Why not pursue systemaccounting as a normal startup?

A:
With billions wasted on frivolous research across the private and public sectors every year, systemaccounting distinguishes itself from the rest as science offering an invaluable return to its supporters by way of:
  • eliminating the systemic risk caused by illegitimate, government-chartered assets,
  • scientifically disproving all attempts by financial market participants to equate the value of the promises they accept from borrowers to the value of the work delivered by laborers in the past,
  • protecting the public from the absurdities concealed within the jargon of pseudo-technical "experts",
  • denying the externalization of liability from organizations claiming to be "corporations",
  • defining and maintaining​ an empirical standard for earnings,
  • increasing the visibility and competitiveness of returns for investors, the availability of capital for entrepreneurs, and therefore, the purchasing power of consumers,
  • all the while, establishing economic transparency and accountability.

In view of the benefits outlined above, people believe in systemaccounting because their sanity is proven to be intact; not because they receive equity compensation for financial insight & bravery. Just as automobile tires are not compensated to believe speed=distance/time, or conductors that current=charge/time, investors in search of a return are not asked to believe the flow of value=Δownership/time.

Correcting the U.S. Treasury's inappropriate choice to allow "banks" & "monetary policy" occupy the role that only science may play within the trade of capital is therefore medicine rather than entrepreneurship. When rates of return are permitted to be legally-dictated instead of scientifically-discovered, the U.S. Treasury is left with no other choice but to hand the printing press keys over to firms whose only means of restoring the inevitable loss of capital they've obtained from the public at unnatural, government-defined prices is—to print more money. Printing for "banks" the device used by the public to serve as undisputed testimony that value was delivered in the past, and therefore, deserves to be received in the future is to falsify reality in favor of a few, and distort prices. Adding the variable of information asymmetry, it is necessary to diagnose the entire financial industry's landscape as owing its existence to imbalanced access to unjustifiable prices of capital—credit included.

The act of prescribing a solution for the recurring destruction caused by chartering under-performing assets, and then attempting to stabilize an entire system in their favor, is not one that first seeks the approval of venture capitalists dependent on a "stock market", or any other financial professional whose success may be enabled by the current system's imbalances. Furthermore, systemaccounting would be incomplete and insincere as a scientific revolution if the very people it is intended to test were found compensated in advance of its consequences to profess its legitimacy. Once people recognize that advocating science's role within the trade of capital is in their best interest, the technology will pay for itself.

In sum, investors are compensated for believing an idea. Systemaccounting is a matter where the roles of the believing and the believed are reversed.

Was this helpful?