|Letters to 666isMONEY.com
|I thought these two letters were original but it turns out that Thistimeinneed sent me a
Rant from Ayn Rand, which I included, unedited at the bottom of this page.
My response in itallic
|Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 20:45:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: (no subject)
|So you think that money is the root of all evil? Have you ever asked what is the root of
Yes, the root of money is slavery, enslavement.
Money is a tool of
exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and
men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who
wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is
not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who
take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce.
Money is made possible by magic. It is intrinsically inert, unnecessary or no real value (most
of the gold and silver supply is consumed in jewlery).
Is this what you consider evil?
It is "evil" because it enslaves people, causes the production of unnecessary, unhealthy
objects and is the cause of much unnecessary suffering.
When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction
that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers
or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the
world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need
to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a
token of honor - your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is
your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who
will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money.
You have Faith in you wallet. in those pieces of paper; you have Faith that the stupid goyim
will accept your peices of paper, which "should have been gold"?
Is this what you consider evil?
An unnecessary evil.
Have you ever looked for the root of production?
The root of production is the urge to create, survive, thrive, create a better world for our
Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the
muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the
knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain
your food by means of nothing but physical motions - and you'll learn that man's mind
is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on
But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak?
Money served its purpose and is no longer necessary. It is superfluous. Modern machinery
has made it unnecessary.
What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the
product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a
motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent
at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the
ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made - before it can be looted or
mooched - made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability.
An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced.
Wow, you really love money, you've composed a sonnet to your God. Nay an Opera.... Get to
To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the
axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power
to prescribe the value of your effort except by the voluntary choice of the man who is
willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods
and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more.
Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of
the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own
benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss - the recognition that they
are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery - that you must offer
them values, not wounds - that the common bond among men is not the exchange of
suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your
weakness to men's stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy,
not the shoddiest they offer, but the best your money can find. And when men live by
trade - with reason, not force, as their final arbiter - it is the best product that wins, the
best performance, then man of best judgment and highest ability - and the degree of a
man's productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence
whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?
But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you
as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will
not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to
reverse the law of causality - the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the
products of the mind.
Your mind is a gift of God, the products of your mind are free gifts of God.
Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants;
money will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to
value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to
seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or
respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his
superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming
the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the
frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no
man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
Trite, Money is UNNECESSARY.
Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth - the man who would make
his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves
him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him.
Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not
yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been
distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one would not
bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies
without its root. Money will not serve a mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason
why you call it evil?
God will provide money if it is necessary.
Money is your means of survival.
My brain, with the Grace of God is my means of survival.
The verdict which you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict
you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own
existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men's vices or men's
stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves?
By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn?
This is why money is a stumblingblock to human progress, spiritual evolution.
If so, then your money will not give you a moment's or a penny's worth of joy. Then all
the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an
achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you'll scream that money is evil. Evil,
because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you
enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?
No, Money is unnecessary, a stumblingblock.
Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is
the product of virtue,
but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give
you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of
Or did you say it's the love of money that's the root of all evil? To love a thing is to
know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is
the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for
the effort of the best among men. It's the person who would sell his soul for a nickel,
who is the loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money - and he has good reason to
hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to
I never said money was evil or that Love of Money is the Root of All evil....
Let me give you a tip on a clue to men's characters: the man who damns money has
obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.
Stupid generality. I got my money legally, the law is dishonorable, making money is a game,
life is a game. Life sucks because of Money, open your eyes to the suffering!
Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the
leper's bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need
means to deal with one another - their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the
muzzle of a gun.
No, civilization, education.
But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it.
Men who have no courage, pride, or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of
their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men
who apologize for being rich - will not remain rich for long.
I got it legally. It's not worth dieing for.
They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries,
but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt
of owning wealth.
For centuries? They are everywhere, like cockroaches in a sewer.
They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt - and of his life, as he deserves.
Yes, "Your Money or your Life."
Won't remain rich because of the corrupt lawyers and judges, who will steal it from her.
Then you will see the rise of the double standard - the men who live by force, yet
count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money - the men
who are the hitchhikers of virtue.
Like George Bush and his cronies.
In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you
But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law - men who use
force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims - then money becomes its creators'
avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a
law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it
from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to
those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over
the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.
All because people were corrupted by money: if there wasn't any money they wouldn't be
corrupted by it. With modern machienery, we can produce enough necessities to share
worldwide. I strongly believe in the Second Amendment to keep the plutocrats and petty
criminals in check.
Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money.
I do, especially the Euro and the value of oil.
Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not
by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to
obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is
flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get
richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them,
but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty
becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so
noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with
brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.
I expect Babylon to fall soon. Things can not go on as they are!
Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money
is men's protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and
leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and
delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an
objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced.
Gold was given a magical value and can be debased, counterfieters were crucified.
Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those
who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an
account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it
becomes, marked: 'Account overdrawn.'
Now we're on the same track.
When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good.
Money is the means of survival, men are evil therefore money is evil! (Or you could say they
are evil because they are uneducated, uncultured, uncivilized but money was the
stumblingblock, their tool, their holy grail, salvation happiness.
Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the
fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished
and looting rewarded. Do not ask, 'Who is destroying the world?' You are.
No, the moneylovers are destroying earth. Mining Gold is destroying the earth, polluting the
You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive
civilization and you wonder why it's crumbling around you, while you're damning its
life-blood - money.
God (and oil) is the Life-Blood.
You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle
is creeping back to the edge of your cities.
The "savages" did not need money.
Throughout men's history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or
another, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep
the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the
evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness,
You're hearing things I never said.
comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves - slaves who
repeated the motions once discovered by somebody's mind and left unimproved for
We still have slaves. Wake up, open your eyes! The slaves are paid in Money, slave wages.
So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there
was little to conquer. Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men
exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of
the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers - as
To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of
money - and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this
means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first
time, man's mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest,
but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the
real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being - the
self-made man - the American industrialist.
America was a God-fearing nation but now it has been corrupted by money.
If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose -
because it contains all the others - the fact that they were the people who created the
phrase 'to make money'. No other language or nation had ever used these words
before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity - to be seized, begged,
inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to
understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the
essence of human morality.
Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted
cultures of the looters' continents. Now the looters' credo has brought you to regard
your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your
greatest men, the industrialists,
I think the scientists, engineers and visionaries (like me) are the real creators of wealth/value.
as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of
muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter
who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the
power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide - as, I think, he will.
When Babylon falls, people will realize that money is unnecessary and will NOT revert to the
Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own
destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another,
then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns - or dollars. Take your
choice - there is no other - and your time is running out."
Either we abolish money, Law and the $tate (all created by Man) or Babylon will fall.
I see you like quotes from famous philosophers, I think this one suits you quite well:
"Till a man can judge whether they be truths or not, his understanding is but little
improved, and thus men of much reading, though greatly learned, but may be little
knowing." -- John Locke (1632 - 1704)
You can't see the Truth so how can you judge it? You're the person who crucified Christ for
upsetting the tables of the moneychangers! Read your Gospels.
|Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 06:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Replies to your replies on money
To: ThistimeIneed[@aol.com] [Remove Brackets]
|. . . Money is made possible by magic. It is intrinsically inert, unnecessary or no real value
(most of the gold and silver supply is consumed in jewelry).
I suppose if you were to use the word magic loosely, I would agree; as long as it was
magic in the sense of an unknown ability to grant importance to an object. It seems
like fiat money (paper money) is just that, papers that by some method are ascribed
value. But we should not hasten to pass such quick judgments. People have used all
sorts of things for money, including wheat and tobacco, so it seems like an object is
given its value by those who value it. Now I know that you will agree that valuing
wheat is a good thing, being it's an agricultural product and so and so forth, but it
seems like people like to have money be it wheat or gold.
They like it because they can't imagine a society without it or they are cynical and
believe everyone but themselves is capable of living in a civilization without money,
where people work for the satisfaction of creating something beneficial.
Now what sort of benefit does money offer us? Well, first and foremost it is a
uniformed unit of measurement that allows us to escape the drudgeries of the barter
system. If we abolish money, we have no option but to go back to the barter system
to exchange goods or attempt to make every single product we want in house. . . .
See what I mean, you can't imagine. Modern machinery produces an abundance, there is no
need to barter and hoard.
Can you imagine what Beethoven's piano would have sounded like if his father had
made it and not the best piano builder in Europe?!!?!!?
No, someone who appreciates good music would make Mozart a piano.
So on top of a unit of exchange, money also allows us to specialize in things. If we
were all farming, there would be little time to pursue knowledge, create music, create
new cures for diseases, advance civilization, etc. That would mean that instead of
writing meditations, Descartes would have been hard at work in the fields tilling the
earth. . . which sounds like a better use of his time?
Without money half the work force in America (bankers, bookkeepers, accountants,
bureaucrats, salesmen, real-estate agents etc.) could share the work with the other half and
only have to work 20 hours a week
. . . It is "evil" because it enslaves people, causes the production of unnecessary, unhealthy
objects and is the cause of much unnecessary suffering.
I would be inclined to say that unhealthy objects are produced under our current
mixed economy system. But although I would say they are unhealthy, I would not
advocate for the abolishment of such goods. To abolish a successful product is to take
a product away from people who are want it and are willing to spend (exchange) their
money (surplus production) on (for) it. It seems like it would be a slippery slope to
start taking away something like cigarettes (because of health reasons) and then fast
food, and then snack foods. Eventually, one would be left with the least offensive and
blandest of foods. It is not freedom to dictate what one can consume, and in the same
right it is not freedom to dictate what one can produce. I think, and you would most
likely agree, that man is happiest when he is freest.
Without money, if you wanted to grow tobacco or marijuana, no one would stop you unless
there were people starving and peanuts could be grown there instead or you were growing it
in the desert wasting water. Or growing marijuana and wasting a lot of electricity with grow
lights, fans and etc. How would they stop it? Shunning, rebuke, logic/reasoning and if that
didn't work, we may have to cut off their water/electric supply.
Now as for unnecessary suffering, I'm not sure how I feel about that. We have drug
companies today and in their heart of hearts want nothing more than to make a
profit(money). And because of their voracious appetite for money, they create all
sorts of drugs that do all sorts of great things for society. So their quest for money has
actually alleviated some of the world's unnecessary suffering.
On the contrary, many drugs are unpatented and inexpensive, like vitamin A, which would
save many from blindness in Africa but there is no profit in giving it to them. The drug
manufacturers have no incentive to make drugs for the third world because they can't afford to
buy the drugs. If people in America lived healthy lifestyles and weren't so crazy or stressed
over money requiring psychological drugs and drugs to control their unhealthy lifestyles ...
On top of all the good deeds the drug companies do, they have extremely good jobs
for people; allowing families to be well fed and well read. Now let us examine a
company that isn't in the business of helping people(so we are inclined to think). Now
it is generally conceded (though immediate concision is hardly proof of anything) that
cigarette companies make a product that is by nature harmful to a person. Their
product leads to millions of deaths and yada yada yada, but! We've already conceded
that humans are happiest when they are freest, and the use of cigarettes falls under
this umbrella of freedom.
If they get sick from smoking, then they enslave someone (wage slave) to take care of
them. If they are willing to die because of their smoking, they are free to do that but
don't expect me to take care of them because of their unhealthy choice. I'll help them
commit suicide or quit smoking.
Now one may be inclined to say that cigarettes are addictive and therefore, people are
not free to choose weather or not to buy them; but the first time a smoker smokes, he
is not under any compulsion by nicotine
I was under the compulsion of my delinquent friends when I started smoking.
Fortunately I quit a few years later.
and therefore his consent is given upon his first drag. Let us not forget that these
people willingly want these products and gladly exchange their surplus production
(money) for it. But what of the factory workers, management, and various other
peoples in the company? They too receive good salaries allowing them to provide for
But do they enjoy being wage slaves manufacturing tobacco so people get sick, become
burdens to society and the health system and die early.
. . . Enslavement
Ok, so by enslavement we're saying basically people are forced to work for a living
wage or else they'll die (starve to death, get the plague, whatever). And as a fair and
open minded individual I have gone to great lengths to listen to your show and give a
courteous ear to your critiques, for it would be rude, close minded, and lazy of me not
Think about being on my show next Friday at 9pm or give me your phone number so I can
call you from the studio.
I watched a recent episode of your TV show where you advocated for a return to the
Midwest (Nebraska, Kansas, etc) where people would farm their own staples of food (I
believe you said soy beans and corn).
When Babylon falls we will travel/travil to midwest because that is where an abundance of
food (corn & soybeans) exists in silos, which will keep the grains whole for an undetermined
(by me) amount of years. (Do you know how many years grain can be stored in a silo without
a vacuum seal?)
Now, obviously we would agree that farming is hard work, with the planting and the
tilling and what not, and so to feed yourself you're going to have to work pretty hard.
Farming is relatively easy with modern machinery. I have charts from the U.S. Dept. of
Agriculture showing how productive agriculture is today. Maybe you remember in school how
100 years ago, 20 or 50 percent of the workforce was employed in Agriculture but today that
is less than 1%, who manufacture all our food and half of that agriculture workforce is
involved in the production of meat (growing corn, sorghum and other pearls tossed before
swine), which is unhealthy and bad karma to eat (I'm a vegetarian).
Now this may not sound so bad to all, but let us draw a comparison to say . . . . a
'slave' worker of McDonalds. They, like the farmer, must work quite hard at a job they
may or may not like for enough to feed themselves and keep shelter over their heads.
They are both driven by the desire to survive and to exchange their hard work for
another day's free breath. When we then look for a real slave, we find that either both
the farmer and the worker are slaves or that neither are slaves since they both act out
of a need for survival.
The majority of slaves in America had it pretty good wouldn't you agree, they probably had a
better life on the plantation than in Africa?
. . . Money served its purpose and is no longer necessary. It is superfluous. Modern
machinery has made it unnecessary. The root of production is the urge to create, survive,
thrive, and create a better world for our children.
The soviets thought that, the sized the private property in the late teens, and were
stuck with a country full of 1950s machinery when their government collapsed
because they didn't believe that industrialization is a dynamic thing, requiring
constant upgrading, retooling and improvement.
Soviets had socialism, not communism. (A communist society will have no money.) The
soviets were not ready yet for communism, read communism definitions here:
Now some may be happy to live to be 79, but I intend to die at 100
I'd be interested to hear your theory on how you intend to do that.
and so to do that, production must be made better and more efficient; something that
just can not be done without the life blood that has spurred it from its birth (money).
Life blood of "civilization" today is oil and the spigot is running dry. The government isn't
telling us the truth that we are going to run out SOONI If they told the truth about the oil and
assassination of JFK, there would be panic, disillusionment.
I would liken it to a mother who stops feeding a baby because it is now one year old.
The baby wants to live but it can never live without food. Man wants to create, but he
can never do it well without the abilities (plant property and equipment) money
For civilization to evolve, for Man to mature, we have to eliminate money, laws and
I've taken the liberty of arranging your responses in an argument, adding a very basic
premise I'm sure you will have no problem agreeing with and took the liberty of
drawing the conclusion.
Your mind is a gift of God (you)
the products of your mind are free gifts of God. (you)
God will provide money if it is necessary. (you)
A long time ago, someone came up with the idea of money (me)
Ergo God has given us the gift (provided) of money and therefore he believes it is
For civilization to evolve, for Man to mature, we have to eliminate money, laws and
international boundaries. Money served its purpose. God has given us brains to figure that
|Ayn Rand on money
From ATLAS SHRUGGED, by Ayn Rand, page 387: