Wednesday, 20 October 2010

Everything depends on context

I thought that your free-thinking readers might be interested by this recent thought-provoking article on the BBC News Website.
Unfortunately, your young friend, Trivedi, will not be able to appreciate the important connection between optical illusions and 'MLM' scams. However, if he is able to follow the BBC article, he will discover just how easy it is to fool the human mind, particularly, our visual sense; for an individual's model of visual reality depends on the context in which he/she sees something.
The minds of unquestioning 'MLM' adherents, like Trivedi, have been programmed to look at 'MLM' scams in the reality-inverting, 'positive' context of: 'Business', 'Independence', 'Financial Freedom' , 'Direct Selling', 'Low Risk' , 'Income Opportunity', etc. This reality-inverting 'positive' context has been further confirmed by (apparently independent) : celebrity endorcements, glossy-advertizing, 'Direct Selling Associations' , etc. All of which have actually been financed by the profits of 'MLM' scams.
It is only when you take 'MLM' scams out of their artificially-created 'positive' context, that their true absurdity, and danger, appears.
To give your free-thinking readers some idea of the mathematical absurdity of the entire 'MLM Income Opportunity' myth, I recently posted the shameful transcript of a 'video message of support' made (in 1999) by, 'MLM' useful idiot, Tony Blair (at the instigation of the silver-haired Director of the so-called UK 'Direct Selling Association,' Richard Berry), in which the former UK Prime Minister spoke of almost 500 000 'Direct Sellers' in the UK. Unfortunately, at that time (according to his own government's statistics), there were less than 24 millions households in Britain. In other words, Mr. Blair was unable to see (due to the artificially-created 'positive' context in which he'd been shown 'Direct Selling') that each so-called 'UK Direct Seller' had less than 50 households as potential customers.
In reality, effectively 100% of all the tens of millions of transient persons around the globe who have signed reality-inverting contracts with so-called 'Direct Selling' companies during the previous 50+ years, have not received one cent of net-income (let alone earned their living) by legally, and regularly, directly-selling products, and/or services (supplied at a controlled-price and quality by these companies) for a profit, to persons who were not under contract to the same so-called 'Direct Selling' companies.
Far from being an authentic income opportunity, 'Direct Selling' has been the reality-inverting 'positive' label for one of the most-extensive, and sustainable, closed-market swindles of all time.
David Brear (copyright 2010)


IBOFB said...

Fortunately, Iraq aside, Tony Blair is infinitely more sound of mind than you, Brear.

500,000 direct sellers and 24 million households does not mean "less than 50 households as potential customers" for each direct seller.

Tell me, Shyam, do you agree with Brear's little calculation?

dtytrivedi said...

UK govt. is quite clear to its people. UK govt. clearly distinguishes in trading schemes definition.

Trading schemes can be an opportunity for people to run a business from home and are not illegal in the UK. Trading schemes may be called:

•direct selling

•network marketing

•pyramid selling

•multi-level marketing

What is an illegal trading scheme?
Trading schemes are against the law if the main way of making money is by recruiting other members, rather than selling goods or services. However, beware as some illegal schemes are made to look like they involve supplying goods.

These schemes are often called ‘pyramid schemes’ and can be chain letters, or run as clubs or games. People that run these schemes can be very convincing, but you should ask yourself:

•what am I being asked to pay for?

•can I afford to lose the money?

•does it look too good to be true?

All these schemes need a never ending supply of new people for everyone to make money. As the supply will always end at some point, the pyramid will collapse and most people will lose their money.

An example of a simple pyramid scheme
Eight people are asked by the scheme to pay £1,000. They are told they will get £8,000 when they reach the ‘top’ of the pyramid.

But for each of those eight people to get that amount, another 64 people need to join. They each need to pay £1,000 and will all be expecting to collect their £8,000. But that would mean another 512 people would have to join. You would then need 4,096 more people, followed by 32,768 and so on.

In simple terms, each person needs another eight people in the scheme to get their money back and make a profit. Eventually, the supply of people with £1,000 must end, leaving most people in the scheme losing all their money.

But the people llike you u are narrow minded who don't know the difference between pyramid scheme and direct selling, mlm or networking marketing.


People like you are misleading the countrymen

Legal Scan said...

So is the case with 6-4-3. Exactly that is the point.

dtytrivedi said...

if it is so then why it is running in more than 80 countries where there are more specific laws for pyramid schemes

Shyam Sundar said...

Con men may run around for several years and in several countries before they are caught. That does not mean they are legal.