It is you who have failed to make a coherent argument. I have suggested that you should clearly describe your proposals — and you have failed to do that.
You talk in vague terms about “the rule of inclusion” — but it isn’t at all clear what you are referring to.
You have provided some links to things you have written — but, frankly, they seem to contain the sort of vague ramblings you might expect from someone who has barely a clue about Economics and barely a clue what they are talking about.
I ask if you are making some claim to being a skilled economist. The reason I ask is not to distract from your argument (because you haven’t really made one!), but to try to assess the degree of your self-awareness. If you accept that you are not a skilled economist, perhaps you will appreciate the distinct possibility that you are confused as a result of being in way over your head in a subject you don’t understand at all well.
And if you are not a skilled economist, do you not think it would be a better use of your time to try to study Economics from the ground up, instead of spreading vague nonsense around the internet, on a subject you don’t understand?
And if you think you have produced a clear proposal and clear arguments in favour of that proposal, then where on Earth are they? I haven’t seen them!