Unruly State of Affairs in the United States of America

We welcome your membership and authorship to the reference library

USOA v2.0 -- April 2025 -- Education & Outreach Committee -- HelpDesk Support is available... Click here to visit the Contact Page...

How You’ve Been Tricked Into Living in the Land of the “Legally Dead”

 

By Pao L. Chang

Guest writer for Wake Up World

The current reality of man is heavily controlled by words. As a result of that, words play a big role in shaping the reality and culture of man. Besides shaping the reality and culture of man, words also play an important role in trade. Some of the most important words used in the business of trading goods and services are related to the name. Your name plays a very important role in your life because it allows others to identify you and communicate with you. Furthermore, it allows you to operate in the realm of commerce and fiction, making it easier for you to trade goods and services with people not living close to you.

Having a name can be a wonderful thing but if you do not know how to use it wisely, it can be a curse and prevent you from living a happy life. One of the ways that your name can curse you is when you allow it to bond to your mind too deeply, causing you to think that your name is who you really are. Your name has the power to trick your mind because it is made up of sigils (letters). Because of this, it is important to use your name wisely, so you do not become a victim of your name.

When you do not know how to use your name wisely, the Dark Magicians or the Elite can use it to imprison your body, mind and soul in the “land” of the legally DEAD. The best time to trick you to “live” in the land of the legally dead or the “sea” of the legally dead is on the day your mother gave “birth” to you.

 

Living in the Land of the Legally Dead…

The contract that the government used to trick your mother and father to agree to allow you to live in the “land” or “sea” of the legally dead is the birth certificate. This certificate is actually a certificate of a dead baby, which is why it has a legal name written on it. The name or legal name is not you because your are living and made of flesh and blood. For evidence showing that the birth certificate is a death certificate, read my informative article titled The Law and You: How the Birth Certificate is Used to Take Away Your Natural Rights.

https://wakeup-world.com/2017/09/24/how-youve-been-tricked-into-living-in-the-land-of-the-legally-dead

It is interesting to know that when you look up the word birth in A Dictionary of Law (1889), it tells you to “see Abandon, 2 (2)”. The word abandon in section 2 (2) is defined by A Dictionary of Law (1889) using these exact words: “The act of a parent in exposing an infant of tender years (usually under seven) in any place, with intent wholly to desert it.”

Based on the definition in the previous paragraph, when your mother gave birth to you and your parents signed the birth certificate with your name on it, they unknowingly agreed to abandon you. This allowed the State to claim “you” as its property and ship “you” to the land of the legally dead (legal fiction). Be aware that the word birth sounds almost identical to the word berth. Because they sound nearly identical, a judge or government agent can use them to trick you to think that he is talking about birth when he is actually talking about berth and vice versa. The word berth is defined as “sufficient space for a vessel to maneuver; sea room” or “a space for a vessel to dock or anchor”.

Here is an excerpt from my Amazon bestselling book titled Word Magic: The Powers & Occult Definitions of Words, which reveals how words are used to deceive you:

“When a ship is in the process of being docked, it is being guided to come to berth. The word berth is defined as “a space for a vessel to dock or anchor”.33 Based on this information, when a product is unloaded onto the dock, it just went through the berthing process, which is the process of delivering the product from the vessel/ship onto the dock.

“Phonetically, the word berth sounds like the word birth. This is why when a woman is in the process of giving birth, she is said to be delivering a baby. The birthing process of a baby is related to the process of delivering a product on a ship. Every woman has a body. Another word for body is vessel. A vessel can also be called a ship. The words body, vessel, and ship can all mean the same thing and be used to represent a woman’s body. This is why a ship is often referred to as “she” and the main ship is often called the “mother ship”.

“To connect the dots, the process of a woman giving birth can also be defined as the process of delivering or berthing a product of a ship. Metaphorically speaking, the product is the baby and the ship is the woman’s body. When you compare all the information that you just read about commerce and the sea business to the process of birthing a baby, you will see a strong connection between the berthing process of a ship and the birthing process of a baby.

“By spelling the words berth and birth slightly different and making them sound almost the same, the Dark Forces and their minions (the Dark Magicians) can trick you to agree to be a product of a ship, so that they can have jurisdiction over you. They know that they can not have jurisdiction over the real you (the living, breathing man or woman made of flesh and blood), which is why they need you to consent to be an artificial person, so that they can treat you like a product and make money by selling you on the stock market.”

The process of tricking you to agree to be an artificial person is mostly done through the legal system, which is the system that deals with the DEAD. The legal system is controlled by the Vatican of the Holy Roman Empire, one of the biggest practitioners of magic spells. The legal system is obsessed with magic spells, because certain magic spells have the power to summon the dead. This is why before a judge (also known as a magistrate/magi-strate, which is a magician) demands you to appear in court, a court agent needs to serve you a summons letter.

Why a Summons Letter Is Used to Summon the DEAD

https://wakeup-world.com/2017/09/24/how-youve-been-tricked-into-living-in-the-land-of-the-legally-dead/

When a court agent serves you a summons letter, the first question he asks you is often related to your legal name, which 99 percent of the time is written in all capital letters on legal documents. For example, the court agent may ask you the question “are you JOHN DOE?” If you were to answer yes to being your legal name and accept the summons letter, you basically agree to play the role of a dead character. This occurs because the legal name is not living; instead it is a fictitious entity that has no life force of its own. As a result of that, it is as dead as a fictional character in a storybook. The summons letter is used to summon the dead using you (the living man or woman) as the medium. This is why a court agent has to serve you a summons letter with your legal name on it before a judge can demand you to appear in court.

To connect the dots, when you accept a summons letter, whether you realize it or not, you agree to raise the dead so you can play the role of a dead character. In other words, you agree to be a zombie. This is why it is called a summons letter. What do witches do when they want to communicate with dead spirits? They summon them using certain magic spells.

Have you seen the TV series The Walking Dead? In this TV series, the zombies represent the sheeple who do not even realize that they are legally dead. In other words, from the perspective of the the Dark Magicians, you are the walking dead, get it? The zombie apocalypse is not something that could happen in the future. It is already here because the people are, in a sense, the walking dead!

To learn how to free yourself from the land or sea of the legally dead, you need to learn how to use words wisely. Furthermore, you need to learn how to use the power of Natural Law to exercise your natural rights. To learn how to do these things, visit my website EsotericKnowledge.me and become a member.

Also by Pao L. Chang:

About the author:

Pao Chang is the author of EsotericKnowledge.me and OmniThought.org. For more content related to the article you just read, visit his websites and read his book titled Word Magic: The Powers & Occult Definitions of Words.

 

 

Details
Category: References
Hits: 222

USOA Menu

Member's Virtual Center

  •  

     

    THE ABUNDANCE PARADIGM: WHY AI FORCES A RETHINKING OF MONEY ITSELF — PART 1

    By Ellen Brown on May 11, 2026

    A Universal Basic Income (UBI) has long been proposed as a way to cushion the blow of jobs lost to automation. Under that model, everyone receives a modest monthly payment – enough to cover basic needs and prevent extreme poverty. 

    But Elon Musk has gone further. On April 16, he posted on X:

    Universal HIGH INCOME via checks issued by the Federal government is the best way to deal with unemployment caused by AI.

    Rather than a subsistence stipend, Universal High Income (UHI) would be a level of income allowing ordinary people to live well in a world where machines do most of the work. Musk has also said that AI and robotics are the only things that can solve the massive U.S. debt crisis. 

    That sounds promising, but where will the government get the money to pay the UHI? Critics say any government that tried it would go bankrupt. There are also other concerns, which will be addressed in Part 2 of this article. Here we will look at the financial underpinnings: why UHI is even thinkable, why AI forces a reexamination of how money enters the economy, why the current system cannot scale to meet what is coming, and the implicit transition needed to meet that challenge.

    Why the Current Money System Cannot Scale

    The national debt of the U.S. government just topped $39 trillion. China’s is $18.7 trillion. Japan’s is $8.6 trillion. Those of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain are each in the multi-trillion-dollar range. Collective global debt now stands at $353 trillion, 305% of the world’s annual economic output. So even if, hypothetically, everything produced in the world in a year were applied toward liquidating the debt, it still would not be enough to pay it all off. 

    In fact the debt can never be repaid, because of the way money currently enters the system. Nearly all of the money supply today is created by banks when they make loans. Banks do not lend their existing capital. The loan itself creates the money. The bank adds the loan amount to the asset side of its balance sheet and balances that sum with the same amount on the liability side. When the borrower withdraws or transfers the funds, either the bank takes them from its reserves in “vault cash” or the Federal Reserve debits the bank’s digital reserve account at the central bank. But the lending bank typically has funds coming into its reserve account at about the same rate as they are going out, so its reserves are continually replenished. Thus a very small reserve account can support a much larger money creation engine. For decades before the Fed discontinued the reserve requirement in 2020, it hovered at around 10%.

    The chief problem with this debt-based system is the interest, which the bank does not create in its original loan. For a typical long-term loan, interest can double the total tab or more. Where is the money to come from to pay this added liability? Across the system as a whole, it must either come from more borrowing or from existing funds. In the case of governments, that means issuing interest-bearing bonds or tapping taxes and other revenues. The interest on the debt compounds, meaning the government is paying interest on interest. This makes the debt increase exponentially, until it is mathematically unsustainable. Then bankruptcies occur, of banks or even whole governments. Booms turn into busts, and the cycle begins again.

    Today, interest on the federal debt is the second largest budget line item after Social Security, exceeding $1 trillion. Meanwhile, workers are losing jobs to AI/robotics, shrinking the income tax base. The system is clearly unsustainable.

    How to Raise Demand to Scale to the Upcoming Supply

    A Universal High Income would replenish the shrinking tax base by replacing the lost wages of unemployed workers. But where will the money come from to pay the UHI? The only sustainable solution is for the government to issue it interest-free. That does not mean through the Federal Reserve, which creates money in the same way banks do: it buys federal interest-bearing securities with accounting entries. The Fed collects the interest, which it is supposed to return to the Treasury after deducting its costs. But since 2008, its costs include paying interest on the reserves of its participating banks, which consumes its profits. (See my earlier article here.) 

    The only interest-free, debt-free solution that will actually increase the money supply sufficiently to match the projected productivity of AI/robotics is for the money to be issued directly by the Treasury.

    This is not a radical new idea. It is authorized in the U.S. Constitution, which provides in Article 1, Sec. 8, that “The Congress shall have Power To … coin Money [and] regulate the Value thereof .…” Abraham Lincoln used government-issued “Greenbacks” to avoid a crippling debt to British-backed bankers. Debt-free government-issued money was also the funding mechanism by which the American colonists succeeded in creating a thriving economy and liberating themselves from the oppressive yoke of the British Empire.

    In his 1729 pamphlet “A Modest Inquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper-Currency,” Benjamin Franklin argued that a lack of currency was a tax on industrious farmers and producers, and that a reliable, locally issued paper currency was the “oil” for the gears of trade. The “Nature and Necessity” of this currency was to facilitate the movement of goods between neighbors. Franklin observed that the British strategy of keeping the colonies short of cash was a method of economic suppression. By forcing the colonies to use gold and silver, which were constantly drained back to London to pay for imports, the Crown kept the colonies in a state of permanent debt and low productivity. When the money supply matched the productive capacity of the people, universal prosperity resulted without inflation. 

    This logic evolved into the “American System of Political Economy” championed by Henry Carey, economic advisor to Abraham Lincoln. He wrote:

    Two systems are before the world… One looks to pauperism, ignorance, depopulation, and barbarism; the other in increasing wealth, comfort, intelligence, combination of action, and civilization. … One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.

    In the context of the 21st century, the “oil” that best lowers the friction of trade is debt-free government-issued money similar to Lincoln’s Greenbacks and colonial scrip. Rather than implementing a radical financial innovation, we would be returning to our roots.

    Inflation or Deflation?

    The chief objection to the colonies’ paper “scrip” was that they tended to over-print, so that “demand” (money) outstripped supply. Too much money chasing too few goods produced price inflation. But in the 21st century, we will soon have the opposite problem: too little money chasing too many goods. Machines don’t need food, clothing, shelter, transportation, medical treatment or other services. So who will buy those goods and services? 

    Money needs to be issued to human consumers, and not just to a few wealthy human consumers serving as debt brokers thriving on interest. To create sufficient demand for the voluminous output of AI/robotics, it needs to go to the whole national population, evenly distributed. Not only can UHI work in that sort of abundant supply without producing price inflation; it is actually essential to prevent deflation.

    In a conversation on X, Musk wrote:

    In a normal economy, issuing more money simply increases the dollar price of the existing output of goods & services, meaning people do NOT get more stuff. If AI/robotics massively increase goods & services output, then you actually MUST issue dollars to people or there will be massive disinflation. 

    As paraphrased on Yahoo Finance (reposted from Benzinga), Musk wrote that handing out more dollars becomes a problem only when the economy’s supply of goods and services fails to surge alongside the money supply. His claim is that AI and robotics could lift production so sharply that the bigger risk would be falling prices, not rising ones.

    But aren’t falling prices a good thing? In this case, no. Prices would be falling due to a lack of demand, meaning producers can’t find customers for their products. They wind up laying off workers and eventually going bankrupt. When spread across the whole economy, the result is a deflationary spiral: prices fall, businesses lose revenue, and the economy contracts, not because production is inadequate but because purchasing power is insufficient. The result is recession or depression. In the Great Depression of the 1930s, food was rotting in the fields while people were starving, because they were out of work and had no money to spend. 

    Job cuts from AI are already happening. According to the same Benzinga article:

    Evidence of near-term strain is showing up in corporate announcements: employers disclosed more than 27,000 job cuts linked to AI in the first quarter of 2026, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas. The outplacement firm said that figure was up 40% from the same period a year earlier. 

    Robert Reich reports that wages are around two-thirds of the typical corporation’s total cost, and that in the first four months of 2026, big U.S. corporations cut over 128,000 jobs. 

    How Soon Will All This Happen?

    Another Benzinga article, reposted on Yahoo Finance on March 16, detailed Musk’s projected time frame:

    Speaking remotely to the Abundance Summit last week, Musk told XPRIZE founder Peter Diamandis that the global economy is on the verge of an explosion so massive it defies historical precedent.

    “I’d say the economy is 10 times its current size in 10 years,” Musk said, before quickly clarifying that the growth could be even more explosive. “Greater than,” he added, framing the projected shift in economic output as a “fairly comfortable prediction.” …

    Ray Kurzweil, author of The Singularity Is Near, sees AI reaching Artificial General Intelligence (human-level intelligence across virtually all domains) by 2029, and full transformative abundance by 2045.

    Other experts question these time projections, but a radical transformation of traditional manufacturing and trade is likely to happen sometime in the reasonably near future. The question is, will the money system transition soon enough to rescue all the laid-off workers from homelessness and famine?

    The Sovereign Wealth Fund Alternative

    There is another model for distributing the gains of automation, one that can be phased in gradually as the AI workforce expands. It comes from Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI. In an ironic twist, Altman and Musk, who jointly founded OpenAI in 2015, are now locked in a high-profile legal battle over whether Altman diverted Musk’s $44 million investment to transform what was conceived as a nonprofit “for the benefit of humanity” into a highly lucrative for-profit enterprise.

    That dispute aside, Altman’s alternative model for sharing AI-generated wealth is a national sovereign wealth fund seeded by the profits of AI and robotics. His proposed American Equity Fund would take public stakes in the companies and technologies driving automation, capture a portion of the resulting productivity gains, and distribute them as universal dividends. The Fund would not replace a Universal High Income but would complement it.

    This approach has several advantages. It ties payments directly to real output, scales automatically with productivity, and can be introduced gradually, avoiding the shock of issuing large payments before the supply side has fully expanded. It would resemble the Alaska Permanent Fund, which distributes oil revenues to residents, except that here the resource would be the most powerful general-purpose technology since electricity.

    Conclusion: A New Monetary Logic for a New Productive Era

    For centuries, money has been issued as a claim against the future productivity of human labor, repaid from the income that labor generates. The logic of this debt-based system collapses when machines become the primary producers of goods and services. Then the limiting factor becomes purchasing power — the ability of human beings to access the abundance their own technologies create. That requires a monetary architecture that expands with output rather than debt, and distributes income not through wages alone but through mechanisms tied to the productive capacity of the whole system.

    Universal High Income and a sovereign wealth fund are two ways of doing that. One ensures a stable floor of demand; the other ensures that the public shares in the gains of automation. Both would be grounded in real production. But for the public to have access to those gains, the money supply needs to expand in proportion to the expanding pool of goods and services. This can be done by restoring the innovation our forefathers baked into the Constitution: debt-free money issued by the government itself.

    How to fund a UHI without triggering inflation or driving the government into bankruptcy is the first objection critics raise, but there are others. They argue that people would stop working or stop learning, that society would collapse into idleness or chaos, that life would lose meaning without jobs, that the government would have the power to control how people spend their money.  Will a UHI ring in the promised utopia or lock us into a state-controlled digital prison? Part 2 of this article will address those concerns. 

    _______________

    This article was first posted as an original to ScheerPost.com. Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of Debt, The Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. Her 400+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com.tom of Form

     

     

  •  

    WAY TO GO MR PUTIN - RUSSIA FINALIZES 'LBGTQ PROPAGANDA' BAN

    Posted By: The_Fox [Send E-Mail]
    Date: Thursday, 1-Dec-2022 05:31:08
    www.rumormill.news/212414

     

    Many a time I often think about moving to Russia, so sick and tired of living here in the West.

    Over there things get done and child molesters etc don't just get away with a slapped wrist, free to again prey on the innocent.

    Those promoting society's moral decay will now have to answer for their actions also.

    Way to go Mr Putin.

    Read more: 'LBGTQ PROPAGANDA' BAN

Older Content