rest is history.

As we noted jana, if anyone is to create wealth and end poverty in Africa, that person must have the brains, courage and resoluteness of Thomas Sankara, Che Guevera and Castro combined.

Even with the so called young Kenyans, we are yet to hear anyone willing to end this madness. If it is impossible to create wealth under these arrangements, why is no one talking about them?

We are talking about everything else apart from the UNDERLYING CAUSE of our misery. How funny.

Anonymous said...

Sounds curiously similar to arguments advanced for dealing with California's budget crisis? A budget crisis you had falsely attributed to a lack of property taxation.....

But this idea is generally not new. Governments have been known to resort to money printing to finance their debts. This is no PANACEA for making poverty history, and you should be honest and open about the risks associated with fiat money, including the inflation that you seem inclined to attribute only to banks.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous wrote that:

But this idea is generally not new. Governments have been known to resort to money printing to finance their debts. This is no PANACEA for making poverty history, and you should be honest and open about the risks associated with fiat money, including the inflation that you seem inclined to attribute only to banks.


Our response:

Firstly, you seem not to understand the meaning of fiat money. All money, whether gold backed or not, is nothing but fiat money. We would be happy to hear your views on land tax.

Secondly, facts speak for themselves. Let us table the facts from UK on this issue.

Between 2003 and 2008, the UK banks CREATED £ 800 billions of new money. This is against the total supply of money in the UK of around £ 1,800 billion. This means that, nearly half of the UK has been created by the banks in the last 7 years alone. Can you inform us what was backing this money?

It sounds good that the supply of money has increased. However, one can only argue that, if he forgets that, as they CREATE new money, they CREATE NEW DEBTS.

Flowing from the above is that, as this lending goes on, debt repayments assumes a huge proportion of our income. This means that, most of the income is going to pay banks while other parts of the economy shrink.

Furthermore, what many do not realise in this way of doing things is that, the ability to pay your debt is TOTALLY dependent on the banks giving out more loans. This means that, if the banks do not create new money via debts as they have done in the last 2 years, many will default and lose their property. Can't you see a form of slavery here? In fact, the whole damn this is a ponzi scheme.

The larger point that we wanted to raise is this. Free Economy/Free Enterprise, i.e. the ability to create wealth depends on three essentials:

(a) Control of means of exchange.
(b) Control of means of production, and
(c) Control of means of distribution.

We want our debate to centre on these essentials. The question we have for you is this. Why on earth, is the MEANS OF EXCHANGE is monopoly of states all over the world?

As you answer that question, bear in mind this. Exchange is the neck of the bottle in the productive consumptive cycle. It is thus, the FINAL determinant of human progress. Why do States cling to this monopoly?

Anonymous said...

Its said Justice delayed is Justice denied.
How many ordinary Kenyans are denied this
Justice in our Kenyan courts?If a case can take six (6) years to conclude,then wait for one (1) year for the judgement to be delivered.
Over eight (8) months elapse without getting proceedings to enable the accused person to appeal.And the laws say you have the right to appeal within
14 days.
1) What should be done in such circumstances?
2) Who checks he judiciary for incompetence and delays in the delivery
of justice?
3) How can the chief Justice (C.J)
discipline the lazy and incompetent judges?
4) Are these same courts we shall depend on to try the perpetrators of post election violence?
5) If our judges had cases in these
courts that dragged on for years, how would they feel?

Mwarang'ethe said...

In our last posting we noted that, all money has always and will always been FIAT money. To appreciate where we are coming from, we must bear in mind a few cardinal truths about money:

(a) The first cardinal truth of money is that, no one, whether a govt. or an individual can issue money without buying something.

(b) The second cardinal truth is that money must be backed with something, and the act of backing can only be the act of selling.

It follows that to issue adequate, sound and stable money, it must spring SOLELY from the same source of all wealth, which is the people.

Money can only be issued in the act of BUYING, and can only be backed in the act of SELLING. Thus, any buyer who who is a seller is qualified to issue money. Government being not a seller, cannot and never be qualified to issue money.

However, since we do not understand how to constitute a govt. we have asked them to issue money without backing it. As a result, such issuance amounts to an attack on private enterprise through INFLATION. This is so because, if you issue money without CREATING EQUIVALENT values it is to inflate.

To appreciate fully what we saying, bear this in mind. The purpose of money is to convert barter from a completed transaction into two halves. This means that one trader (the buyer) receives full satisfaction in value and the other (seller) receives the assurance of an equivalent value later from some another trader. Thats the true meaning of money.

Once we comprehend fully the meaning of the above para. we shall see that, the purpose of money is to obviate the transference of value one way of another.

Thus, to talk about fiat money is to betray ignorance of money. Money substitutes credit for value, but credit is a social credit, i.e. it springs from or rest upon the common creditability of the trading community.

The money instrument, however, springs from the fiat of the issuer, a fiat that the issuer is qualified to issue. This means that, the actual creation of money instrument can only take place only by a fountain of a pen.

All valuable stuff like gold etc are not money. This is so cos money is nothing but a memorandum, a credit instrument, a book keeping device which split barter into two halves, and IS MONEY ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT IT OBVIATES DELIVERY OF VALUE by the transmitter.

Having come this far, the only question facing us is whether issuance of money is to be A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE OF A FEW or the RIGHT OF ALL. It is this decision that will determine the future of humanity.

So, what we have now is a marriage of political democracy of Thomas Jefferson combined with ECONOMIC AUTOCRACY of Adam Smith. Political democracy cannot work without economic democracy, and the money power is the FRANCHISE of the latter.

It is therefore, nothing but futile to imagine that, we can have freedom when the very life blood of our private enterprise is controlled by the government. By accepting this, we nullify our political power.

This means that, there will never be full distribution of wealth without full distribution of money power. When humanity shall have realised this, it shall cease to PETITION govt. because the govt. shall be utterly be dependent on them.

Until we realise these truths, we can change the personnel as we like using our ballot in vain. This is so because monetary control by citizens over the state is the only form of democracy that is effective. And, since we lack this money democracy today, we labour in vain.

KITWEKSPEAK said...

No struggle comes without bloodshed. Even the natives of this great country had to die in their masses for an independent republic to be born... we are centuries behind real democracy and we all have heard or read about the emancipation struggles in America, the struggles of other great African nations…Rwanda needed the million skulls for the great nation it is today to emerge, South Africa needed the Amandla chants to be free of bigotry...... Moi and Kenyatta were largely dictatorial, Kibaki brought great hope, and in quick succession became more lethal than his predecessors ,more lethal by turning hope into despair… using man’s own emotion and conscience against him, ..With the other two thugs before him, at least no one expected justice.
Never dangle food before a starving man, and take it away form him...you’ll not be abusing his hunger, but instead you’ll be abusing his self worth… recipe for creating psychopaths out of mortals…political scientists and roadside analysts have fallen prey to commercial hype, whereas they continue to propagate that local politicians incite their followers..Should I be incited to know my rights and those of Kibaki should be the same? Why do we try to imply that the local citizenry is comprised of zombies?
Truth be told; the local villager knows when his rights are being trodden on, and he knows that the only way out is thru democratic PROCESSES, which e is made to believe, works... and that when the government of the day, a contender in the process, uses force against its own citizens, then it is right for the citizens to rise up in arms...fight for freedom, go against the bullet and rise against the tide of injustice upon them
My fellow countrymen, I believe that the 2007 poll chaos did not produce the results needed. We needed more bloodshed; we needed to send a chilling message that stolen elections are stolen lives.
The few of us will probably never contemplate the hopelessness of a peasant who bases his entire future in the hands of a 'Democratic' process. When that hope is stolen from him, no amount of talk will deter him from seeking freedom....
The only difference between fight for independence and the struggle today is the skin color of the oppressor.... but our gods...The gods of justice blesses us to keep on fighting, until the last man stand, and justice meets him...Palestine, South Ossetia, Kathmandu, Bangladesh, Jakarta, THE Tamil tigers, The war in the Swat valley, the streets of Manila, The DRC, the FARC of Colombia… the list goes on … in biblical times we had such struggles too…. Some continue to date…

But of course, one tribe in Kenya needs to accept that others are Kenyans too, that it shouldn’t be unheard of a giriama, a luo or even more implicitly, a kalenjin having a home in Karatina or Muranga’ the way they have homes and businesses as interior as chepetenye village ….
But of course, we could all live as brothers if hope is restored in all of us…. The TJRC is a start.
(The purpose of war is to restore peace and freedom. And that's the message of THE G40 council....)
Aluta Continua….

THE G40 COUNCIL said...

No struggle comes without bloodshed. Even the natives of this great country had to die in their masses for an independent republic to be born... we are centuries behind real democracy and we all have heard or read about the emancipation struggles in America, the struggles of other great African nations…Rwanda needed the million skulls for the great nation it is today to emerge, South Africa needed the Amandla chants to be free of bigotry...... Moi and Kenyatta were largely dictatorial, Kibaki brought great hope, and in quick succession became more lethal than his predecessors ,more lethal by turning hope into despair… using man’s own emotion and conscience against him, ..With the other two thugs before him, at least no one expected justice.
Never dangle food before a starving man, and take it away form him...you’ll not be abusing his hunger, but instead you’ll be abusing his self worth… recipe for creating psychopaths out of mortals…political scientists and roadside analysts have fallen prey to commercial hype, whereas they continue to propagate that local politicians incite their followers..Should I be incited to know my rights and those of Kibaki should be the same? Why do we try to imply that the local citizenry is comprised of zombies?
Truth be told; the local villager knows when his rights are being trodden on, and he knows that the only way out is thru democratic PROCESSES, which e is made to believe, works... and that when the government of the day, a contender in the process, uses force against its own citizens, then it is right for the citizens to rise up in arms...fight for freedom, go against the bullet and rise against the tide of injustice upon them
My fellow countrymen, I believe that the 2007 poll chaos did not produce the results needed. We needed more bloodshed; we needed to send a chilling message that stolen elections are stolen lives.
The few of us will probably never contemplate the hopelessness of a peasant who bases his entire future in the hands of a 'Democratic' process. When that hope is stolen from him, no amount of talk will deter him from seeking freedom....
The only difference between fight for independence and the struggle today is the skin color of the oppressor.... but our gods...The gods of justice blesses us to keep on fighting, until the last man stand, and justice meets him...Palestine, South Ossetia, Kathmandu, Bangladesh, Jakarta, THE Tamil tigers, The war in the Swat valley, the streets of Manila, The DRC, the FARC of Colombia… the list goes on … in biblical times we had such struggles too…. Some continue to date…

But of course, one tribe in Kenya needs to accept that others are Kenyans too, that it shouldn’t be unheard of a giriama, a luo or even more implicitly, a kalenjin having a home in Karatina or Muranga’ the way they have homes and businesses as interior as chepetenye village ….
But of course, we could all live as brothers if hope is restored in all of us…. The TJRC is a start.
(The purpose of war is to restore peace and freedom. And that's the message of THE G40 council....)
Aluta Continua….

Anonymous said...

The Austrain school has advocated this for a rather long time, without the lofty and soemwhat banal pronouncements on 'economic' democracy. The more useful thing is to state WHY such decentralized control over the issue of money has not gained currency throughout the history evolution of money. Only then might we be able to move beyond empty statements into concrete, actionable statements.

That money is a standard of measurement, a store of value and a medium of exchange are things we learnt pretty early in school. That there is a difference between fiat and commodity-backed money is not anything to split hairs over.

The more important to suggest a pathway through which the control over the production and supply of money can be shifted from the central state (and its agents thereof), where it has resided for a large part of its history, to your so-called citizens or according to Adam Smith, to the free market. Equally importantly, it would be helpful to state why you anticipate that the privatization of money supply would achieve outcomes more superior than the state.

Now, if you bothered to go back and look, you will note that your cheerleading of privatization in your most current post is inconsistent with your earlier solution that borrowed from the California experience. It is also very much in tension with your thoughts on land being held and distributed by the state. Is that in line with the economic democracy that you speak of? Can these wildly disparate philosophies be reconciled within one economic system?

Mwarang'ethe said...

KITWEKSPEAK said...

But of course, one tribe in Kenya needs to accept that others are Kenyans too, that it shouldn’t be unheard of a giriama, a luo or even more implicitly, a kalenjin having a home in Karatina or Muranga’ the way they have homes and businesses as interior as chepetenye village ….

Our response:

You fall into the same fallacy we have written about. In your ignorance, you imagine that the Kikuyu's are the problem. Far from it. Please read what we are writing very carefully and u shall see where your subjugation started and how you may end it.

At independence, we gave the Govt. the monopoly to supply us with money, or what we prefer, MEANS OF EXCHANGE. And, as we noted above, all exchanges are barter and thus, to argue that, you need govt or its "son" i.e. banks to supply u with money is a terrible mistake.

The consequence of the above monopoly is this. The Govt. denies all the ability to create means of exchange, which is vital in specialised society.

Having denied ALL Kenyans that power, the Govt. goes ahead and allows the banks to "loan" money at their discretion.

Let us make one thing clear here. A commercial bank offers no loan. Never. Never. All it does is to allow the "borrower" to CREATE money. Having been given this monopoly by the govt, he becomes a sub - autocract over private enterprise. This is the origin of problems because only a few are allowed to create means of exchange.

Having been given permission by the govt. to allow SOME people to create money, it develops an autocracy of business. This autocracy is composed of those FEW who are RECIPIENTS OF IMMUNITY from prohibition against assertion of money power. Here, we see that:

- this immunity is given to a FEW,
- it comes directly from the Throne/President by virtue of money monopoly of modern State, and
- is issued through the banker.

As a result, this business autocracy begins to enjoy competitive advantage due to its money power which it is permitted to exert, BUT IS DENIED OTHERS. And, since the interest/tribute must be paid to the banker, payment of this is spread to the whole community. This peverts competition.

From the above, one can see that, given that, the first President of Kenya was a Kikuyu, with the money monopoly we gave him, he diverted it to a FEW people from his tribe through banks. It is therefore, from the monopoly of money the Kikuyu's have been able to dominate the rest of Kenyans.

Thus, it is not by conspiracy that Kikuyu's are dorminant economically and politically, it is a natural growth or output of a perverted money system. It follows that, hating Kikuyu's or killing them, will not solve your problem.

The only solution is to demand an end to govt. monopoly of money which only helps to benefit a few at the expense of many. Once you have done that, your ballot power will count. However, as long as you lack a democractic money system, you will cast your ballot in vain.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous wrote that:

The more useful thing is to state WHY such decentralized control over the issue of money has not gained currency throughout the history evolution of money.

Our response:

We supplied the answer to this in our first comment. However, we are more than happy to supply more answers. But, let Edison who was speaking in support of Henry Ford, speak for us. He is quoted to hav said:

"It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30,000,000 in bonds and not $30,000,000 in currency. Both are promises to pay; but ONE PROMISE FATTENS the usurer, and the other helps the people."

You can read more about his views as reported in the NY Times here: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=3&res=9C04E0D7103EEE3ABC4E53DFB467838A639EDE.

Anonymous wrote that.

The more important to suggest a pathway through which the control over the production and supply of money can be shifted from the central state (and its agents thereof)

Our response:

You can inform you that, Japan is already trying what we are suggesting. We are not just bubbling.

And, if you wish to learn how this system can be implemented, we have extensive literature. Just get in touch.


Anonymous wrote that:

Now, if you bothered to go back and look, you will note that your cheerleading of privatization in your most current post is inconsistent with your earlier solution that borrowed from the California experience. It is also very much in tension with your thoughts on land being held and distributed by the state. Is that in line with the economic democracy that you speak of? Can these wildly disparate philosophies be reconciled within one economic system?

Our response:

You have not understood what we have advocated. As concerns land, we have asserted one thing. We have called for LAND VALUE TAXATION.

To tax land value increament which is due to community effort does not amount to communism unless you want us to believe that Singapore is a communist state.

Anonymous wrote that:

Equally importantly, it would be helpful to state why you anticipate that the privatization of money supply would achieve outcomes more superior than the state.

Our response:

What you are saying is this. Private sector can provide railway, airplanes, ships, schools, roads, milk, cocoa, bread, food, clothes, but, it is totally incapable of providing the means of exchange for the stuff it makes and distributes.

Equally, you are saying this. The govt. is incapable of providing railway transport, shipping, airlines, clothes etc, but, it is a genius when it a comes to means of exchange. What nonsense is this?

Mwarang'ethe said...

In addition, we wish to bring your attention to WIR in Switzerland, which is a private medium of exchange and is not a legal tender like Swiss Franc.

Unfortunately, their webiste is not in English. http://www.wir.ch/index.cfm?DC86BF333C1811D6B9950001020761E5&o_lang_id=1.

Although many are not aware, the use of WIR currency if u wanna call it that, has played a major and strategic role in Swiss economy.

Anonymous said...

Mwarangethe:

You are the one that is full of nonsense. If privatization of money supply were as easy as you suggest, what has kept it from happening as with the roads,railways, and all the services that you name? Why is it that only Japan and Switzerland out of the advanced industrial democracies have undertaken or are currently undertaking the experiment?

In addition, how do you advocate for a major institutional change whose content you claim to know, yet whose implementation you cannot articulate in simple terms? So that instead of indicating a simple process that Kenya can adapt from Japan and/or Switzerland, you instead refer us to websites written in languages we do not understand. For one who not only claims superior understanding but who does so with passion, how difficult is it to distil a couple of lessons for Kenya and the rest of the world from Japan's and Switzerland's experiences?

Once again, I will put it to you that you make many empty statements, that are exhortatory at best and conradictory at worst. Public policy is well served by ignoring you.

ROGERSBIZ said...

Nice Blog.

Anonymous said...

"You have not understood what we have advocated. As concerns land, we have asserted one thing. We have called for LAND VALUE TAXATION."

You also advocated for state ownership. I argued against state ownership and gave the example of Ethiopia and argued against taxation of the rural poor, majority of who subsist on less than 2$ per day. But I have been open to you demonstrating the feasibility of such a program of taxation, the rates of taxation and how the rural poor would pay for it. Just that--give your empty statements some flesh.

One word of advice: cut and paste is a most dangerous exercise.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous said...
Mwarangethe:

You are the one that is full of nonsense. If privatization of money supply were as easy as you suggest, what has kept it from happening as with the roads,railways,

Our response:

It seems you are not reading our comments. We have given you the reason why this is "difficult."

Anonymous wrote that:

In addition, how do you advocate for a major institutional change whose content you claim to know, yet whose implementation you cannot articulate in simple terms?

Our response:

It baffles us that you are unable to distill what we have been saying all along. Simply:


(a)Full re-establishment of the public prerogative of creating money.

(b) An end to creation of money by means of commercial bank credit.

(c) Spending of new money into circulation DEBT FREE.

(d) Establishment of local complimentary monetary systems to develop local economies.

Our views are reflected also in American Congress. U can see it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pVV4n2lKHk

Anonymous wrote that:

Once again, I will put it to you that you make many empty statements, that are exhortatory at best and conradictory at worst. Public policy is well served by ignoring you.

Our response:

We have a books in english langauge on WIR system. If u are willing to read, give us your email, and u will have it in a few minutes.

We are not making empty statements. Our statements are extremely well considered. And, if you are not lazy, give us your email and we shall supply thee with ample materials. And, the truth shall set you free.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anpnymous wrote:

But I have been open to you demonstrating the feasibility of such a program of taxation, the rates of taxation and how the rural poor would pay for it. Just that--give your empty statements some flesh.

One word of advice: cut and paste is a most dangerous exercise.


Our response:

It is amazing how even educated Kenyans are ignorant. Before your respond again, please, please go thru the Kenyan Land Policy which is about to go to Parliament.

Since you seem to be out of tune, we refer specifically to section 3.5.5.2 entitled: Land Taxation. You can find it here if u will: http://www.ilegkenya.org/pubs/docs/DraftNationalLandPolicy.pdf

When you read that section, it will dawn on you that, what we are writing about is ON THE WAY like a train.

When that policy comes into effect, it shall spell the end of land ownership as we know it. You shall be a leasee. It shall be that, if you own land along Thika road, any value increament brought about by the roads, broadband etc constructed using tax payers's money shall not belong to you, but, to ALL.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Just as an example, when it comes to Land Value Taxation (LVT), we would advocate it to be implemented this way:

(a) All land in urban areas, should be subject to LVT.

(b) All land surrounding places like ports, airports etc should be subject to LVT.

(c) All land bordering infrastructure such as Thika road, railway lines etc, should be subject to LVT.

This means that, we can leave the rural land for the time being.

Anonymous said...

Mwarangethe @7:56 am:

As usual, you failed to answer the question and instead launch an atack on my person. I raised no objection to taxation save for the rural poor and I defined them. Do you have a problem reading?

For your information, I contributed quite substantially to Kenya's draft land policy as to the African Union one. It gives me great pleasure to note that you've mastered it and are regurgitating it with much more ease than the financial stuff you've been struggling with today.

Anonymous said...

Mwarangethe:
Just re-read intervention number (a)on the full re-establishment of the public prerogative of creating money. Then go back and read your earlier posts esp the so-called adam smithian "economic democracy" stuff. Do you see an inconsistency there?

Dont you also think that full public control can crowd out private sector/market initiatives, which are the essence of so-dubbed adam smithian "economic democracy" stuff?

I'm starting to sense that you're arguing for neither state nor market mechanisms on their own but rather a mix of both, depending on which of these institutions performs which monetary or fiscal control function most efficiently.

Finally, might there be lessons to learn from the Scandinavian countries where poverty and income inequalities are relatively lower than most anywhere else? What do their monetary and fiscal controls look like?----your so-called "FINAL determinant of human progress"?? Should we not also be looking at what those countries are doing?

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous said...
Mwarangethe @7:56 am:

For your information, I contributed quite substantially to Kenya's draft land policy as to the African Union one. It gives me great pleasure to note that you've mastered it and are regurgitating it with much more ease than the financial stuff you've been struggling with today.

Our response:

We have answered this question by suggesting that, we leave rural lands for the time being. We just throught that, the question of rural farms is not a big issue.

Now, you are boasting that we have mastered your document? Well if thats the way u wanna have it appear, fine.

Now, someone has suggested we reduce our points into few specifics. We have done that.

So, what is that you claim we are struggling about? U see, before u lay the simple principles, it is important to bring about the underlying issues. We trust we have done that.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous said...
Mwarangethe:
Just re-read intervention number (a)on the full re-establishment of the public prerogative of creating money. Then go back and read your earlier posts esp the so-called adam smithian "economic democracy" stuff. Do you see an inconsistency there?

Our response:


It seems you have a problem reading. This is what we wrote:

"So, what we have now is a marriage of political democracy of Thomas Jefferson combined with ECONOMIC AUTOCRACY of Adam Smith. Political democracy cannot work without economic democracy, and the money power is the FRANCHISE of the latter."

Anonymous wrote that:

Dont you also think that full public control can crowd out private sector/market initiatives, which are the essence of so-dubbed adam smithian "economic democracy" stuff.

Our response:

On the contrary, we advocate for DEMOCRACTIC issuance of money. Thats why we are calling for LOCAL MONEY to serve specific regions.

We shall illustrate this point in about one hr. from now.

About Scandinavian states, vir bor i sverige. So, we know so much about these countries.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous wrote:

Dont you also think that full public control can crowd out private sector/market initiatives,

Our response:

Unfortunately, you have missed our point. What does public/democractic issuance of money mean?

Having witnessed the futility of legalized counterfeit, the American delegates to the Constitutional Convention resolved to withhold from the Federal Govt, this perverting power. Thats why in Article 1, section 8, para. 5 was written this way:

Congress shall have the power to COIN money, REGULATE THE VALUE thereof and of foreign coin, and FIX the standard of weights and measures.

This clause as initially suggested had these words "emit bills of credit." However, after debate, these words were omitted. Thereby, the Govt. was denied the power to ISSUE currency. It was worthy noting that, in those days currency was called bills of credit.

It is therefore that in the American case, the Govt. was authorised to "coin money" but not to issue. This empowered the Govt. to SET UP A MINT and STAMP out coins from metal brought to it by PRIVATE OWNERS.

The coins so cointed belonged to the property of citizens. This means that the American citizens were allowed to issue coins into circulation which beared the Govt's guarante of weight and finesss.

In this way, to "regulate the value thereof" meant only to define what contituited a dollar and its fractions.

Following these arrangements, for the FIRST SEVENTY (70) years, USA no curency was issued by the Govt. Business was conducted with private bank notes and gold/silver coins minted by the Govt. for the private owners of the metals.

It was during the civil was when this tradation was turned upside down. The Secretary of State Salmon P. Chase did recommend to the Congress to issue Greenbacks, although it was recognised as unconstitutional. However, this anomaly was excused as a matter of emergency.

Funny enough, the same Chase in a majority report did condemn this issuance of money by the Govt. as unconstitutional when he was the Chief Justice of the SC. However, in another judgment with Chase dissenting, the Court sanctioned this practice.

Thus, here we have a clear example where for the first 70 years, the USA govt. did not issue money. It was issued by the people as wealth creators. Thats exactly what we have in mind. Let medium of exchange be issued by those who are competent to do so, and these are the creators of wealth. These are the people. We are not theoritical, we have cited an example.

In summary, Kenyans ought not focus on personnel, but we should focus on three keys issues:

(a) Land Reforms- these are underway. We hope the Parliament will do a good job. We are yet to see any discussion here on this issue. Why?

(b) Monetary and banking reforms along the lines we have suggested. These will be the most difficult reforms to achieve given the strong vested interests. So, public awareness is essential.

(c) Tax reforms - in this, we need to shift tax from labour, consumption and capital to land, waste and pollution.

Someone did suggest that the Australian School of Economics are nuts.

Well, you can watch this debate between an Australian sch. economics versus Conventional economists are just laughing. It is called Peter Schiff Was Right 2006 - 2007 (2nd Edition

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

Anonymous said...

Mwarangethe:

This was your original solution, that the state assert its control over money as opposed to banks. I am puzzled by how in a matter of hours you evolved to another (more delightful) position, passionately advancing the complete decentralization of the control of money supply to citizens themselves—not privatization by any means but a devolution to local publics as it were.

Do you remember this?:

"So, if banks can create money out of thin are, why can't the state do so?.....Abraham Lincoln wrestled with this question during the American civil war. Since bankers were asking intrest to the tune of about 30%, he decided to create his own money, i.e. the Greenback." Note that even the English did the same to finance their war with France a couple of centuries earlier than Lincoln--one pointer to why the state may not so easily relinquish its hold over money supply.

Here’s another example of the acrobatics you seem to enjoy engaging in:

You had said:
(a)Full re-establishment of the public prerogative of creating money.

After my questioning, you changed it to the following:
“What does public/democractic issuance of money mean?”

I say: It can mean anything. It is an empty statement. Citizen control over NATIONAL representatives who in turn control CENTRAL level bureaucrats too is an illustration of democratic accountability. But I will now assume that you are talking more about devolution than of privatization (the substance of anything adam smithsian). Conceptual clarity is key.

I buy the principle of LOCAL publics that you seem to be advancing rather passionately, though naively, but would like to caution you that problems encountered at the central level don’t automatically disappear just because money gets controlled at a more localized jurisdiction—hark back to your quote of Edison speaking (on behalf of Ford) about the challenge of elite capture. It is just as real in a devolved setting.

Now, you have advanced and somewhat justified (i.e. better management if not eradication of public/citizens debt; eradication of rents extracted by govts and their actors due to the monopoly over the means of exchange, among several) a solution for Kenya, and I am thrilled since that hardly happens in our KK neighborhood. Does it not bother you that you are pressing for a major policy change based more on a normative justification, how YOU think things SHOULD be, and less on some kind of empirical understanding of how the system that you propose works in reality? According to you, Japan is trying it...Switzerland has...everyone else has NOT, including the very successful (at eradicating poverty and income inequalities) Scandinavian countries. That is a rather narrow empirical basis to draw upon for such a major restructuring of Kenya’s monetary control?

Anyhow, here is a link that can help provide but a very rudimentary education on the Austrian school (not Australian), that is far less tangential than a discussion focused on America's financial woes. It is a tradition that commands some respect, you will note. I am not a big fan for obvious reasons, but you will find that their ideas on money jibe quite well with what you suggest here i.e. removal of the state’s monopoly in money supply. Read especially a quote from Ludwig von Mises and I hasten to emphasize that I do not have a penchant for quoting “dead, white men.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous said...
Mwarangethe:

This was your original solution, that the state assert its control over money as opposed to banks. I am puzzled by how in a matter of hours you evolved to another (more delightful) position, passionately advancing the complete decentralization of the control of money supply to citizens themselves—not privatization by any means but a devolution to local publics as it were.


Our response.

The point is this, due to fear produced by ignorance on what is money, it will be difficult to jump from total state monopoly to complete private issuance of money.

Thus, we think that we need to bring about all possible options. This means that we can start with outlawing money creation by banks and have the state do it alone. As people learn how the monetary system not based on debt may work, we can move to complete private ownership of money. Seen that way, there is no contradiction in our views. Ours was to bring about possible solutions for debate. What u could have done is to suggest what u think is the better option.

Seen this way, we have shown that a state can issue money without borrowing as Abraham did although was unconstitutional. In the same manner, we have shown that USA did have private issuance of money for 70 years. So, we can go back to this model first thru state control and then private. We hope u see our point clearly.

Anonymous wrote:

Does it not bother you that you are pressing for a major policy change based more on a normative justification, how YOU think things SHOULD be, and less on some kind of empirical understanding of how the system that you propose works in reality?

Our response.

You expect one to offer full details of how to bring this about in a blog? Come on.

If you are serious, u would have inquired what you can read to get a better picture. But, since you do not believe in quoting dead white men (read, u reference is ignorance) u miss the whole point.

Anonymous wrote that.

everyone else has NOT, including the very successful (at eradicating poverty and income inequalities) Scandinavian countries. That is a rather narrow empirical basis to draw upon for such a major restructuring of Kenya’s monetary control?

Our response:

For one, even in Scandinavian countries, we can see inequality starting to rear its ugly head. Their money system is not democractic as we would wish.

More importantly, you asked why is taking too long to have such a system. Well, we will ask:

- How long did it take to separate religion and state? How much blood was shed in this fight?

- how long did it take to refute the idea of divine right rule? Didn't rivers of blood flow for centuries?

- how did it take to give women vote?

- how long did it take to end slavery?

- how long has it taken Kenyans to get a new constitution?

- why did it take too long to end colonialism?

It may take centuries to separate money and state as it took to end slavery, or separate religion and state. Just as these awful positions had ignorant defenders, today's money system has it ignorant defenders. Thats all.

Gus said...

Rivetting discussion

Anonymous said...

why istnt that no one tells u, u said it! Damn! en it true!

Anonymous said...

Why would the state involve itself anymore in the monetary system of Kenya?

Besides the funds, and budgets that they are mandated to control, they pretty much stay out of the commercial banking system.

What we nee in Kenya is more fiscal autonomy at a local level, to allow personnel closer to the community to have more input in how funds are disbursed, this should be balanced by the citizens having a say in the projects that they think should be a priority in their area.

Anonymous said...

Mwarang'ethe:

What I would have expected to see and hear is very simple. In my undergraduate class we were taught that to advance any proposal successfully, we need to demonstrate some acceptable understanding of 5 things: the why, what, where, who and how. For policy analysis the how is particularly important. Unlike you, I find blind faith in the ‘goodness’ of an institution extremely unsatisfactory.

I am more concerned about fostering a competent understanding of the conditions that may enhance or detract from the effective adoption and implementation of a ‘good’ policy. I am concerned about the costs (or feasibility) of enforcing regulations that are not agreed upon by those involved. I am VERY concerned about the stability of systems when challenged by external or internal factors. Yet I do not say that we need a PERFECT understanding, but I am saying that we need some sense of how the institutional regime that you propose might operate in PRACTICE and subsequently what kinds of safeguards and interventions might be necessary to sustain it, strengthen it and to support adaptive learning.

You have invested a lot of words, 4477 to be exact, in communicating the goodness of your policy proposal. Many of these words did not add any value to your basic argumentation. Instead of getting defensive, don’t you think it justified that you invest even fewer words in thinking through HOW your proposal might be animated? Even just a simple outline in bullet point format?

It is foolish to think that you can hide behind stupid and ridiculous statements about time—all tough policies take time to adopt and implement. But if you think that drawing parallels between the slave trade, seprationism and so on is a good line of defense, I will grant you that, but then will go further to demand that you highlight some of the successful strategies that those that led the fights against these ills that you have named employed towards their cause, and whether (or how) the successful strategies might apply to your vision of ‘democratizing’ money.

Let us dwell on substance!

Let it be recognized that any meaningful change in the welfare of Kenyans will not come from the casual proposal and introduction of new policy regimes that seem ‘good’ and ‘democratic’ but from a sustained intellectual engagement and interrogation of the real meaning and real-life implications of proposed policy.

Let it also be recognized that lofty statements (or words that ‘fill the mouth’ as Achebe would put it) that are backed by superficial and often unnecessary quotations do not prove anything even though a dead, white man said so. However impressive they may sound.

It is more valuable to seek to understand and to inform than to camouflage an embarrassing lack of understanding by using unnecessary, empty statements that lead nowhere but deeper into that dark, dirty abyss we’re all struggling to get out of.

So shall we talk about land reform, now?

Mwarang'ethe said...

We mentioned the issue of debts. Here is the confirmation of exactly what we wrote:

http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/mag/InsidePage.php?id=1144020658&cid=457&

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous wrote that:
It is more valuable to seek to understand and to inform than to camouflage an embarrassing lack of understanding by using unnecessary, empty statements that lead nowhere but deeper into that dark, dirty abyss we’re all struggling to get out of.

Our response:

One, we hope you are not a senior public servant or in the private sector. You are the type of person who Kennedy referred to when he said this:

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie - deliberate, contrived, and dishonest - but the myth - persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought"

-President John F. Kennedy speaking to Yale University, 1962.

You may be holding a senior position somewhere, but, we doubt whether you will ever be a great man. You should learn from the story of Louis Pasteur who was just an usher in the Lyceum.

It happened that on thursdays he took the boys to walk. A student took his microscope to examine insects, and allowed Pasteur to look through it. This was the starting of the boy on the microscope career which has made men wonder. He was almost wild with enthusiasm at the new world which the microscope revealed.

What makes great men is CURIOSITY. When they hear or read of a new idea, it arouses their curiosity and the desire thereof to learn more about this new weird idea.

If you are a great mind, our ideas should have provoked you to learn. However, since you are small minded fellow, just like the fellow who ended up saying that he knew all the stuff he was asking about land reforms, all u want is to prove you are a genius. Thats foolish.

And, since your education has only taught you how to select the right answer when given the choice of A or B, and u seem like you are incapable of finding information, you may go to this site and see an Act that has been prepared in the USA. It covers the stuff you are yapping about here unless you want us to read for you.

http://www.monetary.org/amacolorpamphlet.pdf.

Anonymous said...

You are the foolish one, to whom pity should be offered in abundance.

Because you lack substance and have no authority over what you're peddling here, you are quick to label others. And also because you lack substance, you are less apt to think for yourself, and critically so, but to blindly follow the words of dead white men, simply because they are dead white men. Yet you do NOT understand what they say nor the implications of what they say! I would encourage you to train your mind to THINK and to do so critically.

I have asked good and valid questions of you and your proposal. I wish you had the humility to admit of your weakness (which is self evident) and the strength and intellectual fortitude that is necessary to move you from the shallow, rudimentary phase that mires you down currently to the freedom that a deeper intellectual enterprise has to offer those engaged in creative problem solving.

Since you raise the issue, I am wont to admit that I am indeed a GREAT mind, a good thinker, and that indeed the greatest minds in the world, and also around me in my enterprise have acknowledged that in many substantive ways. This is by no means an exclusive club, it is open to your type as well, if only you would cultivate different habits. Vuka dadi!

M-Pesa said...

hehehe Anon 9:26

just go back to the usual and use less e-ink

the phrase you are looking for to summarize all you wrote is "wewe pumbavu"

Mwarang'ethe said...

Anonymous wrote:

Since you raise the issue, I am wont to admit that I am indeed a GREAT mind, a good thinker, and that indeed the greatest minds in the world, and also around me in my enterprise have acknowledged that in many substantive ways. This is by no means an exclusive club, it is open to your type as well, if only you would cultivate different habits. Vuka dadi!

Our response:

Mat 22:15 Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might ENTANGLE him in his talk.

Mat 22:16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.

Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?

Mat 22:18 But Jesus PERCEIVED THEIR WICKNESS, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye HYPOCRITES?

Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.

Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?

Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Mat 22:22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.

Now, now, Mr Anonymous, there is no difference between thee and the Pharisees. We spent a whole day explaining the issue of land tax with another anonymous, and perhaps it is you.

Since the intention was to ENTANGLE, just like the Pharisees, he/she ended saying, "we are the masters of this issue since we helped AU to draft land policy." If this guy knew all this, why waste our time asking? We see no profit in answering people whose sole intention is to entangle.

In the same manner, if you are not the same person, you do not ask because you want to learn anything, but, u want to prove how smart you are just like the Pharisees. And, for this reason, we decline to answer any query from thee for you ask in bad faith.

If you think you know more than we know, the best option would have been for thee to enlighten the readers of this blog. That you have not done.

Or more appropriately, show us why the current arrangements are better than what we propose. Thats the spirit of big minds and people of good faith.

We leave thee with these finals words:

(a) To ISSUE money is to buy.
(b) To BACK money is the act of selling.

It is only the private enterprise that, engages in these two acts. This qualifies it to issue money.

Since the Govt. does not sell:

(a) It can only issue money by spending in useless projects like wars, Youth for Kanu 92 etc.

Since it does not sell anything, it cannot BACK the money it issues. Consequently, its issuance of money results in one thing, INFLATION which is nothing but destruction of wealth. For instance, the Kenyan inflation in the last 6 years has averaged 20%. So, even if there were 7% growth, it seems to us that, overall, we had wealth destruction.

If the Govt. wants to back its money, then, it has to go into business of buying and sell. This is communism.

Once you think thru these facts, u can tell us how Govt. can issue sound and adequate money.

Anonymous said...

My final words:

VUKA DADI!!

Google
 
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...