Consulting example: profiting on lack of knowledge means that the less knowledgeable the customer is, the more money you make. This is a serious problem, because often it means we want the customer to remain stupid (or more preferably, become stupider), so that our expertise pays us more as time goes on. Otherwise, if the customer were intelligent, he would not be paying us for our expertise in the first place. It gets you somewhere, if you want to think so.

The only way many people get paid and continues to get paid, is if they keep their secrets, so that most of the world (customers) remain stupid.

The world is not intelligent. The world is only semi-partially intelligent. It takes Partial Intelligence to allow most businesses to be profitable.

Two consultants get together. Consultant1 knows more on TopicA. Consultant2 knows more on TopicB.

The two consultants see capital. One consultant can charge the other for information. Both consultants exchange their capital, and they receive the information they needed. Exchanging their capital involved all sorts of high tech calculators, spreadsheets, accountants, taxes, etc.

In the end, neither consultant came out ahead in regards to capital: Both exchanged capital. Both of them lost $50 and gained $50. They ended up with a balance of $0. So what was the purpose of the capital being exchanged - to prove something? Capitalists have a Pargence problem. 90% or more of the world is only partially intelligent - either they deny this previous example exists, or they ignore it. Ignoring and denying are a sign and symptom of Partial Intelligence, or lack of overall intelligence.

Two consultants that help each other and end up with no capital, are failures in a capitalistic society. Why? If both consultants helped each other, why does capitalism consider it a failure? Simple. Capitalism is far too simple. Capitalism means to base your priorities on Capital. That is far too simple. Two consultants that help each other evenly, are not a failure. Why would they be? But in capitalism, they are! So the solution is obviously not communism or socialism, but some kind of BSD/MIT like society where everybody just fucking helps each other and shares stuff while some of them make some money but mostly it's all about people helping other people. Example: cold fusion nuclear power, tesla electricity, free cell phone plants that run off solar or safe Nuclear Power from National ignition facilities, or if not free, then a low cost low maintenance system... not a high maintainence high priced high restrictive system like say, Apple Computer, iPad, iPhone, or GNU/Linux (high cost because these systems are constantly unreliable, breaking down, full of bugs and security issues, and an utterly stupid socialist subsidized by tax license, see http://gng.z505.com.. Lawyers are paid huge sums of money for your GNU crap software, folks.)

So not all consultants will exchange equal information: maybe one consultant came up with a $40 total and the other consultant came up with a $60 total. But how can one possibly decide on this? How many hours do you spend calculating whether your consulting was worth $40 or if it was worth $60? Aren't high tech calculators, taxes, and accounting needed to figure any of this out? 6 hours already wasted just thinking about the surcharges and fees involved.

Couldn't you have just skipped the entire endless scheme of calculators, taxes, surcharges, fees.. in order to sacrifice a bit of information to your friend? What does it matter if you came up with a $60 total, if according to someone else it was worth $30? We could go on and on forever, This is an endless scheme. We can easily create endless schemes in a capitalist society. When something is easily available to us (the ability to create endless schemes), this is a big danger. It means it is most likely going to happen, even if we try to avoid it.

Wasting time on the high tech calculators, spreadsheets, accountants, taxes, etc. and coming out even is stupid. A person who thinks capitalism is efficient is Pargent. Capitalism works, but it isn't the most efficient method. Capitalism is ludicrous when you think about it deeper. For those that cannot think deeper, will continue to believe.

Wasting time on the high tech calculators, spreadsheets, accountants, taxes, etc. just to come out $10 ahead of your friend is silly. Because eventually, your friend will want to pay you back for that $10 by giving you more helpful information. Good friends always want to contribute to each other's knowledge - so you end out coming even or coming slightly ahead. But you can never make money off a true friend! But since capital is the basis of the capitalistic society, and you can never make money off a true friend, doesn't that mean we must not have many friends in a capitalistic society?

Why do we have so many "businesses" (the word "business" is a funny word itself. What does it mean, exactly?). Surely, since not all businesses want to help each other, we must have a lot of enemies in the world. For example, the point of being in business is to ruin your competitors. The point of being in business is not to help and give to your competitors. However, for those that believe "competition is healthy", you are correct. You may think that without a business with schemes, you simply cannot have competition! There must be schemes to have competition? No, that is the misconception.

Friends compete with each other too. Competition is not just prevalent in business. Don't make that mistake of thinking so. If my friend gives me a large bag of apples, you can bet that I will compete with him and try to give him something better. I will compete with my friend and create or give him something that is better than what he gave me, without ever exchanging endless schemes (receipts, taxes, costs, bills, etc.). I will want to show off to my friend and show that I am a true friend. I will go and give him a bigger bag of apples than he gave me, and he will be really surprised. It creates a bit of competition! Healthy competition. Yet, this internal competition of our friendship never involved an endless scheme of accounting, taxes, calculators etc. The two friends simply wanted to help each other more than they already were helping each other, which caused competition. So competition is healthy.

The capitalist who argues that competition is healthy is missing the point. He is arguing for competition, not capitalism! He is avoiding the fact that capitalism is based on capital, not competition. The fact is, competition is not directly related only to capitalism! But that is what most capitalists believe (i.e. surely there can't be competition without capitalism.. can there? Of course there can!). Competition is a separate subject that can exist without capitalism.

You can't help BusinessA if you are BusinessB, because that might ruin your little scheme (unless you merge). But what does the scheme have to do with the ultimate goal: getting something done efficiently, or helping someone? Isn't the scheme just a waste of time in the end, if it means less knowledge and less time spent on helping?

Why, when BusinessA helps (merges with ) BusinessB, people consider it a negative thing? (monopolies). If two friends merge together (two friends move in together) no one considers it a monopoly! That's because there are no endless schemes in the friendship merger. But in business, merging creates two endless schemes rammed together. So people begin to see the negative issues accented, when two businesses merge. It doesn't make sense, that BusinessA helping BusinessB (monopolies) is a negative thing according to many by consumers. It should be the opposite.

The infinite fight for a cheap deal and a good salary doesn't pan out

When Businesses grow bigger, usually cheap labor or low wages come into play. Or high prices start to kick in. If Business is getting bigger, shouldn't wages get better? Shouldn't product prices become lower? In the case of companies like Microsoft.. staff gets paid high, but then the product prices are high. In the case of Walmart, low labor rates are dominant and low pricing exists for the consumer. None of these solutions are good ones.

When Microsoft pays their staff high wages, people start complaining about the high software prices. When Walmart pays thier staff low wages, consumers get wonderful prices and the staff goes home poor. Gee, see a trend here? Infinite loop? People want high salaries but cheap groceries. People want high salaries but cheap software. But it will never work. If you want cheap groceries, you have to have cheap labor. If you want a high salary, you need to have expensive products. That is how a capitalist system works. If you want cheap Microsoft Windows operating system, you have to have cheap labor.

In an intelligent society, capital would not be the basis of a community, since capital does not equal intelligence. It is as simple as that.

In Pascal:

 Capital <> Intelligence

 Capital != Intelligence

What sort of accountant accounts for an accountant's taxes, and what accountant accounts for those taxes of the taxman's taxes tax? Infinite loop?

High tech calculators, spreadsheets, accountants, taxes, etc. creates useless employment. Useless employment creates high tech calculators, spreadsheets, accountants, taxes, etc. High tech calculators, spreadsheets, accountants, taxes, etc. creates useless employment. It just goes around in circles.

High tech calculators, spreadsheets, accountants, taxes, etc. should be calculating useful endeavors, not infinite and endless schemes. All businesses, not just MLM (multi-level marketing), are infinite and endless schemes. Many people feel that only multi level marketing is an endless scheme. But when looking deeper into any company, you still have an endless scheme. A partially intelligent human understands that MLM is an infinite scheme. A completely intelligent human understands that any business is an infinite scheme.

For example:

Google is a company that everyone seems to think wonders of. Google would not exist without web content put together by people not interested in profits. Google has no real product of their own. Their product is our web content, and they run little ads beside it. This is an endless and circular scheme. They have no product, yet they are still successful.

If a public library indexed the internet for us, just like the public library indexes books for us, google would be utterly useless. Google would go broke. The public library internet website would be where everyone ran to check out and search the internet. People would just laugh at google and say "if I go to the library community based search engine, I don't see those annoying text ads. Why would I use google?". That's because a library is not so much a business - it is a community oriented system, not focused on endless schemes. The focus of a library is usually intelligence - i.e. have as much information conveniently available for people as possible, without any schemes. Google is in some ways worse than the multi-level companies with overly priced products. Because Google has no product! Your website is their product, even though they don't own it!

Of course google is a useful tool.. but it's not completely intelligent, since it has an endless scheme around it. You can still get away with using Google, because it works.. partly. It works partially. For now. Until the public library or the community decides to offer a solution that doesn't involve any schemes.

Be honest with yourself: if there was a search engine run by W3C.org or the public library, do you think you would use it or Google's?

You would use the one that was most enjoyable and most intelligent.. and most likely a search engine put together by a library or a group like W3C.org would be far more high quality than some company who likes to spam you with obnoxious text ads. Who invented the internet? A community, or a schemed up business? Communities drive the community. Businesses are just schemes inside communities. When communities replace businesses, quality of life increases.

If your friend called you up and asked you to come and haul his car out of the ditch, you would not think about bringing your calculator and your credit card swiping machine. you'd just go and help him. But the consultant or contractor would think of the credit card swiping machine and the other endless schemes that make businesses tick. But really, the credit card swiping machine and calculator has nothing to do with helping the person out of the ditch! It is just a scheme that is wrapped around helping the person out of the ditch.

So does this mean that the world consists of mainly friends? Probably not, if most people involve endless schemes in their daily activity. Friends don't do this. So the world can't exist of mainly friendship.

If I have to think about my consulting fees and my taxes before I help you, we are no longer friends. The scheme got in the way.

Circular schemes are anal. Circular schemes are stupid. Capitalists are partially intelligent. Communists have an equality scheme where everyone is supposed to be equal, which is just as absurd. The problem is, communism has hijacked the word community, so every time you talk about community or friendship, people think you are talking about a communist system. So going to a friendly bar, is communist? no. Going to a park to meet a group of friends, without any calculators and spreadsheets, must be communist, because no capital is being exchanged at the park? Wrongo bongo. Communism hijacked community, commune, friend, and public (all public schools and libraries must be communist! doh!). It's too bad.

Communism, Capitalism, are not the answer. And neither is Socialism or Fascism. The answer is knowledge and intelligence. Please dissociate yourself with politics, and associate yourself with intelligence.