food for thought

Jobaboba's Jokes Factory. (Only for those who are feeling silly)

Re: food for thought

Postby LionsShare » Mon Jun 20, 2022 3:28 pm

iamani hi,

I could see when I had my own Ltd Co the privacy things, giving Ltd Co bank details to get paid, instead of my own, talking in a way that the Ltd Co were doing..... instead of me doing...... Whilst a Trustee is in the public (Ltd Co), & could use Ltd Co to hide stuff, even as the Ltd Co is a clear distinct separate entity, you will still have to follow acts for Ltd Co & fill out the statement of confirmation (who the usually share holder(s) & director(s), there will be NO accounts to fill in for dormant Co) every year or face penulties (fines). Surely the idea is to get away from PUBLIC & be out of 'system' with the facility of being able to dip in when needed?

Don't forget if dormant Ltd Co has a bank account & starts to have monies going in & out its no longer dormant & is trading - accounts. OK can have 2nd Ltd Co in a different name or adaption of 1's own name but still faced with 'legals'.

Surely the best way would be to correct status & transfer assets to a private Trust? Own nowt & control everything!

Then there is the problem of having monies to deal with, if out of 'system' 1 will need a mechanism to hold monies & to trade, even if its just getting food stuffs. Out of the 'system' 1's own bank account would go? The mechanism would have to be eqivilant to your own 'public status' (that you control) - without the need to fill out tax returns. Is it possible to open a bank account without proving 'legal status'? If so make a name & away you go.

Don't get me wrong I actually agree with HWA & see what you are on about but for me its whole idea of getting away from encumbrances that matters.

LS
LionsShare
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:39 pm

Re: food for thought

Postby iamani » Tue Jun 21, 2022 12:06 am

Hi LionsShare

Well, reducing one's 'public' exposure is the prime motivation behind the HWA method. It seems to me that it could be very effective and the only Acts you are obliged to follow with a dormant LLC are the ones concerning keeping the accounts up to date  -  which amounts to filing the annual confirmation statement, which seems very reasonable considering the potential benefits.

Also, i don't think it's obligatory for an LLC to have a bank account if it is declared dormant at time of registration, although a certain amount of incomings and outgoings are actually permitted without having to lose dormant status anyway, so that doesn't appear to be a problem.

You don’t really need a 2nd Ltd Co and there's no need for any new bank account as you can still do all of your usual day-to-day stuff in your usual name with your usual accounts, but remember  - 
your usual day-to-day stuff in your usual name with your usual accounts is all "legals" anyway... and as far as tax-returns go, if you are on PAYE your employer will just keep doing what he's doing and HMRC will keep on receiving your contributions but may even refund you all of it. If you are running another company it doesn’t affect the tax-status of that company. If you are declared self-employed then you can undeclare yourself.

Private trust seems like a good idea, it's definitely better than owning nowt and controlling nowt, but when you say to "correct status"  -  which status would you like exactly...?

Believe me, i share your desire to avoid 'legal' but i'm really starting to wonder if there is any practical way to avoid it completely...

Cheers!
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 588
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: food for thought

Postby LionsShare » Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:30 pm

iamani hi,

you are correct its not obligatory for an LLC to have a bank account, even after trading could declare LLC as dormant & scrap previous running account - it will have monthly charges - encumbrances

'as you can still do all of your usual day-to-day stuff in your usual name with your usual accounts' not too sure will ahve to research, surely if declareing 'new status' to bank would they treat you private or still public or somthing else, would they scrap your previous status account?

'You don’t really need a 2nd Ltd Co' very true

'Believe me, i share your desire to avoid 'legal' but i'm really starting to wonder if there is any practical way to avoid it completely...' would probably have to meet several that have done this & see what they have done respectivly, draw own conclusions & away you go

'which status would you like exactly...?' simples: for them to f' off & leave me alone :mrgreen:

LS
LionsShare
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:39 pm

Re: food for thought

Postby iamani » Wed Jun 22, 2022 7:39 pm

Hi LionsShare

So we don't need a bank account for the NAME LLC  -  cool, thanks for checking.

Re: new status; you only need inform those corps you want to inform (ie those who hassle you), so if happy with bank  -  say nowt! Private accounts used to be available to all (at least those who knew about it) with Santander (Post Office) but this stopped around 2018  -  now they're available only to people with ten million quid to deposit. i suspect that is down to the popularity of the Frank o'Collins Ucadia method and then Steve Mccrae's  (VERY similar...ahem!) method.

The only way to privatise your bank account is to close it. Whether you close an account or the bank closes it, the account is still there  -  it's just private. i'm told some people use that to their advantage by using the closed/private accounts to set-off debts  -  but this is not relevant to what we are discussing here.

To wait to speak with those who have tried this before jumping in is an excellent idea...

...and i too would like for T.H.E.M. to f' off & leave me alone!

Cheers!
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 588
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: food for thought

Postby iamani » Wed Jul 06, 2022 2:59 pm

Greetings

Anyone been following the Lawful Rebellion and Debts YT channel? It's been a bit of a rollercoaster ride these last few months for sure  -  a little inconsistent but entertaining (and quite informative) nonetheless.

Just this last week he (Jez) was building up tension to a grand reveal of 'the great remedy' to all of our legal woes (via a planned live-cast with a mystery guest billed as a 'financial/banking expert on the inside') and he did seem genuinely excited about it  -  he also stated that his own safety may be threatened and that YT would undoubtedly pull his channel for broadcasting this info, thereby implying that if T.H.E.Y. took it down then the proposed method must have much merit. This culminated in a live broadcast two days ago (Sunday 3rd July) which i and hundreds of others awaited with much anticipation and then dutifully lined up to watch...

...a bit of a damp squib tbh  -  more of a pin-drop moment than a penny-drop moment  -  but perhaps only because the concept revealed is difficult to grasp at first hearing, especially to those who have little-to-no foundational knowledge of the subject matter (eg. me!) Whether it really is 'the great remedy' or not, i really couldn't yet say... but in (as close as i can manage to) a nutshell, here it is:

Bitcoin... or to be more precise "Bitcoin Satoshi Vision" (BSV). Apparently the idea is to perceive BSV more as a bankable medium of exchange than as an investment (although it was also stressed that BSV value would almost certainly keep rising)  -  and that's pretty much it. To be fair, Jez did say it would be so simple as to at first appear inconsequential  -  which it does  -  and that it would probably take a little time for its potential to become apparent. He wasn't wrong...

The USP of the idea is that BSV transactions are permanently recorded, and each transaction can be viewed by all - which is hardly earth-shattering news...

BUT... each transaction carries and displays the digital-legal-signatures of both parties to the transaction, which transparency leads to the Holy Grail that is:

ACCOUNTABILITY !

The blockchain holds a record of every transaction on every BSV coin, but of all the cryptos only BSV still requires the digital signatures to be retained also. It would appear to be the digital equivalent of the all-important 'paper-trail'. What this means (if i understand it correctly) is that should govt depts and other corporations accept your payment in BSV as legal-tender and go on to spend it  -  we can see where the BSV goes. Also (again, if i understand it correctly) each 'wallet' has to be assigned to an individual rather than a company. Both of these facts (if they are indeed facts) lead to exposure of liable parties in the event of wrongdoing connected to use of the BSV. This leads to another quirk  -  T.H.E.Y. obviously will not wish to accept payment in BSV due to its transparency/accountability... yet if the payment is refused, any alleged debt is deemed settled...

...and that's about it, i think. Is it 'the great remedy', the answer to our legal woes? i honestly don't yet know  -  but i do see some issues that need to be addressed. For example:

All crypto is digital, and therefore intangible, there is no physical substance to hide under the mattress;

BSV transparency can work against us as much as them in that our activities can be tracked/traced;

Anything happens to the power grid you cannot access/use your funds;

If the www. gets wwwiped  -  so does your claim to those funds;

Lose your 'key' and you lose your claim to those funds;

A BSV account can be seized/frozen just like a bank account;

Ever heard the phrase: pump-and-dump...?

BSV value can plummet as well as rocket  -  imagine using it as a bank for your wages and then seeing your wages and/or savings severely reduced or even wiped out by a drop in BSV price...;

We know T.H.E.Y. are looking to implement a 'cashless society'  -  what's to say this isn't a ploy to use our greed to condition us and get us to 'volunteer' to such...?

We know T.H.E.Y. are looking to implement widespread use of digital-legal-signatures  -  what's to say this isn't a ploy to condition us and get us to 'volunteer' to such...?

Craig Wright, architect of BSV who has claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, has been labelled (rightly or wrongly  -  idk) by many in the crypto community as a scam artist and not to be trusted...

...which brings me to Jez's 'mystery guest'. To his credit, he didn't ask for money  -  but did promote a certain brokerage website. i think it's fair to say that (presuming he is invested in that which he is promoting) he has an interest in encouraging others to invest in BSV, but  -  does he have an interest in said brokerage website...? Impossible to know without knowing his name  -  there is neither transparency nor accountability here... which is kinda ironic, don't ya think?

Now i'm all for maintaining privacy and anonymity. However... what's to say the requirement for such in this instance is down to a wish to remain safe (definitely plausible)  -  or (more likely...?) a wish to hide one's lack of credibility due to prior misdemeanours?

Remember the recent live-cast Jez did for G-O-O-D Nation...? How the transmission was interrupted/distorted for one particular special guest, Andrew the G-O-O-D Nation expert? From what i could hear of what he said, he was deffo on target  -  and we know this is what T.H.E.Y. do to try to stuff the cat back in the bag... but that didn't happen this time. It also seems to me that Andrew (and Stuart and Richie for that matter) are just as much at risk from nefarious agents as the mystery guest, and yet they were persuaded to overcome their reluctance to appear on camera... but not 'Murphy' (mystery guest's chosen avatar for the live-cast).

i hope both of them (Jez and 'Murphy') will forgive my scepticism if it is misplaced, but i'm finding it hard to believe the guest's claim to not being aware of the truth-in-law movement until recently  -  mainly because i think i recognise his voice...

i won't name him in case i'm wrong  -  but for those of you who saw the live-cast on Sunday here is a link to a year-old YT vid. The guy clearly has a good grasp of the principles of truth-in-law and i do heartily recommend watching the whole vid  -  but does his voice sound familiar to you...?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QaIM74dZIKo

Hmmm... this guy claims to be involved in the finance industry too, according to Google/Facebook.

For those who didn't see the live-cast you should go watch it  -  only you can't because:

Shock! Horror!   -  the channel has been taken down!

...which suggests that it truly is 'the great remedy', right? Well... it might if it was YT who pulled it  -  but it wasn't YT who pulled it. It was Jez.

So why has he deleted his channel?

Tbf, he has done it before with both a prior account and this one and he is known for removing videos (infuriating sometimes!) and occasionally reinstating them. He has also previously hinted that the 'grand reveal' would be his final vid, but the last thing he said on the live-cast was that he would do another vid to clarify the info presented on the live-cast  -  though he certainly didn't mention that he intended to delete the channel! Very odd, considering the amount of people clamouring to get involved with 'G-O-O-D Nation', and the personal sacrifice made by Andrew (and Stuart and Richie) to appear on screen to promote it.

So wtf is really going on here?

Perhaps he'll come back and tell us... i do hope so.

Cheers!
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 588
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: food for thought

Postby LionsShare » Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:09 pm

iamani hi,

yes I agree to what you state regarding the 'must see video of all time'.

I have my own take on things but until I get to know awt about crypto then its going to lie asleep for me. Was Jez & 'Murphy' correct? I don't fully know, possibly may be?

here's my take:
https://goodf.forumotion.com/t5726-this-sunday-6pm-live-its-showdown#39012

there are other comments in that thread too which I think should be taken into account when thinking about that video & even Jez himself, I do like what he states about a range of subjects concerned with debt, utilities etc. But what is of great concern is the fickle nature of here's the channel - no it ain't, oops yes it is...... what next?

With this subject, due diligance is a must before embarking on such a venture (crypto).

The real thing to come out of it all for me was the idea of getting away from any banking control :cheer: :clap:

LS
LionsShare
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:39 pm

Re: food for thought

Postby LionsShare » Wed Jul 20, 2022 5:33 pm

some of you might be interested, its about the not so 'great reset':
https://goodf.forumotion.com/t5746-csrq-sm-what-s-that#39191
LionsShare
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:39 pm

Previous

Return to The Lighter Side

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron