During elections we only make selections and never become the deciders ourselves        

 

 Did you know that Switzerland already has a well-established model of direct democracy?  Some polls indicate that 80% of Swiss citizens are satisfied with their system of direct democracy.  Have you ever seen a population that is 80% satisfied with their government?  I haven't.  Participatory democracy or direct democracy is a form of democracy that we absolutely must consider. Look where our leaders have led us!

 

 Think if you could just pull out your cell phone and vote on issues that will lead to decisions affecting your everyday life. For example, voting on how your tax money is spent, voting on which laws you think should be adopted or abolished, voting for or against certain proposals proposed by citizens, or even voting on the content of public information programs.

 

 With participatory democracy, citizens have the opportunity to propose ideas to the population in the form of proposals, which citizens can then discuss, debate, vote on, and decide whether or not to adopt or amend. During public discussions and debates, experts and professionals will be invited to enlighten citizens on certain technical subjects.  This will enable citizens to make more informed decisions.


 According to the model of direct democracy that we adopt, decision-making power would ideally and primarily be held by citizens who are familiar with the issues surrounding citizens' proposals, i.e., citizens who are more involved in discussions and debates concerning citizens' proposals. Those who are less present or absent during discussions and debates concerning citizen proposals will still be able to vote on whether or not to adopt these proposals, but their votes will count for less.


A system based on majority voting, such as a participatory democracy or direct democracy system, is not a perfect system, but could be perfected with the art of accommodating opposing sides and finding common ground for all parties. It's by practicing the art of decision-making that citizens will improve at doing this, and then satisfying as many citizens as possible becomes easier with time.

 

Even if citizens do not always make the right decision, the important thing is that citizens have the power to correct their decisions at any time. For example, if a proposal is adopted but citizens ultimately realize that it does not make sense, then citizens can go back and create a better, more specific proposal that better meets their desires. On the other hand, with the current system, if citizens disagree with the decisions made by governments, the only option is to wait up to four years to change governments, so this is not very effective.

 

Citizens have the solutions!

 

 Having normal people in power is the solution to creating a better world, that's all. It doesn't take a superhero to save the world, but simply more normal people on the ground who get involved in the decision-making process in their territories. Citizens have always had the solutions! I believe that normal people in power could put an end to all this chaos on the planet. 

 

 Forget the fight against the left, the right, communism, capitalism, socialism, etc. These are just headlines that will distract us from the true reality of things. No matter what system we have, the reality is that we must invest time and energy to sit down together, discuss together and then make the best possible decisions that aims to please as many people as possible.

 

 Of course, not all citizens are willing and able to get involved in decision-making in their territories, but the people who are involved will represent all citizens much better than any government.

 

 We must stop this child-parent relationship that we have with our governments. We must grow up, become adults, evolve, take responsibility and take care of our territories like adults! The advancement and evolution of the planet and the human species cannot be entrusted to politicians, but rather to the people. If we do not control our territories, someone else will do it for us, in our place and to our detriment.

 

 Voting for politicians and simply checking X's in boxes once every 4 years is an act of absolute laziness. We cannot prosper by simply doing this. To get a better result, we must do the work ourselves.

 

 If the citizens of Quebec and Canada adopt a certain model of direct democracy, I believe the result would be a non-authoritarian system that would be focused more on pleasure and freedom and not on work and production. I believe that citizens would not need to work as much in order to simply survive and would therefore be obligated to work less hours on a weekly bases in order to make ends meet.  I believe that the people working for corporations would also have more leave and vacation time. I believe that citizens would succeed in structuring the economy in a way to keep prices on essential needs affordable for everyone.

 

  Implementing a system of participatory democracy will be difficult at the beginning, it will be necessary to make some sacrifices, there will be confusion and uncertainty, it will be chaos. But after a while, we learn to organize ourselves, we learn how to make decisions and find common ground, we become aware and sensitized to the needs of others, the simple citizen gains power and know-how over time, we take responsibility, we grow, we become independent. On the other hand, with a system of representative democracy, it's easy to go vote and check X's in boxes, it's practical, it's convenient, but by simply doing this, society deteriorates enormously.

 

 We must do the work if we want the result, there is no other way.

 

It doesn’t matter…

 

 It doesn't matter whether you are more on the right or the left, a communist, a capitalist, a socialist, religious or not, the important thing to understand is that a people living in a specific territory must have the power to decide how things are run in that specific territory, not governments, nor corporations, but the people.  

 

 If it just so happens the people decide they want governments, then they must decide how much power these governments will have over them in the first place.  The people must decide the specific role these governments will play in their lives in the first place.  The people must also have the power to surveil and supervise their governments and nothing, absolutely nothing should be kept secret from the people.   If this was the case, then representative democracy would maybe stand a chance.  

 

We don't all have to agree to advance

 

  Citizens can discuss collectively, and even if they don’t agree on everything, the majority of citizens will still agree on certain principles which will greatly and quickly improve society, for example;

 

 The majority of citizens are against massive military spending and the financing of wars, the majority support a system where wealth is redistributed more equally among the population, at least to help meet the most essential and fundamental needs of society, like eliminating poverty for the elderly and children, or building small basic structures for the homeless. The majority of people want to have more paid vacation time because 2 weeks a year is not enough. The majority of people want a system that facilitates and allows the people to have more freedom and not have to work 40-50 hours a week to simply survive. The majority of people want to live in a system where workers pensions are guaranteed. The majority want to live in a system where problems, destruction, disease and people’s sufferings are not profitable. The majority of people do not support the increasing prices on essential needs, so this problem should have been remedied long ago

So you see, the majority of citizens would vote in favor of proposals that would bring these ideas to fruition and this would bring big changes in our lives.

 

 Personally, I don't like the idea that technology companies can have access to our personal data, for example, to geo-locate us in order to send us targeted advertisements. I believe that the majority of citizens are against this form of intrusion into our private lives. With a certain direct democracy model, a simple proposal put forward by a citizen could lead to the abolition of this intrusive practice.

 

The collective intelligence of the citizens

 

 The collective intelligence of the citizens greatly exceeds the intelligence of any government. When this intelligence is exploited, citizens will realize that they’ve always had all the solutions to their problems.

 

If citizens were in power, they would have long ago found a way to lower prices on basic needs, like food, oil, cell phone service, etc., because the vast majority of citizens desire this. Citizens would have made the necessary investments with their tax money allowing them to have the infrastructure they need to save money on their essential needs in the long term. For example, in order to have affordable cell phone and internet services for all Canadians, citizens would have likely voted in favour long ago of building their own telecommunications networks with public and private money in order to save millions of dollars every year.

 

 It's not complicated to keep prices on essential products down, it's not a big science. We simply have to overproduce essential products and services so that prices remain low, with investments coming from the private or public sector, as long as prices remain low, that’s the goal.

 

 Look at the cannabis market, prices have been falling for several years. Before, good cannabis was rare on the market and an ounce sold for $280 in Montreal. Today I can find an ounce of good cannabis in Montreal for $100. But why? Because more and more people are growing it and therefore prices are falling. Thanks to new information and technology, anyone can grow cannabis in their closet at home.

 

How citizens would have spent public money?

 

 If the goal is to save the people money, citizens would have invested public money in order to save money on their basic needs such as food. Is there really a better investment than that? If public money would have been well invested by citizens, they would have built greenhouses and small farms all over Montreal to keep food prices low. Citizens would not pay $1.80 for a litre of oil, because long ago, they would have invested their tax money along with private investments to ensure that it never costs them $1.80 per litre of oil! They would have procured their own oil extraction and processing companies to save millions of dollars every year. Citizens would never have let the price of rent in Montreal increase so much, because they would have built housing centres to counter the price increases.

 

 Citizens would have invested their tax money with the aim of becoming efficient in the long term, that is, investing in the necessary infrastructure that would allow the vast majority of citizens to save money.

 

The 2 objectives that can unite all citizens regardless of

their differences

 

It is easier for citizens to unite when they all agree on certain key points.

 

Apart from being in good health, being free in all senses of the word, such as having the freedom to move and travel, to work, to express oneself etc.. The majority of people want 2 main things. The majority of people agree that these 2 things are very important. People may be divided on certain topics, but on this, the majority of people agree that they want these 2 things, which are indeed very related.

 

  1- All citizens want to have good purchasing power, that is to say, to have enough purchasing power to live well and purchase the needs they desire, to have enough purchasing power to achieve projects, to travel, to be free, etc.

 

  2- All citizens want to work as little as possible on a compulsory basis. That is to say, citizens have an interest in working as little as possible in a compulsory manner in order to be able to survive and obtain the needs they desire.  Again, the aim is to have more free time to enjoy life.

 

If the majority of the people want these 2 things, then it makes sense to have a system or systems that would aim to facilitate the achievement of these 2 things that everyone wants. It doesn't matter if you are on the left or right, a conservative, a progressive, a communist, etc. If the vast majority of citizens desire these two things, I believe that bringing these two things to fruition will be among the reasons that will force the unification and cooperation of people, regardless of their differences.

 

Our time and energy spent are two very precious things that can never be replaced. We are dying slowly, so our time is very important and can never be replaced. We have limited energy stores in our body, so our energy is very important. For these reasons, the focus of our system should be on saving this time and energy and only do effective work that makes humans happy.

 

We will always improve

 

Over time, we will become better collectively at making decisions and we could refine our system of direct democracy to the point of satisfying the vast majority of citizens, I am convinced. At the beginning, it would be chaos, but from this chaos, we will learn to grow and better understand our own system and its faults, with the aim of satisfying as many citizens as possible.

 

It's by having responsibilities that we will become responsible and independent, and if we never inherit responsibilities, we will never learn to be responsible and independent. It is by practicing the process of making our decisions that we will learn and improve our ways and methods of doing this. Making mistakes together is mandatory for our learning and therefore we must absolutely make mistakes to grow and know how to avoid these mistakes later.

 

If we always ask mom and dad to do everything for us, we will never be able to become independent. We must become responsible adults, make our decisions and take care of our territories. It's up to us to do this work, otherwise we will remain weak dependant children.

 

The deciding majority = Tyranny of the majority?

 

When we talk about the majority deciding, people often refer to the tyranny of the majority. For my part, I believe that the majority of people here in Canada and in Quebec are well-intentioned and would likely take decisions that aim to satisfy all parties as best as possible. The will to accomodate the losing side must be present to avoid a certain tyranny of the majority.

 

To avoid a possible tyranny of the majority which would violate the fundamental rights of citizens, it would be necessary that all citizens living in a certain territory agree on their fundamental rights which they inherit from birth, such as the right to work, the right to travel, the right to free speech, etc. If citizens have an agreement on what their fundamental rights are, then any proposals coming from citizens who seek to violate these fundamental rights will be ignored.

 

A good majority of citizens living in a territory would need to agree, with signature, that these rights can never be violated by any citizen or government authority. If these fundamental rights are violated, citizens will have to agree to unite and create a force that is ready to defend these individual rights that they possess. For example, if the citizens of a village vote in favor of a proposal that aims to exterminate all people who are 6 feet tall and taller, it will take other citizens to stop these crazy people.

 


 Each province or selected territories should declare their independence and sovereignty from Canada

 

Why do this? To decentralize power and allow citizens to be more in control of their territories. In my opinion, each province in Canada should declare its Independence from Canada, implement a system of participatory democracy and create a citizen led central bank for each province. The provinces will then be able to finance local projects which are essential to their well-being. The provinces will be able to decide that they will have a common money with the option for certain provinces to create their own unique currencies if they wish.

 

Within the provinces, other territories could also declare their independence and manage themselves. Citizens will be able to create their own self-determination systems for specified territories. The Canadian flag could still exist, because it represents Canadian territory, but there would no longer be a federal government.

 

The provinces will still be able to join forces to accomplish wonderful things and their wealth can be shared equally amongst all Canadians. For example, if all the oil is found in Alberta, then, in an ideal setting, companies from other provinces could have permission to extract oil in Alberta so this can benefit all Canadians.

 

It is not up to judges, politicians or other authorities to determine whether the creation and implementation of a direct democracy style system or other systems is legitimate or not. It is by referendum that citizens will be able to decide whether they want to implement a certain direct democracy style system or other systems of governance in a specified territory.

 

Public lands, waters, resources and infrastructure belong first and foremost to the citizens of Canada and First Nations and not to the Canadian federal government, the UN or other global corporations.

 

Who has the right to give us our rights?

 

Is it the government, the Gods, the other citizens….??

 

Citizens inherit natural rights from birth and these rights should never be violated by any civic or governmental authority. Such as the right to move, express oneself, work, etc. Apart from these rights which should never be violated by any authority, in my opinion, the rights of citizens should be decided by all citizens with the help of a direct democracy style system. This would lead citizens to discuss, debate, vote and decide on all of the rights they should have in a specific territory.

 

Laws that are created and supported by citizens who took the time to discuss, debate, vote and then decide thus, is a much more just and legitimate process than the current process, that is to say, the government which decides everything without consulting citizens.

 

What governments have not done in 120 years and what citizens

could have done in 10 years.

 

Had a direct democracy style system been implemented long ago in Canada, i believe the people would have been successful in ;

 

-Eliminating the majority of poverty in Canada, especially amongst the elderly and children.
-Eliminating all forms of food insecurity by building several greenhouses and local farms.
-Eliminating the chaos in the healthcare and the education system.
-Constructing social housing for people living in extreme poverty and permission granted to anyone who wants to build a small mobile or stationary structure to live in.
-Increasing vacation time for workers, 2 weeks per year is ridiculous.
-Reducing the 40 hour work week, which in my opinion is equal to modernized slavery.
- Creating the Citizens Bank of Canada, to never again enrich bankers with money coming from the people.
- Eliminating all forms of mistreatment towards the elderly, especially in long-term care facilities.
-Creating an economy that does not thrive on consumption, but rather on efficiency to eliminate the production of low quality products that constantly break.
-Investing more time and resources in order to eliminate several diseases at the source such as cancer. Unfortunately, with our current system, problems can be very profitable and so finding cures is much less encouraged.
- Eliminating the chemicals in the food we eat.
-Have hemp growing everywhere, because hemp is a biodegradable, multi-use material, very robust, very good insulator, which only takes a few months to grow and which can help us replace our dependence on plastics. Where is the affordable linen made with hemp from Canada, where are the hemp bags in all the grocery stores?
-Creating a system that does not make money from people's problems and sufferings, therefore discouraging the creation of problems for profit.
-Having more electric cars on the roads, because this technology has been around for over 100 years now.
-Having no impediment to recycling materials. Construction of factories to transform and recycle glass. Apparently we're having a hard time recycling at the moment because it's too expensive.
- Installing durable materials in public infrastructure such as roads, to avoid constantly redoing them.
- Providing clean drinking water for all citizens. There are indigenous children in northern Quebec who do not yet have access to drinking water, etc., etc., etc.

 

So you see that after voting all this time for politicians, this is still not enough to provide basic needs to certain people.

 

The atrocities suffered by elderly people in long term health care units is very solid proof that governments are not capable of carrying out the work demanded by the people. The simple fact that governments have seen nothing, or done nothing over all these years to help these people, shows us how urgent it is for citizens to implement a direct democracy style system in Canada and vote in favour proposals that would put an end to these attrocities.

 

Do our politicians really have the power?

 

I think not, because the politicians themselves don't know how the system works, they are told how the system works.

 

When politicians come into office, they don't know where to go, what to do and how to do it. They must be trained, supervised and directed, they must be shown the procedures. Who teaches a politician on how to become a politician? Is there a college course on how to become a minister in government? No.

 

The people surrounding the politicians are the ones explaining to them how to become politicians.  The people surrounding the politicians are the ones explaining to them how much power they have and how to use it. They advise them on and what they should or should not do. They are the ones informing the politicians and guiding them into position.

 

Politicians are surrounded by people who advise and inform them. Who are these people? These people are not elected by the public but seemingly have all the knowledge and power.

 

Taxation on our salaries is theft. Here's why.

 

The government has no right to take money from our salaries, because we never consented to this practice and voted for it. We have never authorized and given this power to governments in the first place. We have an agreement with our employer for our salary, but we do not have an agreement with the government. No law can have the legitimacy to force us to pay the corrupt governments of this world, especially when they invest our money in armed conflicts and other inhumane practices.

 

  When the government seizes part of our salary, it is theft, because the two parties do not have an agreement. For this practice not to be theft, both parties must agree. Taking something from an individual without their consent is theft, period, even when it’s the government doing it and even if it’s legal. The laws that authorize the governments to do this are not laws that have been voted on and decided by the people. So to simply say that the government has the right to do this, because the law allows it, is not justifiable.

 

Of course the government has expenses but it is up to people to decide how to carry out this whole process and decide how these expenses will be paid. Firstly, the people must discuss, debate and decide whether paying taxes is a fair and legitimate practice. Then they can decide how much tax people have to pay and how that money is spent exactly.

 

  Who will have to pay for the construction of roads in Quebec and in Canada? The entire population or only the drivers? It is up to the people to decide this. Would there be a user-pays model for the health-care system and the education system? Will every citizen of Canada have to pay a tax every year to support the health and education system? It is up to the people to decide this.

 

Additionally, when we pay taxes to governments, we cannot track and count that money so we cannot know the governments true revenues. If I asked you to become my business partner but i would be the only one to have access to the numbers and the one who knows the real revenues of the company, would you accept? Of course not.

 

  Every citizen should have the right to financially support an organization or not, period. If the values of citizens do not align with the values of governments, citizens should have the right to stop paying this organization that they do not support and without penalties. An individual would be stupid to continue to finance operations that they consider dangerous, or that harm other people.

 

The alternative to paying governments would be to create multiple accounts and pay for our public services directly. For example, the people could deposit sums into the education account to support the education system, into the unemployment insurance account to support the unemployment program, etc. At the end of the year, if there is a shortage of funds for programs that the people deem essential, then they will be able to vote in favour of a temporary tax to fill the gaps.

 

So much of the unhappiness on this planet is caused by the people giving their money involuntarily to governments and not being able to decide how that money is spent. I believe that governments of this world and the people who work for them have killed more humans than any other organization known to man.

 

 Adults with too much power become like children again

 

Look at all the wars and deceitful practices driven by the wanting of more power.


It’s really the accumulation of too much power that is the enemy of man, because when men have too much power, they become like children again and want to own and control everything. Knowing that the accumulation of too much power is like a disease, we must not make people sicker and crazier by giving them more power. The reason society is sick is because the people in power are sick.

 

If we lived in a society where profits were redistributed more evenly amongst the people in order to prevent the accumulation and concentration of power by a few people, I believe we would live in a much better world. The majority of citizens would belong to a very comfortable middle class with a few wealthier people here and there. This is the best solution for a healthy society in my opinion. I believe that a society run by citizens through a direct democracy style system would lead us  towards a similar system.

 

Accumulating so much profit and power off the backs of workers and citizens is a way of doing that has never been decided or accepted by the people. If workers and citizens would have thought out and created this system, they would have made a system that primarily compensates themselves and not the people who profit from them.

 

The collective stagnation we feel.

 

I believe that the collective stagnation that some of us feel is present because we don’t feel like we are collectively moving forward in the right direction. We don't have the impression of being part of a system that unites us and which aims to manifest those 2 or 3 things that we all really want and that contribute to making us all happier. That is to say, more purchasing power for ordinary citizens, less forced labor in order to survive, more freedom, less war, etc. The focus in society is still on "making money" and not on making people happy.

 

Many of us feel some sort of collective emptiness, a feeling of helplessness, of stagnation, and I believe this feeling will start to disappear the day we begin to carry out the process of creating a direct democracy style system in our territories.

 

  When creating a better world and self governing our territories becomes a social project, hope will once again grow in our hearts and we will regain this feeling of moving forward in the right direction, I’m sure of it. With a citizen-led system, happiness and efficiency would become the goal, and not simply making money and profits for a minority of individuals.

 

 

We are the energy, we are the batteries, we are the ones who are performing the actions, we are the builders, the thinkers, the creators, we are the energy , money is just paper.

 

Behind the creation of all wealth there are citizens and workers, and without them there is no wealth. Without workers and citizens, there is nothing at all. No one gets rich without workers and citizens. Workers and citizens think and build worlds, money is just paper.

 

What everyone really wants is not money, but rather what money buys. Behind all the products and services we buy, there are workers and citizens, so what we really want is workers and citizens above all. The reason everyone works is to eventually be able to access the products and services of other workers.

 

Imagine if all the money on the planet disappeared tomorrow, could we still survive? Of course, because we can still function, we can still move and produce actions, we can organize ourselves and exchange our energy between us in several forms in order to satisfy the needs of us all. On the other hand, if all the workers and citizens disappear tomorrow, we no longer have energy, we have nothing. If people always work, we will always have our needs, regardless of whether money exists or not.

 

The presence alone of workers is enough to make a society function, they just need to be organized. Money is not essential, but workers are.

 

The advancement of a society should not depend on the availability of money, but rather on the availability of workers, because workers are the primary energy source and not money. It only takes ideas and people to create a society, money is secondary. But currently money is often and firstly needed to be able to build a society, even if the workers and their energy is present.

 

Workers and those who have worked deserve to be treated like kings and queens, because they are the creators who created everything. They are the ones who made the products and services we want and need. It’s thanks to workers that we are alive, do you realize this? If we owe anything to anyone, we owe it to the workers, because without them we cannot survive. In a sense, we owe them our lives. The heroes of this world are the workers and those who have worked and with good reason.

 

Human X Work = Everything.

 

Money can only exist and be used thanks to workers

 

It is by exchanging our precious energy for money that money then becomes precious. Without us, without workers and citizens, money is no longer worth anything.

 

Governments, corporations, banks and everyone have money because of workers and those who worked. It is they, by working, who allow the money to have value. If workers don't work, money is worthless because no one will be able to buy anything. Without workers, money has no value.

 

Don’t idealize money, rather idealize the workers because without the workers their is no money.

 

Let's control our energy and our money

 

Currently, we are using money that we do not have the power to create and that we do not control.  We the people, must have control over this thing that controls every part of our lives, or else we control nothing.

The power to activate workers should not only depend on money coming from corporations, banks, foreign money, investors or governments, because workers do not belong to corporations, governments, investors and banks. Workers are part of the community, so the community should have the power to activate a certain number of workers so that this work-energy favours all citizens and not just a minority.

 

A people who are forced to depend on money from investors, banks, corporations or governments to activate their own workers to then benefit from this energy and ensure their survival, is a people who must essentially ask permission to work and survive.

 

All citizens of the planet should have the right to work and provide for themselves at all times, whether investors are present or not. It’s not fair that only people with a lot of money can activate workers and then benefit from them. Citizens have the right to work and exchange their work and talents freely with each other and must have the necessary tools to control and activate this process. People's survival should not depend only on people who have money.

 

When citizens must rely solely on private money from banks, investors, corporations or rich people to activate their own workers, they are at the mercy of these people and must pay fees on this private money in the form of interest.

 

We cannot sit back and wait for wealthy people and governments to come and save us with their money. We are the energy, and therefore, we need to appropriate the means that allow us to activate this energy to serve the people and not only the bourgeois class.

 

The people must have the power to create money if needed without always depending on money belonging to the wealthy which remains idle in bank accounts. Money must circulate for the system to work, and when it does not circulate, citizens must have the power to create new money to be able to activate certain workers to meet the needs of the people and to start new projects and move society forward. This can be accomplished with a Citizen led Central Bank for selected territories.

 

Without people there is no money, so if there is anyone who has the right to print and create money to activate society, it is the people and not the banks nor the governments.


We are rich in workers, but poor in money.

 

In many countries, there are enough workers, energy, know-how and resources in order to satisfy the needs and desires of the people, but there is not enough money to accomplish this. The country finds itself being rich in workers, rich in energy, rich in work hours, but poor in money, so nothing can be done.

 

Look at all these poor countries, look at all these workers, all this energy which remains stagnant and which cannot be activated. Take Haiti for example. How to activate all these workers who do not have work in Haiti? By waiting on investors? No. By creating a Haitian Citizen led Central Bank which will allow Haitians to create new money to activate workers which will allow them to create necessary infrastructure which will allow them to work and share their energy amongst themselves. They can then borrow money to citizens who have good ideas who want to start businesses and create opportunity.

 

  If a group of motivated Haitian workers needs funding to build a garage to repair cars, and the citizens of that neighbourhood need this service, then there should be no impediment to accomplishing this. If the private sector is unwilling or unable to invest the money necessary to activate these workers so that they can offer a service in high demand that is required by the people, then a Citizen led Haitian Central Bank will have to do it.

 

Here in Montreal, I believe that Montrealers would love to build greenhouses everywhere in order to have access to fresh produce year round.  But few investors are willing to invest because these are not very profitable projects and the goal is not to make big profits off an essential need but rather to offer an essential need at a good price. If the people do not have access to any money, then they should be able to create new money to activate certain projects that are not necessarily profitable, but necessary. Then, when citizens buy the cheap produce grown in the greenhouses, some of that money will be destroyed and not refunded with interest to a private bank or investor.  This must be done to compensate for the excess money in circulation caused by the creation of this new money that paid for the construction of greenhouses. This way, over time, the money should keep its full value.

 

Citizens should be able to create money to activate certain workers and create their own infrastructure so that they can own and benefit from these riches forever. Then citizens will be able to pay small amounts each time they benefit from these infrastructures. When payments from citizens are received, some or all of this money will be destroyed to compensate for the excess money that was created to pay the workers who created this infrastructure. The people can also decide not to destroy the money and to have more money in circulation, but doing this in the long term may have consequences.

 

If we create wealth through this new money created and printed, then yes, there would be temporarily more money in circulation, but there would be more wealth for citizens too. The important thing is to forever possess this wealth that money helped to build.

 

Let's imagine that I have a money printer in my living room. Let's imagine that I print 100 million dollars in my living room, and that I subsequently hire 2000 workers to build several social housing units worth 100 million dollars. Would this 100 million dollars that I printed and which is now circulating in the economy really have an immense and negative impact on society? It is possible that the value of money would be temporarily affected, but in general, I believe not. What is more important is to have social housing for people in need and not wait for society to deteriorate. The tenants of these social housing units will then be able to pay small fees every month to live there and then this money will be returned and destroyed.

 

When citizens have the power to create their own money, they can then finance the construction of infrastructure that is essential to their needs and then own it without relying entirely on private money. This is how citizens will be able to spend their energy so that this energy eventually returns to them.

Money does not serve the people as it should. Currently, money acts as a tool that allows governments, corporations, investors and banks to easily steal energy from the workers and the people. When we exchange our energy for physical or digital money, it then becomes easy to steal this money through methods of intimidation, taxation or by manipulating the markets.

 

The question that all politicians will avoid

 

Canada has its own bank and it is called the Bank of Canada. Why doesn't the Bank of Canada loan money DIRECTLY to citizens at low interest rates, like it does to private banks? Currently, the Bank of Canada loans money to private banks at very low interest rates and then these private banks loan this money back to the people  at very high interest rates. In other words, we're getting screwed.

 

Instead of having private banks on every street corner taking advantage of us, we could have Citizen Banks of Canada everywhere who would charge us much less interest or no interest at all. There can be Citizen led Banks representing any territory including cities and provinces.The people don't need to charge interest because they don't have to charge interest to themselves, but they can if they want.  Establishing Citizen led Banks would prevent citizens from having to deal with private banks that charge them immense interest on money that essentially belongs to them.

 

Everyone has to work much longer to pay off their mortgages, student loans, cars, credit cards, etc., just to pay interest to private banks. Furthermore, these private banks never worked to get this money in the first place, they simply have the power to make numbers appear on a screen out of thin air, then they loan this money to us and charge us the interest.

 

If we create a Citizens led Central Bank in Canada or Citizens led Central Banks in the provinces, we can then loan that money to people with good ideas and who want to create a better world. Many suppressed inventions can also be funded by a Citizen led Bank.

 

Being forced to work for 25 years to pay off a house that took 2 months to build, to simply enrich a bank, is this fair? Was this process decided by all citizens? The answer is no.

 

If workers are present, then no one should suffer

 

Thanks to the Covid-19 crisis, there will possibly be cuts in services to needy citizens due to the lack of money in government coffers. But services should not be cut if the workers are present to do the work.

It's ridiculous to think that able workers cannot provide essential services to people simply because there isn't any money to activate them.

 

If we have the power to create new money with the help of a Citizens led Central Bank, we can activate the amount of workers we need to ensure that the people have their essential needs met.
If workers and citizens are present, then there should always be essential services available for citizens.

 

Non working workers can be activated no matter

where they are

 

A worker who does not work but who wants to work, is energy waiting to be used and benefited from by the society.

 

If citizens have the power to create new money with the help of Citizen led Central Bank, they can activate workers who are not working but who want to work anywhere in Canada and Quebec. They will be able to build the infrastructure necessary enabling these people to work and produce something of value for the rest of society.

 

If the private sector is unwilling or unable to invest money to build the necessary infrastructure that would allow everyone to work and earn a good living in Canada, including the isolated people living in the North and other very isolated places, then it is up to citizens to find ways to activate this energy.

 

What would happen if suddenly 2 million immigrants came to settle in Quebec or Canada in a short period of time thanks to some kind of crisis? Could these people all find jobs in the private sector? Do we have the necessary infrastructure to accommodate all these people? Could we offer a good quality of life to these newcomers and ensure that they can provide for themselves? If we have the power to create new money, and if the workers are present, we can finance the construction of the infrastructure necessary to put these people to work.

 

If we were to create the necessary facilities allowing these 2 million people to grow and process hemp as well as produce hemp products such as linen, bags, shoes, food, hemp oil, paper, insulation and construction products, as well as other products, we would be a leader in the processing and manufacturing of hemp products in Quebec or Canada!

 

The value of money

 

Who has the authority to value currency? How is this process carried out exactly? Is the current explanation on how this is done a legitimate process?  Can the markets be manipulated to affect the value of currency?

 

I believe the people must have the authority to be able to determine the determining factors which determine the value of our money because otherwise the values of these moneys will be determined by factors unknown to the people and without their consent.

 

Currently in Lebanon, money is no longer worth anything and citizens are having difficulty purchasing essential needs. How can this all happen in a very short amount of time?

 

I believe that citizens of all countries should have the right to value their currencies as well as the currencies of other countries with mutual agreements between the countries.

 

It is up to citizens to decide which countries they want to support more by accepting their money or by doing business with them. The people should have the freedom to choose to increase the value of a poor country's currency temporarily to help the people of that country.


Rethinking money.  What does it really represent?

 

What is money? What exactly does it represent? As a society, what do we want it to represent?

 

People trade their time and energy for this money, so in part, it represents the time and energy of workers and the people who have worked. It’s like a form of materialized and digitalized energy.

 

On the other hand, when a bank creates new money out of nothing, this does not represent any form of energy expended by workers. If someone buys a property and resells it a few months later to make a profit, this profit does not represent a form of energy that has been worked by workers. Simply moving money and investing in the stock market also does not represent a form of energy that has been expended by workers. Someone who is skilled with printers and computers could create fake money and have money without having to work. Someone can also steal money without having worked for it.

 

If banks, investors, thieves and fraudsters would no longer be part of society, citizens would be little affected because these people do not offer actual work energy to the population. The real work is done by mechanics, artists, plumbers, cooks, farmers, psychologists, welders, etc.

 

If the value of money would be supported by gold like in the past, then the people who have all the gold would have all the power. On the other hand, if the value of money is supported by the people’s work, then the people who work would have all the power.

 

Replacing the old money with a new kind of money,

the people’s money

 

 It would be beneficial for the workers and people who have worked to have a form of money that represents the energy of their work. This money would be representative of something of real actual value.  This new money would be created, accepted, authorized and controlled by the people.

 

If the people organize, they could create their own money based on their work energy, then the working people and the people who have worked would become kings and queens of society because the people who do the actual work would have all the money.

 

People around the world would be able to restart their societies by replacing government money with the people’s money.  Firstly, all forms of the old money would have to be boycotted.  This includes physical and digital money as well as crypto-currency and any other forms of the old money.

 

Then all forms of the old money can be replaced by a new kind of money, but only up to a certain amount, for example a few million dollars per individual. The goal would be to restart society in a more fair and balanced way and to prevent a small group of people from having all the power and controlling everything.

 

Only people who offer products and services of actual value that are wanted and needed by the people would be able to earn this new money. If your job is to produce bombs or give out parking tickets, then maybe you would not be allowed to earn this money in your specific society with those actions. The citizens can ultimately decide who can have access to their work and services and help shape a better society in this way.
 
The people all over the world can restart their societies by creating and using their own new money and enrich themselves instead of enriching the banks, investors, thieves and fraudsters, because it’s the workers and the people who are doing and who did the real work of actual value.

 

 Everyone would want this money because everyone would want access to the workers and the people’s products and services.

 

The benefits of having a people's money

 

Replacing the old money with a new money would help to neutralize the power of the 0.01% of crazy people who are creating conflict and chaos in the world and profiting from this. This chaos includes, financing of wars, creation and promotion of hatred between countries, weather manipulation, manipulation of the economic market, child trafficking, the financing of secret government programs, etc.

 

The new money in circulation can be associated with some kind of proof of work guaranteeing that this new money, wether physical or digital, has and represents actual value and that it represents a service or product of value that is demanded by the people.

 

Another reason why replacing old money with a new money would be an option would be to neutralize all the counterfeit money that is currently circulating. The technology to print money exists, so if that technology exists, there are automatically other people besides governments and banks who secretly own this technology. The question is, how many are there and how much counterfeit money is in circulation because of these people. If only a handful of people on the planet had this technology, that would still be too many.  Currently, all this extra money in circulation along with all this counterfeit money is devaluing the money of the people who actually worked for it.

 

I believe that to help eliminate the worst crimes in society and to avoid the production of counterfeit money, society would benefit from eliminating physical money and replacing it with strictly digital money. Digital money can leave traces and therefore people who commit the worst crimes can eventually be detected. On the other hand, for the moment, society would be less advantaged by having only digital money because the people are not in control of the laws, the banks and the governments. If the people adopt a system with strictly digital money but have no control over the systems that manages and controls this digital money, then they will be at a great disadvantage.

 

Earning money should be based on doing good deeds that contributes to making people happy. Actions that do not have the objective of creating a better world and making humans happy and efficient are actions that should not be supported by any money. The energy spent by workers and citizens should primarily be used to make humans and the environment happy.

 

The current monetary system is not controlled and understood by the majority of citizens, so it can have recessions, economic crashes like in 2008, it can have fluctuations in the value of money without anyone understanding why. Citizens need a system they can understand and control, otherwise they will never reap the full benefits.

 

In my opinion, we need to adopt a direct democracy style system and vote in favour of propositions that will slowly lead us towards a monetary/financial system that the people understand, that the people control and that better meets the needs of all people.