Business Judgements

Background to Judgements

The Parasite

I will start with the Oxford English dictionary definition of a parasite:

“1 an organism which lives in or on another organism and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other’s expense. 2 derogatory a person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.”

I have included both definitions because they apply equally well to the whole governmental system and infrastructure. However, I will be focusing on the parasite in business here, and will leave the parasite in government for a separate analysis.

The Parasite in Money

After a bit of work, I managed to find a mathematical representation of the parasite in usury, or in the use on money. I derived it from a set of individual transactions, and after a bit of further work, I was confident this could be scaled up to modelling it for the whole economy.

The mathematical expressions are as follows:

Where ‘n’ is the number of transactions in the economy divided by the number of commodities and services being transacted. And ‘I’ is the average interest rate charged.

They basically say that if interest is being charged in the economy, the ones collecting the interest (FUsurer) continually suck value out of the economy, which offsets the value the economy generates (FEconomy). And so that’s why we have inflation (the value of money constantly decreasing), and why we feel we’re paddling upstream against a very strong current all the time. And that’s all down to the parasitic nature of usury or taking interest. And no matter how small you go with the interest figure; it will always be taking value away from the economy. So as soon as you take this value down to zero, the usury equation (FUsurer) vanishes, and so does the parasite. And the economy, or ‘invisible hand’ is able to continue unabated.

But you then start asking why we have usury in the first place. Why does this interest need to be charged? Who is charging it? And then we move into the field of management.

The Parasite in Management

There are many forms of management, but probably the worst is the cause of slavery. What the Jews were subjected to under the Pharaohs. But the Pharaohs had no money, so it was just direct control by physical force. But physical force used in this way is also parasitic, hence why the whole governmental system is parasitic through the use of force by the police. But I digress, because this is about management in business in these current judgements, and not the government.

So, the introduction of money has meant the parasite has been exposed, because I’ve managed to derive a mathematical expression for it. And since mathematics is based on laws of reason and logic, its representation this way is pretty much indestructible.

And so now we have a model, and now I’ve managed to theoretically cast it out of the monetary system (interest to equal zero), we can start working backwards. Start looking at the parasitic behaviour of people here. Have a closer look at management.

So, looking at the second dictionary definition of the parasite, it is someone who relies on others and gives nothing in return. And this is how I see management. They control their staff, and their staff get nothing in return. Yes, they get paid, but in a socialist system, their accommodation and food would get taken care of anyway.

But you say management offers direction, a strategy for the market. But the market today is all about chasing profit, which is parasitic because it’s all about creaming off the top. So, their direction is parasitic.

And what about guidance you say, but managers aren’t technically responsible for the products or service, so how can they possibly give guidance when they don’t know how the product or service actually works?

But I think the worst effect of management, the worst parasitic form of it is its power to sack someone. Even though management is acting parasitic anyway, its ultimate control is manifested in its fear to deny the staff any income if they don’t comply. And since fear of this nature should not exist because we have no predatory species, the justification for it evaporates, and so it becomes purely parasitic in nature. And so, we’re back to socialism, because in this system, you don’t get sacked, you’re just found another job. And you don’t need an income anyway because everything is taken care of. So, you just use denial of certain things as punishment, and incentives to encourage work. But you don’t use fear, unless their actions are truly parasitic. You just don’t use fear to encourage or sustain parasiticism, which is exactly what management does.

So, if management is purely parasitic, it has no logical or theoretical justification. So, it therefore has no logical right to sack someone. Or even to control them in any way.

Legal Implications of the Parasite

I’ll provide the Oxford English dictionary definition of stealing here, and we’ll see how close it is to how a parasite behaves:

“1 take (something) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.”

Now, this is where law and logic clash. Because the definition here states that the taking of something must be legal. But I’ve just explained that the use of usury in the monetary system is parasitic, which means the usurer gets benefits without giving anything in return, which simply means he gets something for nothing. Which is exactly what the definition of stealing is if you ignore the legal term (“take something without permission and without intending to return it”, and notice the ‘or’ in the definition).

But what about the permission part? Isn’t usury being used with our permission? Well no, because we’re forced to use it through it’s acceptance by the legal system, which is of course upheld by the use of physical force by the police. So how can the legal system accept something that’s parasitic? Because even with or without the permission part, it’s still stealing because the usurer is getting something for nothing. Which is effectively the same as perpetual motion, where a machine’s motion continues without the need for any energy input. Which is against the laws of physics; the first or second laws of thermodynamics. Therefore, the parasite is an impossibility, and anything relating to it should not be considered legal by law.

So, if you then consider the legal term, parasitic behaviour should by definition be illegal because it is stealing in its purest form, and also a logical impossibility. Therefore, usury should be illegal, but it’s not. And that then starts to throw up a whole load of questions regarding law and money. We have a whole section of it called competition or antitrust law, and contract law, and fines in court. The list is pretty much endless. And this is where existing law begins to break down completely, because within law, there should be no contradictions. But the use of usury is stealing and parasitic, which means it should be illegal. And there you have an extremely large contradiction. One so big that it really has no hope of recovering from. Not in its entirety.

But again, this is digressing into the field of law, and I’m sticking to business here. But the reason I add this section on law is because you can then apply it to business. I’ve already explained that I find management parasitic, and if it can be described as parasitic, then it is also a logical impossibility and therefore should be illegal. And again, you could argue about management being used with our permission. But it’s not, because it’s accepted legally and upheld by force. Another contradiction emerging.

Judgement Groups

Extremely Rich

Parasitic equation (FUsurer) being used at its most extreme levels. This person has an extremely bad incentive to keep accumulating, which is exactly what the summation sign in the equation represents. What the parasite is so hungry for; getting something for nothing. And he can’t possibly do it in such a short space of time without using very large values of interest. And interest is obviously used here because he can’t possibly manufacture or provide a service all by himself to generate this amount of money without using it. For a billionaire, that’s like making and selling 500 million £2 hamburgers, starting from nothing, and in the same amount of time. A physical impossibility.


All the bad points about management above, but amplified to the highest level. He gives authority and justification for it, even though it can be shown to be completely illegal.


This is just the usurer feeding their money back into the economy, which is exactly how I discovered these equations in the first place. It is actually part of the parasite’s behaviour, by putting others at a disadvantage through the parasite’s competitive use of money. I’ve already explained this in my paper, so you’ll have to refer to that if you want the detail.

It just reinforces the massive scale of the parasite which they are. We’re dealing with massive amounts of money here, and by using philanthropy on such a scale, it just helps increase the size of the parasite. Because the competitive advantage is huge, and puts the real workers, the ones who should actually have the recognition for their work at a massive disadvantage. So, all philanthropy is doing is increasing the size of the parasite inside this person, whilst also increasing their public profile. Sustaining and encouraging the parasite on the largest scale possible. Massive economic damage caused by a single person.


Although this does allow the economy to function on a large scale, their desire to demand ‘compensation’ for the use of ‘their’ money does make it extremely parasitic. They don’t deserve compensation because the method of getting it is parasitic, and it’s not their money in the first place because they gathered it parasitically. And it has the same effect as philanthropy. It publicly encourages the parasite by feeding money back into the economy at a competitive disadvantage to others. Ones who aren’t so parasitic. It just means the parasite wins each time, just by being a parasite.

And hence you see the runaway effect of the parasite again, how it creates artificial confidence. Because it just feeds itself, just by being a parasite. Its able to look brilliant, even though it’s the complete opposite. And that’s what sustains it. Why these scum can’t see they’re scum. You can see how much of an impossible task this is if you don’t understand the exact theory. Why you public keep struggling with their pride all the time. It’s just the self-sustaining effects you’re seeing, and as soon as you show it hate at a level above this, it will shrink away.


So, I’m not going to pinpoint individuals at the moment. Just that the more money they’ve personally accumulated and the higher up the management ladder they are, the more of a parasite they are. So, target the richest first, the ones with the most money, and that’s essential. Nip it in the bud from day one.

And don’t target any females either because this isn’t actually a female problem. Females are actually anti-parasites (the theory I will cover at another judgement), it’s just that they’ve been psychologically broken previously, which makes them start to think like one. But it isn’t actually their fault, and I can deal with them using alternative, kinder methods.