Posted by: graemebird | December 14, 2011

The Deeply Disturbing John Humphreys Story

From comments section on this blog.  Someone asked me if Humphreys was a Jew.

Humphreys isn’t Jewish, but he comes across akin to some of the hyper-incompetent Jews that I have been talking about lately, because he is drastically over-promoted. One wonders who is pulling his strings. He is not currently employed as an economist. He has no capacity for serious work in economics. Rather he is employed as a sort of displaced Barrister/Lobbyist/Quisling. Displaced in that he is promoted as an economist, but works as a Barrister/Lobbyist/Quisling. Someone gave him the resources to start a Libertarian party, and someone is employing him to champion sellout positions from the wrong side of the fence. The best way to control the public is to control both sides of the debate of the public.

He’s no Jew but his background is somewhat akin to that of Obama, aka Bari Shabazz, aka Barry Soetoro. Actually the parallels are incredible and if his background were any more dodgy he would soon be running for President of the USA. Like Obama he is a queer, but at one time was in a somewhat cultish hard-core religious environment. Like Obama he has barely needed to work a day in his life.

He’s certainly the dodgiest character I’ve ever met in the flesh. He somehow managed to get these huge loans after working only a short time in the public service. This at a time when no-one had any idea that the Reserve Bank and Treasury, were going to continue the housing boom beyond all reason. On this basis he allegedly didn’t need to work, and would spend all this time in South East Asia, doing nothing, and writing about doing nothing.

Like Obama he’s queer, and like Obama, he feels ashamed of being queer thanks to the time in a pressure-cooker religious environment. So he hangs out in South East Asia, hiding his shame, doing nothing, and writing about doing nothing.

But this layabout somehow gets all these doors open for him, though under normal circumstances, everyone ought to simply recognise him as an itinerant loafer. One wonders who it was that recognised his sort of LEGAL PROSECUTER FOR HIRE talent. He has a talent, not so much for debating, but for hijacking debate.

I’ve got to hand it to him, insofar as he managed to find such high quality people in order to found this libertarian party, so he could betray liberty from:

1. His position of being an insider

2. From the cache of him being the  founder of Australia’s only Libertarian political party

3. From his total control of this libertarian parties unofficial blog.

I’ve had my arguments with Taya (spelt Terje) but there is no question that the people that John found to be the initial inner core, of Australias only Libertarian party …..  were a quality bunch. But if John is merely working for some other crowd, so that both sides of any issue can be controlled, then he may well have been told who were the likely lads he ought to get in contact with, as he moved about like some sort of hobo.


With Johns surface and shallow understanding of economic life, he is easy to dupe with ideas like “Human Capital” and this sort of confusion in terminology. You have capital. You have humans. Capital is largely machines (including vehicles) buildings, and physical structures associated with investments ….. (like all those structures associated with a mining operation for example.) For the most part human capital is merely the capacity of people to operate the machines, and work within a team. And as well human capital would plausibly be certain cultural and management norms to do with how to run a shift, or an office. So this talk of human capital is mostly bullshit.

But nonetheless John is the frontman, for something called “The Human Capital Project.” This is a project which as one of its unfortunate side effects (OR MORE LIKELY ITS MAIN AGENDA is to prepare developing countries for the bankers to rape, once these formerly poor countries, have developed enough wealth, in order for the raping to begin. That is a pretty important project for the banking elite to have on the fly. They cannot yet control China. They have all but pack-raped the US and the EU, and they won’t be able to squeeze blood out of these people forever.

What must be understood is that the fractional reserve rape of a country can come as soon as that country has created enough wealth to be raped. So for example the Japanese were creating enormous amounts of wealth in the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s and then they were gang-raped by fractional reserve in the 80′s. This is why fractional reserve excess and wealth always have a one-to-one correlation, when we look back into deep history. Some people see this one-to-one correlation, and quite reasonably (on a superficial research level) wind up thinking that the fractional reserve created that wealth. But this is nonsense. As soon as the wealth is extensive enough the rape can begin. So the shadow-government, must now be eyeing India and South East Asia, and salivating.


Now then  John Humphreys shows up in the office of dusky-skinned big shots,  and he’s this itinerant layabout. He’s WHITEY. Whiter than white.  Some of these old guys still remember the Empire for fucksakes. And somehow, the story goes, that John-the-whitey Humphreys, managed to get backing and funding for this “human capital project” to put third-world kids into bondage for their education.

This ludicrously anti-economic scheme, is not anything to do with “human-capital” even as totally confused as that conception is. The loans aren’t to train kids how to be electricians, and give them the equipment, with zero-interest loans, in order to be able to get to work as soon as they are trained up. No no that is not what this is about. You need to know the economics-institutional reality to understand the true nature of this human …..   capital …. project …. so fucking called.

There are two thieves in our lives, and therefore two schools of economics, to cater for these thieves. The public servants are catered for by the Keynesians, the Fractional-Reservist thieves are catered for by Theoclassical economics.

The brilliance (from a wrecking point of view) of the Humphreys plan is to train these kids up to cater for the Fractional-Reservist thieves AND THEN MAKE THEM PUBLIC SERVANTS.

You must understand that for this scheme to have gotten off the ground, the kids must be virtually guaranteed a job in the public service, if they are to pay back their loans. But public servant jobs, more typically, in third world countries, go to the kids of powerfully connected families. They go to the upper class. So imagine anyone going to see these hard-nosed cronyists in third world countries and asking for money? I mean its such a stupid scheme on its face, that you would be excoriated immediately for wasting the patrician’s time. So this isn’t by any means coming from this wandering loafer. If whitey showed up to talk to these millionaires, he would be looked upon as an upstart, neocolonialist wanker. A white, know-nothing, whose done nothing, living abroad, swanning around, simply could not try this on, on his own bat. He’s a frontman. And particularly since its such a stupid scheme.

Supposing you go to these kids to offer scholarships to study Theoclassical economics. These scholarships in the form of loans. But the government needs only so many public servants. And they need very fucking few economists. So where is the idea that these kids will be employed, just because they are in on John’s scheme? And if its John’s scheme, rather than him being some loafer, and frontman, why is it that he gets to start it, and not have to work around the clock, maintaining its momentum? Supposing he really had a mission, to improve economic understanding in Bhutan or somewhere? Why is he not slaving at it, like the chicken-man in “The Ugly American”* rather than mucking about at the pool, joining MOVEMBER and constantly updating his online diary where he pretends not to be the cable-guy in terms of his lack of socialisation.

He’s the dodgiest fellow I’ve ever met in person no question. You would have to have known Julian Assange or Barry Soetoro, to find someone who could compete for dodginess.



  1. I don’t want to imply that all those who disagree with me, are socially-retarded, and ghost-writers from revenge of the nerds, or people who are really as with it as Truman, in the Truman show.

    For example Jason Soon has always let me down. He’s a weasel when it comes to public policy, economics and so forth. But he’s a very likeable bloke generally speaking. He’s no weirdo like Humphreys. He’s fully house-trained and all that. I don’t know why Soon is always letting us down. So since I don’t know the answer I always blame his racial handicap. I always just say that he’s sussed out which way the wind is blowing, and he is poking his finger in the air to figure out who is most well-connected with the new emperor.

    There would seem to be a lot of people out there whose beliefs and attitudes are based on which way the wind is blowing. Its the job of all good people to see to it, that the wind blows the right way.

    • Tillman is not socially retarded now is he. He’s a devilish clever debonair man of the world with exquisite tastes in all important matters and pastimes.

      Naturally he was banned from the Cat by the out-of-his-depth nobody Davidson who seems to be some sort of Afrikaner Boar of the Blogs Down Under.

      • The thing is I don’t know. I guess I really hate these fancy-pants nihilists. trying to justify mass-murder of kids. I couldn’t go for that idea, even if someone had convinced me that it was the intellectually correct way to go. I’ve been immensely privileged to see young girls bloom into young women, and have been astonished by this transformation. I’m talking about girls not-of-my-own-race. So I could never go in for this profoundly anti-strategic idea of hurting women and children.

        But having said that I would have to say that Tillman would strike me as socially adept. Don’t have anything to do with him Ron. He’s damaged goods.

      • Tillman blows

  2. A spectacular character assessment Mr Bird. Bravo.

    Human Capital is a repulsive term, I agree, used by snotty nosed HR types with not an ounce of human feeling for their fellows.

    Humphreys Cambodia program is a disgrace. It provides funding for university education for poor Cambodians requiring them in return to pay back up to 65% of their after-tax income in perpetuity. This is exploitation of the highest magnitude by a rich toff carpetbagging in one of the poorest countries in the world.

    • Right. But imagine he’s some clean-cut hippy, itinerant, as he attempts to portray himself?

      Why would they give this whitey moron the time of day? I mean its proven that he’s a frontman of some sort.

  3. Have you donated to John’s cause, BIrd? Do you know anything about it.

    the reason it’s set up as a loan system is to make it self funding, you nincompoop. It’s good thinking by John… somehting you will never admit because you’re jealous of him.

    • To teach Theoclassical economics to third world kids? Why not just get George-Reisman’s home-study course, and set up your own little school, paying the smartest poorer kids you can find to learn the gear?

  4. Because it’s a scholarship sort of program you nimrod.

    Making it into a loan setup helps make it long term sustainable and not a one off thing.




  5. There is no plausible way that such a ludicrous scheme is “self-funding”. Thats the idiocy of it. No scheme, so without financial merit, could ever be self-funding. You’d need to control the governments hiring policy to make it self-funding.

  6. Graeme, I don’t know much about Humphreys except I recall he got squashed like a bug as quick as a blink on LP the couple of times I saw him comment there, and that he runs the god-awful Menzies House whose puerile, badly argued and written posts are routinely demolished by a revolving door of endless quicksilver lefties.

    • Right. Now don’t you think its pretty odd that people throw him up to edit a conservative website? Who trawls around to get him to do stuff like that? But on the other hand he’s got the time to do it. Because he never has to work for a living.

      Its Soetoro all over again.

  7. I recall now that the dude got disendorsed in humiliating circumstances by the LNP as its candidate for the seat of Griffith, Qld in the 2010 fed election. Guess the rip-off Cambodia project didn’t help win hearts and minds of even liberals in a characteristically cluey, ethically strong and ethnically diverse electorate.

    Once again, democracy ejects a piece of poison from the body politic.

  8. Yeah. Right. I certainly hope so. He ought to be tapped out for sure. But his sponsors may have more in mind for him.

  9. It is weird. He appears to be an intellectual lightweight (my one prejudice) and as shadowy and malevolent a personage as Moriarty.

    Still, the flip side to this if that’s the best the dumb fubar right can do, we’re all (the sane right and left) laughing and safe.

  10. Yeah someone is pulling his strings for sure. And its no longer plausible that he could be unaware of this.

    From the weirdo’s private site at the core of the now perverted libertarian movement:

    Limited Liability and debt are never okay together. Because this requires legislation, in order to stop the potential for abject public rip-off. And since a libertarian society is against extensive bully-boy legislation, it follows that limited liability, and debt, coming together, is a combination that is a mortal threat to the free society.

    Comment by graemebird | December 14, 2011

  11. “Now don’t you think its pretty odd that people throw him up to edit a conservative website?

    You can think it’s odd, but then if you see the patterns in history, and draw on personal experience, it’s not so odd. Rather it’s the norm. The Peter Principle at work. Other related processes and principles at work.

    The public service is probably an exemplar and showcase for all this. Not because it is public, per se, which it in so many ways is not, in any meaningful sense of the word, but because by virtue of its size, wealth and interconnection it can show how Byzantine are the forms of cronyism and other types of corruption.

  12. Yeah exactly.

    The next step in this endless exploitation will be to set up a gold-based monetary standard.

    Gold-alone, has never passed a market test. Because as soon as the banker ponzi-conspiracy gets going, they work tirelessly to undermine silver as a co-currency. If silver disappears, then the general public is beholden to the bankers, because this means that most all the money base will reside with them.

    If we were starting over on monetary soundness again, we would have a range of metals, that we could use as digital money. Silver is the true money. Gold would have been an add-on and a store of value, a medium for international purchases and distant trading. But silver ought to have been the key money.

    However once the ponzi-cartel gets going they do what they can to undermine silver. Because they can control Gold. They cannot control multi-metals with silver as the main medium.

  13. I’ve been re-reading Sun Tzu’s The Art of War. How good is it.

    There’s only so much a club in one hand and a sword in another can achieve.

    Victory or even its possibility requires so much more.

    All is explained by Tao.

  14. Sun Tzu is how the world works today. We are sold on the Greek straight-forward analysis. But the banker-crony nexus definitely works on the Sun Tzu model. I used to think that the extolling of Sun Tzu was a giveaway to show up a sort of voodoo mentality. But I have been humbled in this respect.

    • Mr Bird

      Could SOON be using some tactics from his ancestor to blind-sight you?

      • Easily. What can you do about these people? Conspirators can work as if they were passing an invisible bowl of soup between them, and not spill anything. What I don’t understand is why people would work so hard to maintain a system which diminishes us all. Why not go for efficiency, productiveness, employment, and fairness. Rather than ugliness, exploitation, slavery-lite, chronic weakness in labor markets forcing us to look after all sorts of marginalised folk, and rich people jumping about like baboons, making money for doing fuck-all, imagining themselves to be genetically superior gods, on the basis government-subsidised Abba-Dabba Berman-like numbers rackets, and the liquidation of local ownership.

  15. Very strange video by an Aussie, who is pretending that Ron Paul hates Jews, even though his main mentor was Murray Rothbard. Ron Paul is basically a Misean. But according to this spoiler, Ron is a jew-hater.

  16. Very clever by the way.

  17. Look at this idiot Humphreys. He seems to be implying, that under free enterprise, banks could get away with the current situation where they claim to own your cash!!!!!! As if. You see in reality you own the cash. But the banks have gotten legal cover, so the contract says that they own the cash. The legislation says that they own the cash. Its just more fraud on their part, and you would never deposit your cash with a bank that took that attitude if there was competition. But this is a little bit too much for Humphreys to figure out.

    I think where your premise goes off is that you have this odd assumption that when a deposit is made into a bank, that ownership of the base money is transferred. Possession is transferred; that is the point. Ownership is not. The bank does not owe me money, it holds it on account for me. It remains ‘my money’.

    If you forget this, you end up in the same sort of poo as MFGlobal (not a bank, I know, but still a current example) which suffered catastrophic losses investing its clients assets.

    Now an arrangement may be reached by which ‘my money’ may be invested for a time by the bank for benefit to us both; this leads to ‘term deposits’, with the notable characteristic of ‘matched maturities’.

    But this is only an adjunct to the primary function, which as pointed out above, is storage.

    Comment by intuitivereason | December 14, 2011 | Reply

    What you call an “odd assumption” is just the plain fact. Check the contract you signed with your bank.

    The primary function of banks is *not* storage. The primary function of vaults is storage. The primary function of banks is to match loans of different maturities and different liquidities. And it is all done voluntarily.

    Comment by John Humphreys | December 14, 2011 | Reply

    As if the conspirational ponzi-scheme would not have hogged for itself legal cover by now. Clearly you are a moron Humphreys. Its our money. Not the banks. The rest is just more fraud but with the lawyers involved.

    Comment by graemebird | December 15, 2011 | Reply

    That ought to have alerted your dense mind right there that something was amiss. If you weren’t such a moron you would see that the impression that all of us have that its our money, as opposed to the legal cover the bankers have ….. you would have thought even someone as idiotic as you would have noticed something was wrong there.

    Comment by graemebird | December 15, 2011 | Reply

  18. So your contention is that fully-backed banking is only a warehousing deal? Fractional reserve may not be fraud but this thread reeks of something that stinks. 100% banking involves loans as well. So therefore the whole basis of your ignorant display has been summarily refuted.

    Comment by Chodorov | December 15, 2011 | Reply

    “We don’t need to have limited liability introduced by the government. The same thing could be achieved quite easily through contract law where anybody dealing with a company voluntarily agrees to terms and conditions which create the same outcome as limited liability. Solved.”

    No thats nonsense. The government needs to agree to lend legal cover to an entity that doesn’t exist. Clearly legal liability is a government creation. These are not natural persons at all. If a fictional person buys land, the government has to recognise that company as the owner of the land, or else that title transfer cannot go ahead in the first place.

    “What you call an “odd assumption” is just the plain fact. Check the contract you signed with your bank.”

    So it never occurred to you that this legal cover would be impossible under free enterprise conditions. So obviously the rest of your reasoning falls down it its entirety. Start over.

    Comment by Chodorov | December 15, 2011 | Reply

    It ought to be obvious to anyone that if you allow limited liability, and fractional reserve banking, to come together, the banks will be able to steal everything, right up until a general societal collapse. They will wind up owning more and more of everything. Once you say that a conspirational ponzi-scheme is legal, and you put in on one half of every transaction a few things will follow. They will destroy silver as a money so that they can control the entire money supply. Always the banking cartel destroys silver. Then they will time when the recession begins and ends, in order to pick up assets for pennies on the dollar.

    Comment by Chodorov | December 15, 2011 | Reply

    Limited Liability and debt are never okay together. Because this requires legislation, in order to stop the potential for abject public rip-off. And since a libertarian society is against extensive bully-boy legislation, it follows that limited liability, and debt, coming together, is a combination that is a mortal threat to the free society.

    Comment by Chodorov | December 15, 2011 | Reply

    Take the Washington Mutual situation. The Federal Government was trying to get 900 million out of three top executives at that failed bank. But they arbitrarily settled for 90 million. So the three are happy to pay the 90 million having effectively stolen a great deal more. This is what has to happen when you combine limited liability and debt financing. The directors, or the executives can steal the money. Note that they were prosecuted on the basis of some rules within a massive mountain of regulations. In the Humphreys simpleton model, there would be no way to prosecute at all, in any circumstance, no matter how brazen and direct the stealing was. Because Washington Mutual is a distinct legal entity from the people running it. Hence its obvious that limited liability coming together with debt financing is the harbinger of statist corporate regulation. All we need to do is outlaw fractional reserve, and make limited liability only consistent with equity finance, and we can deregulate.

    Once you have fractional reserve and limited liability together, you are going to need heaps of legislation, and you need to pay for all sorts of investigators. This is what happens when you are too dim to figure out what ought to be the natural law under the situation. Part of the problem in the US was that after the 9/11 incident, the Bush administration took 500 people out of the department which could chase down bankers, and investigate liars loans and so forth, and brought them over to work on the war on terror so-called. So there has been no referrals for prosecution. With the savings and loans debacle they threw thousands of people in jail. Whereas now, Corzine can steal money directly out of peoples accounts and be walking around free. He didn’t even have to post bail or anything.

    Anyone ought to be able to see immediately that if there is fractional reserve banking, and legal liability together, then you have to accept massive regulations and huge enforcement costs. You have to assume malice of people who pretend they cannot readily see this.

    Comment by Chodorov | December 15, 2011 | Reply

  19. UBS is recommending metals investments ….. including the tin in tinned foods, and the lead in small calibre weapons. When people come ask me to join some betting pool at work, I tell them my horses are called “Gold” and “Silver.”

    • “When people come ask me to join some betting pool at work..”

      What type of work do you do Graeme?

  20. Manufacturing. Can you not tell by my bias towards making and building real things? But thats as far as I’m willing to talk about my job. Today, everyday, people are commuting into town early in the morning, and many of them are doing inherently useless work. They could be making and building things, or offering contracting services to those outfits that make or build things. So in finance we have 5-10 times as many people as we really need involved with it. Because of the inefficient monetary, banking and capital markets we have going. In government we are likewise weighed down with maybe ten times the people we need. Although we could probably use an expanded part-time military, with a lot more tradesman trained up from scratch for that purpose.

    We don’t have enough people in infrastructure and manufacturing. We could probably use a few more in agriculture. The idea is to get regulation right, so that most of these corporate lawyers can be fired, and they might go into manufacturing, or something useful.

  21. Probably Humphreys is a crypto-Jew. We need to investigate before we could dismiss the idea. Barack also.

  22. Humphreys is a Golem

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: