November 27, 2005 journal, our money system, part three, where do we go from here is the question in The Times Examiner by Steven Yates. "Part one and 2 presented evidence that we have a problem of some magnitude on our hands. Some ask me, what can we do? Is there any way out of this mess? They are disappointed when I don't have a magic wand. I’m just the messenger. I can suggest what some folks are already doing, which is to buy gold and silver. Clearly the value of gold is going to go up relative to the value of our fiat dollars. This obviously is not a complete solution, unless you want to live in the woods, escaping the clutches of our money system and its super elite masters is very hard. While some people do not keep bank accounts, most do and are unaware of any alternatives. Not to mention the difficulty of doing business on a large scale outside this system. There are pessimist and there are optimists, with difference schools of thought in each with diff-erent degrees of credibility. The pessimists think nothing can be done; the process of encirclement toward global control is too far along, and there are too many resources arr-ated on the other side. We are relatively few, poorly organized, and strapped for cash. We have no Ford are Rockefeller Foundation on our side. We have at best, the web (where riders publish for free) and publications (where everyone works for free) none of us dare give up our day jobs-from which we can be fired if we get to politically incorrect! There is something to this, I admit. However we should note that the laws of economics are what they are, regardless what Government is in power or what the “Banker's" do. Part 2 of this series established that the current process is unsustainable. Other things be-ing equal, the laws of economics themselves will one day bring out financial flights of fancy down in flames. If that happens, then given how advanced nation's economies now interpenetrate one another, it may plunge much of the globe into depression making the 1930's look like a picnic by comparison. Unemployment would reach levels never before seen in the advanced world. Partial infrastructure collapse could mean a return to quasi- medieval conditions. Millions of people would be killed in food riots, starved, freeze to death the following winter, or die with diseases we thought were wiped out, before a leadership capable of picking up the pieces could emerge. It is unlikely that such lead-ership would care about constitutionally limited government! Anyone with functioning brain cells should be motivated to prevent this scenario, if at all possible! What about the optimists? They divide into two groups: those I increasingly think of as irrational optimists and those I would label rational optimists. Rationale here means guarded, more cautious. They realize we did not get into this predicament over night and we will not get out of it overnight. Moreover, recognized human fallibility and sinfulness, which insure that we will never have perfect civil government-the desire for that is the stealth humanist in each of us. I have encountered schemes I have convinced will not work-given the generally low educational level of today's American public. These schemes all say essentially, "if we just do X, we will be saved!" X might be to abolish the U.S. I+R+S, or elect a Liberaltrian to the national office. The first I suppose, is not impossible but be warned, it could be repl-aced by something worse. Read Joan Veon’s latest article on newswithviews.com. or

See Jim Cox's review of Neal Boortz’s book on fair tax last Thursday on lewrockwell. com. Lets use common horse sense. The Feds are not going to cut off their free ride without being assured that something replaces it. The second are not going to happen either. American voters, with few exceptions, are brainwashed by the so-called 2-party system and sold on don’t throw away your vote arguments. Moreover, today's money”.