The Issuance of Debt-Free Money
(That would end the income tax-war-debt usury system)
 

"The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers..... The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied.
 

"The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power."  — Abraham Lincoln, on the issuance of the Greenbacks, government issued, debt-free money which is in sharp contrast to the privately owned and controlled "Federal" Reserve.

Some things are simply unacceptable

An Unacceptable System:  The Creation of Inequality, Poverty,
 a Regressive Society and the Wrecking of Ordinary People's Lives

The Vicious Circle of Debt and Depression – It is a Class War
 by Ismael Hossein-zadeh

"'Feed a boom and starve a recession,' is not the way to manage an economy. Only Social Credit gives a nice even flow of new currency, watering every household equally and with just enough to keep enterprise and opportunity flowing steady and independently.” — Jim Logel

The Philosophy of Social Credit

The History of Usury Prohibition


Why We Must Adjust our Spectacles
 for Another World View

Lincoln's Greenbacks Meet Social Credit for
the Perfect People’s Economy
 

The problem is not fiat, it's usury. The solution is not gold,
 it's social credit and debt-free treasury notes.

First, A Look into Gold
 

* A Further Comment on Gold

* Gold as Fool's Money

* The Gold Standard is Not the Answer

"The gold standard puts real money in yellow chains —
and there is no freedom where money is in chains."

Unchaining Freedom

The Way of God — Good to All

*Because all Human Beings Are Created Equal*

*What is Social Credit?

* An Economy That Works for the People

* The Good Stewardship of the Nation's Economy

*Expanding Life, Liberty and Happiness

*The Boom Bust Cycle – This is No Way to Live

*Monopoly Credit vs Debt Free Treasury Money

* Repudiate the Debt

* Question and Answer Discussion

* One More Review of the Basic Idea

* See the Monopoly Game

* How Do Social Credit Populists View the Economy?

* The Beginning of Rothschild Central Banker Fraud and Thievery

* How to Institute Social Credit and Debt Free Treasury
 Dollar Through the Ballot Box

* The Conspiracy of Economic Gurus and Pundits Who
 will Not Offer Solutions

* Watching Out for Charlatans Pushing Social Credit 

* Why Populists Do Not Do Gold

* The War-Debt-Taxes System Needs to be Done Away With

* Schematic of a Usury & Non-Usury System

*The Two-Tiered Economic System – The Elite Loop
 and the Lower Loop

*No Monetary Reformer is on Your Side who is not Honest About
 Everything that is Going on in the World 

 *Social Credit to Replace the Usury and the Monopoly System
 (which includes the Flight and Full Liability of Corporations)
 Through a Constitutional Amendment

* The Logic of Social Credit is Irresistible, The Benefits Immediate
 and Lasting, Deliverance Within Our Reach

* Opposing World Views – Gold Versus Social Credit


* Social Credit is Fiat Money From The People, To The People and For
The People So the Market and Profit System Serve Us Instead
of Interest, Monopoly and Rent

* Understanding More of the Creditor/Predator Class
Through the Two-Tiered Economic System

* Social Credit Stands Up to the Most Rigorous Scholarly Examination,
 Whereas the Gold Standard Proposal is Full of Flaws

* Identifying the Wrong Part in our Malfunctioning National Economic Engine
 and the Right Part Needed to Replace It

* Why Big Finance Manipulates Interest Rates

* Inflation is Being Blamed for the Crimes of Interest and Deflation
 and Bankers who Create New Money but Don't Let Any of it Reach Us

* History of the House of Rothschild

* Answering the Most Important Question a 21st Century Nation Can Ask

* With Social Credit we  Have a Smooth Running and Prosperous Economy
  without Deflation or Over-inflation  

* Social Credit Dividends

* De-Coupling Social Credit from Gold
and Other Charlatans

* Bonds and Banking — The Biggest Conflict of Interest

* End the Fed for Gold — A False Choice

* The Credit Monopolists, Debt and Rising Prices

* Gold Based Currencies

* Comprehensive Links on Social Credit
— Featuring Louis Even


How People Can Fix It All

* Satisfactual — Blue Bird Money


* Social Credit and our Contemporary Economic
 Problems  — Youtube

* Social Credit and  Fiat Money

* Our Current Money Problems

* Ron Paul's System of Money Creation through Gold-Backed Loans
 only Perpetuates the Debt/Usury Cycle.

* The Global Usury System *

 
Today I am going to tell you about Social Credit. 

Everybody knows that people go to work so they can get money to buy things.  The things people buy are paid for with money people earn by making the things people buy.  And that would be all there is to say about it  if it weren't for a big problem that keeps happening. 
 

Sometimes the good things people make on their jobs simply don't sell even though everybody knows people want those things and need those things.  When this happens and selling stops the people who make things have to stop making them. Companies don't get any money when they don't sell what has been made and so they don't have enough money to pay all the people who work at the company.  This causes troubles for nearly everyone. 
 

How come there is not enough money for people to buy the things that they can so easily make for each other. 

The troubles start because some of the money that goes around and around from families to companies and back to families again gets taken away so there is not enough money being spent so everyone can keep their job and keep on spending.  The big problem is the money that is taken away so it can't keep going around businesses and families doing good for people. 
 

The reason the money goes away is that it is only loaned to people, not given to them.   Families and companies have to borrow the money so they will have money to buy and sell.  The people who loan the money to companies and families give it, but then they expect it back or else they will take away the house or the companies for themselves.  Sometimes the people who lend the money really want to get those companies for themselves and get the houses and start making people pay rent who live there. 
 

If people didn't have to borrow money to get it, then there would always be enough money to buy things that people make when they go to work.  There would be no problem if everybody just got together and voted to print money and send some to every family so they could spend it.  Doing that is called Social Credit.   With Social Credit the money does not have to be paid back. 
 

Does everybody understand what I've said so far? 
 

Social Credit is easy to understand and it is easy to do, but the reason why we don't get our money this way and avoid all the troubles is that very rich bad bankers can steal a lot of money from everybody when money is borrowed instead of being given to people  from Social Credit.   

Now there is one more thing you need to know about. 
 

When bad bankers take away more money than they put in  they are stealing the things that that money could have bought for families if people used Social Credit to put in new money instead of borrowing. 
 

The bad men don't just lend money and then get it back and then lend it again right away  to someone else.  If that was the way money worked then maybe money wouldn't be gone away as much and there would be enough going around for everybody  to keep making things and buying things.  But the bad men do something much different.  What they do is called usury. 
 

When a man wants to start a company and give people jobs to make things he goes to the usury man at a bank and borrows money from him.  The usury man writes on a piece of paper that the man starting the company is to get some new money from the bank.  The company is started and people get jobs and people have money to buy the things that are made.  But then the money has to be paid back.  For every dollar that the man starting the company borrowed, a year later he has to give back to the usury man a dollar plus a dime a nickel and some pennies; and sometimes he has to pay back with each dollar a whole quarter. 
 

That extra money that has to be paid back for each dollar that the man owning the company borrowed is called interest.  It is called interest because the extra dime and nickel and penny paid back with the dollar is what makes the usury man interested in lending to the man with the company in the first place.   
 

So all the time people are borrowing new money that comes in but paying back the same amount of money plus more.  Money is always being lost by families and companies to the bankers.   
 

And this is what causes troubles.  Because all the time the bankers have all that interest they get and families and companies are short that much for buying what is produced and keeping companies busy with everybody working.   People lose their jobs.  Companies go out of business.  And the bankers don't want to lend money to companies because the companies don't have enough customers.   
 

But bankers are in the business of lending money, and if people can't borrow money because the banker knows the people will never be able to earn enough to pay back each dollar with an extra dime, nickel and penny because the banker has taken out all of the money that was going around  -- the banker will look elsewhere for people to lend money to.  He will lend money to other countries.  Or he will pay bad people to get countries angry with each other so they will start a war so that people will have to borrow money to buy guns and airplanes and ships and bombs to win the war.  Then the banker can lend all of the money he took away as interest and the companies can hire people again to make the guns and bombs.  The bankers will even cause other kinds of disasters if they can so they can lend their money to rebuild after the disaster.  These are the kinds of troubles that happen when people get their money from borrowing it from banks rather than just agreeing that money will be printed up for free and given to each man, woman and child to spend without having to pay it back at all. 
 

After thinking about usury and Social Credit I really hope that people will find a way to have Social Credit without usury.  If people have Social Credit then companies would make enough money that they could keep everyone hired and make new things and different kinds of things and better things and everyone would have the money to buy the ones they like.   

Are there any questions? 
 

Q:  How come people don't fix the problem by having Social Credit and not having money that's all borrowed and all that sort of nonsense. 
 

A:  That's exactly what I wondered.  So I looked up the word "economics" in the school encyclopedia and read what it says about what causes companies to go out of business and people to lose jobs.  It didn't say anything about the real reason of people having to pay interest without extra money being added so they could pay it.  Instead there were two famous men who were paid by the bankers to give people different reasons why people lost their jobs and and couldn't buy things. 
 

One man named John and another named Paul said that when companies couldn't sell that the government should spend money so companies give new jobs to people who lost their jobs.  But this answer was wrong because the government had to borrow money before it could spend it, and the leak of interest later on would more than undo the spending that the government does now.  And besides, the government spending what they want is not the same as the people having the money to spend it on what they want. 
 

Another man with another wrong answer was named Milton.  Milton said that the banks that make money should look at prices and if prices go up they should lend less money and if prices go down they should lend more money.  Well, of course that sounds good, but of course it doesn't fix the problem of interest draining away the money people have to spend on the goods they make.  Even when prices don't change, the bankers are slowly ending up taking out more dollars than they have put in.  Milton didn't understand that it makes a difference if there are ten dog food companies making puppy biscuits with everybody working and selling the puppy biscuits for fifty cents a box and having only two dog food companies in business and people without jobs with the price of puppy biscuits still fifty cents for a box.  Another thing that Milton said was that while the people were incapable of deciding how much money their should be, that the bankers could be trusted to just lend enough money so that prices wouldn't change.  Milton didn't seem to know that bankers would want price to go down and the amount of money to go down most of the time -- because everyone owes them money and if prices go down then the money they are going to get from people paying interest will buy more for the bankers and the people will have to work harder and longer to get each dollar, dime, nickle and penny.  They also like to have the amount of money going around to become less and less because then more people will have to come to the bankers to borrow more and pay back a dollar and a quarter for each dollar borrowed instead of just a dollar, a dime and a nickel. 
 

John and Paul and Milton would not tell people that using money that is borrowed rather than money that is just made and given to people is what causes everybody's troubles.  It doesn't matter if puppy biscuits are one cent a box or if they are a million dollars a box as long as people receive enough money to buy everything they can make and want to own. 
 

To conclude this report I simply wish to say that I think Social Credit is the best way for companies and families to get the money they use and that usury is a very bad way that only does good for a few very bad people. 
 

Teacher:  Thank you, Betty.  That was very nicely done.  However, before you take your seat,  I have a question that I would like you to try answering.  Some people say that if our money were gold instead of paper or checking account money created by bank loans that prices would not go up and everything would be fine.  In light of what you have learned about Social Credit, do you think that could be true? 

Betty:  I don't see how it could be true, Miss Shirley.    To get gold one has to pay the cost of getting it out of the ground.  And when people hide it away it doesn't get spent.    With Social Credit the money just comes to every house without people having to do anything.  With gold you would have to either get it out of the ground or borrow or buy it from the rich people who own it all, and they would want interest.   To pay their debts people would not only have a harder time because money had gone away in paying interest, but because gold is so hard to get hold of to put in people's hands in the first place.  The gold money would never be enough and so the bad bankers would prosper at the expense of everybody else even more with gold than without it. 
 

Teacher:  Very good.  You may take you seat.   Now class, it is time to put away your reading notebooks and bring out your geography textbooks. 
 

Richard EastmanNote: Economists mentioned were John (Keynes), Paul (Samuelson), and Milton (Friedman)

With Social Credit the money first enters the economy as a check to each household, not as a New York bankers loan to a giant corporation.  The following diagram presents a version of Social Credit that I propose to impose right away.  It would come with repudiation of debt -- or freezing debt paying and then repudiating it later.  And instantly providing treasury money to substitute for the purchasing power which High Finance would immediately attempt to dry up and otherwise sabotage.  Call it simply the American populists' social credit plan. 

The Vicious Circle of Debt and Depression – It is a Class War by Ismael Hossein-zadeh
 

System #1:  The international bankers have monopoly of credit.  They keep the credit tight to maximize loan income and the value of their debt portfolios.  Unfortunately keeping the money supply tight means that the corporations they invest their money in and buy stock in do not have customers.  So, hiring Israeli intelligence they pay for a false-flag attack in New York sky scrapers so they can have a war and a great need for anti-terrorism measures which their defense corporations can cater profitably, solving the problem of insufficient purchasing power to buy their products.  They also create weather disasters and other disasters with secret technologies  -- because the emergency services business and the reconstruction businesses are also lucrative  -- paid for by government which borrows the money from the bankers to pay the corporations. etc.  Meanwhile the people not involved with war industry or the disaster business continue to lose jobs and houses and standard of living  because of lack of purchasing power.  
 

or System #2: 

System #2:   The government has debt-free treasury money that it creates without borrowing from international bankers.  They give an amount of money to every American  --  not a redistribution of funds, but the government giving households the chance to spend the new money into existence  -- so that household demand will guide the market economy.  The entire economy will shift away from catering war and disasters -- and from making war and making disasters  --  as people receive these checks and treat them like they would a tax return or a dividend payment or a pension check.  People will still work for a living -- the social credit does not replace work, or entrepreneurship, or the market system, or earning a living  -- what it replaces is the way new money enters the economic loop.  Let housewives again decide what this country will make.  And under this system the domestic economy will get the stimulus, because  American families do not spend their money on war.    Social credit is the death knell for both finance capitalism and socialism and the welfare state.  There can be no free market system with consumer sovereignty without social credit.  Their can only be poverty and war without Social Credit.
 

The private credit monopoly is a criminal conspiracy with traitors in government and the courts.  Repudiation is the only course, along with compensation for damages and redistribution of their ill-gotten wealth.  Remember, that fraud vitiates all contracts -- and executive orders, legislation and decisions from the Supreme Court are null and void if made by a conspiracy intending sabotage. It would be best if all nations and individuals repudiated debt at the same time and with replacement credit systems ready.  Treasury money and social credit are the innovations that will make that possible.

Under the Social Credit system we get rid reliance on the bankers loans based on fractional reserves and with spendable deposits increased or decreased by the Fed's buying and selling of securities to the big investment banks, which work their way to the little banks slowly and imperfectly  -- the money often going to invest in construction in China or other low-wage land ow-environment-user-cost countries -- THAT SYSTEM IS ELIMINATED.   Instead, new money arrives each month at each household (not to firms) -- this money takes the place of loan money.  It is debt free and it does not have to be paid back.  (No, it is not impossible.  It is no less impossible that the fact that we can finance two wars when were are already busted and sunk to the center of the earth in a debt hole that neither householder nor government can climb out of.  --  Now let  me tell you the secret:  We are killing Iraqis in payment to our Jewish creditors and we are killing Afghanis and soon Pakistanis in payment to our Chinese creditors. And we will soon be killing each other for both of them.  --  )  As I was saying, the social credit dividend goes to each household  and the housewife etc. then takes the money to the stores and buys what she thinks best for her family.  Father still goes to work, and mother too if she prefers that to domestic production of home culture and her own children's social and cultural development etc  -- the householder still has a job  -- but more leisure because he does not have to pay the Rothschilds  -- all debt incurred under the old criminal system has been repudiated  -- and so people need only work a fraction of what they worked before.

This Social Credit System  -- let's call it the American version of Social Credit  -- to distinguish it from the more purist C.H. Douglas versions that are widely promoted by populists in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and, in dark basements of Britain.  American Social Credit is a lazy combination of Douglas, Kitson and Soddy -- taken with a great deal of artistic license.  As I was saying, this Social Credit System  gives money to the householder, who then takes it to become the effective demand for new goods and services offered by firms.  The people not being entirely wage dependent for their consumption (for their buying) are able to pay a higher price firm enabling the firm earn some profit that does not have to be eaten into by payments of "B"  the usurer.   The firm can make an honest profit and the amount of purchasing power in play will not be tampered with by devious criminals in top floor offices of the Rockefeller Center or the small group of investment bankers who on  the Second Floor of the New York Federal Reserve Bank tell the FOMC chief (Geitner's old job) what the  open market sales and purchases of securities will be.  (Remember, these purchases and sales of treasury securities between Fed and bankers is what  under the present system expands and contract the supply of loanable funds that finance business investment and mortgages (i.e. increasing and decreasing spendable deposits, those debt-based deposits that provide our purchasing power, such as it is).   All that will be shut down under social credit.  There would be no Fed.  Money would be created by the Treasury, and credit would be created by the National Credit Office with every penny of credit going to household and not to any agency of Government.  The householder will be the first spender, not the government and not the elite international corporation.  The housewife will again (or for the first time) direct production and become the center of the attention of profit seeking entrepreneurs as they once again (as not since the 1920's and early 1950's) do everything they can to satisfy her wants for herself and her family  -- which is called Consumer Sovereignty, something that only Social Credit really provides without tricks  -- without debt and the grand larceny of intentional manipulations of credit to set up and then knock down households with inflation and deflation, boom and bust, easy credit and tight credit, investment and bankruptcy and transfer of assets from workers, entrepreneurs and engineers to bankers and their crony monopoly corporations.

It is very important that the households receive the social credit checks and not the government.  The big spending Democrat is the partner of the banker  (the Republican IS the banker!)  -- I'm speaking of the decision makers, the policy setters of the party, not the rank-and-file fool who is led by the nose by deceit and bribes and scares  and seduction and envy and whatever politically useful emotion paid agitators can stir up.  But under Social Credit, the household gets the money, they spend it on what they think households need most  -- what is best for their children and for their own personal development and health and future and public contributions they wish to make -- the American citizen will once again have money to give to charity, even as charity will not be as necessary  -- although there will always be spendthrifts  -- there are other problems which are addressed by populist remedies other than social credit  -- but we are not talking about those here.

The government will continue to get its money by taxation.  It will not spend the social credit money itself.  It will only get that money when it is paid to them as taxes.  There will be no withholding on social credit.  (Very important.)

Social Credit will not replace earned wages.  People will still go to work.  But they will not have to work to pay big debt  and they will not have to work to pay their household debt -- except a reasonable mortgage debt  on a bank with 100 percent backing  -- people can deposit their debt-free treasury note money at 3 percent interest  and people wanting to buy a home will borrow at say 6 percent  -- which will be fixed for all time  -- inflation being impossible without the dishonest banker expanding and contracting credit at will.     The householder will not have to work until May or some other late month just to pay the national debt, the tax to pay interest on the national debt.  That debt, to the Rothschild interests will be repudiated  -- as gained by fraud and malfeasance and the igniting of wars and boom-bust cycles and bubbles and other forms of financial and government boondoggle scandals.  The Rothschilds and other banking dynasties will have most of their money taken from them in reparations  -- let them go into the wine business or sell fine art  -- under Social Credit the Rothschilds have no function  -- even as they are a dead weight loss on society today  -- remember, a banker is not an entrepreneur  -- he only controls entrepreneurs and engineers and workers because of his monopoly of credit  --   the Rothschild's control too much to be good entrepreneurs  -- Investment Bankers of the City of London and Wall Street care nothing about pleasing the American housewife, or any other American family member  -- the banker profits not from building better a better mousetrap or computer mouse, and neither does the big corporation  -- rather, they profit by creating monopoly for themselves, monopoly created by destroying the competition through the shock of  damaging expansions and contractions of credit as already explained. 

Governments will tax and they will provide public services.  But the money will originate in the hands of the householders  -- not the government owned by the corporation getting into a war, or building up a giant Homeland Security boondoggle -- or fake crises that each have to be met with expenditure of trillions and the regulation and shut down of everyone not related to a big financier etc.

Businesses will need to apply less for loans because they will be profitable enough to expand without loans, that is provided they still can satisfy the housewife, if they can still attract her dollars (social credit plus wages and profits from business ownership).  Social credit is real free enterprise, the only really workable market system that can hold up a complex modern society without the scam, boom and bust and all out corruption of the debt-money private credit monopoly system we now languish and perish under.

Because the housewife directs production with the purchasing power that social credit and a husbands paycheck that does not have to go to pay creditors and the tax man who turns it over to Rothschild as interest on the National Debt.  Motive for war will be gone.  Wars, as Hobson showed over a hundred years ago, is caused by the people not having enough money to buy what they themselves produce -- so that firms had to sell abroad (in exchange for raw materials etc.) to sell that they produced  -- giving credit to foreign countries to develop their resources on condition that they buy from the Imperialist country's firms  --  because, as Douglas put it,  the domestic population only earned "A" while the products for sale had to cover both "A" (wages, profits) and "B" usury  -- so that a constant stream of loans by usurers were necessary to keep firms going  -- a responsibility abused by rigging the game with expansions and contractions  until the banker and his pet monopoly corporations owned everything.  The heck with that noise!  All of that will be out of our lives forever  -- if and when we -- all nations  -- rise up and overthrow the money power and replace it with treasury money, social credit, debt repudiation against international crime banking syndicates..

 

Discussion

"Mark S Bilk" & "Richard Eastman"  
 

Mark S. Bilk:   Betty did a good job.  [see "Betty's Book Report on Social Credit," above]  But I have a question: Does everyone get the same  amount of social credit money from the government? 
 

Richard P. Eastman: Yes.  
 

Mark S. Bilk:  Seems to me the amount should be inversely based on income or wealth.  No point in giving millionaires extra money -- they already have enough to buy things and keep the economy going.  It's the poor and middle-class people who don't, so they should get it.  That way you don't give out more than is necessary and risk inflation.  Right? 

Richard P. Eastman:   Social Credit is not a redistribution instrument.   It is not a tool of social policy.  The poor and the rich get about the same amount of oxygen to breathe and they get the same amount of Social Credit.  If it were otherwise than immediately Social Credit would become an instrument for criminal misallocation, for political argument of how "progressive redistribution" formulas were arrived at.  Politicians would run for office either as Robin Hood or as George Bush.  Political corruption, and in fact political parties of all kinds, are based on capturing the instruments of redistribution.

Mark S. Bilk:  And is getting social credit money dependent on working?   Because  if it's not, wouldn't people just live off that money and not work? 
 

Richard P. Eastman:   Receiving a Social Credit dividend check is not dependent on working, or being needy.  Or anything else.  If people want to live off that money they can do so.  But without exploitation at the job, with lots of interesting employers all making profit and able to hire people that fit their very varied needs -- working is more attractive and easier to obtain.  Most people want to so something and be proud of it.  Others -- artists, or maybe people like you and me -- will forego larger incomes in order to serve others for free -- the self-sacrificing do-gooder.  Everyone wants to work under the right conditions.  Those who don't probably shouldn't.  If they don't they shouldn't be a drain on family members who do work.   We have great modern technology  -- Social Credit is modernist -- and plenty of resources (despite the lies of monopolists who seek to hide the reasons behind planned dearth for higher prices of their monopoly/oligopoly corporations.   I think we need men who don't work  -- people who develop themselves in highly individualistic ways.  But for the reasons given, I do not think people will want to forego work  -- and one more reason:  Without having to pay personal debt, and national debt and with such abundance from business with plenty of demand and no interest payments  (i.e. not hobbled by the "B" in the "A" plus "B" theorem of cost of production plus interest payment equaling cost of product  --  Social Credit eliminates "B" (interest payment component and related components or it compensates them with Social Credit making up for the drain of "B")  with the ultimate result that people don't have to work as long to produce the same amount of product  (think of it as less overhead translating into higher wages and lower prices, i.e., higher "real" wages, or purchasing.  If going to work means only four or five hours a day  -- people will not find work adversive.  Almost everyone not overworked enjoys the first one, two or three hours of work.  The fourth hour is tolerable, but work becomes aversive if you are tied to in for longer periods.  Of course the work that is more interesting  -- the professions etc. are especially rewarding for in visible accomplishment and social status  -- individual achievement or love of the craft - or dedication to the service  -- that many will work long hours and like it.   They are free to give their time to work or not  -- they are no longer debt slaves forced to work for Rothschild, Rockefeller and their debt collector the IRS.  Everyone likes work of their own choosing on their own terms.  No one likes to hang out in the street when they can really be doing something they feel good about.  Also people are competitive  -- men will still pride themselves on what they can do, what they can earn, what they can give their families  -- that almost defines the middle class ethic.  Under Social Credit we will all tend towards that ethic.  And that is good  -- whatever anarchists or communists or libertarians or conservatives or progressives may urge to the contrary.    The Rothschild's substitute for the "real thing" has led us to where we are today.   

Mark S. Bilk:    But that means that there would have to be enough jobs for full  employment.  And because of increasing automation, computerization,  and other forms of technology, the standard number of hours worked  per week would have to be gradually decreased to insure that there  would be jobs for everyone. 
 

Richard P. Eastman:   "Full Employment" is a bogus goal.  The error gained prominence from Keynes who viewed the old excuse for depressions as "over production" -- but we know that there is no such thing -- in the Depression of the 1930's milk was thrown out and crops burned because there was insufficient demand due to insufficient purchasing power in the hands of the people.  Keynes put his name to the General Theory because he sold out -- making millions in 1930 -- to the schemers behind the depression.  Montegu Norman and Bernard Baruch among them.  Keynes book was written by a circle of agents of the City of London.  At any rate, Keynes theory was that when factories were idled because of "overproduction" or "underconsumption"  the solution was not Social Credit  -- Keynes was bought to be the figurehead of "the new economics" that was simply change the packaging of the old system and sell that to the country, pushing the Social Credit reformers aside. 
 

Keynes had a good reputation because of his book The Economic Consequences of the Peace -- which described the mistakes of the Versailles treaty in demanding impossible reparations for Germany when Germany was not the country that kept the war going and when Germany was the country that first agreed to quit the war and accept Wilson's Fourteen Points  -- which they never got.  Keynes was right and got the international respect he deserved for being right.  Keynes also was right when he wrote a shorter piece in 1925 called "The Economic Consequences of Mr. Churchill" in which he foresaw the consequences of Winston Churchill, then the Chancellor of the Exchequer  who did a Ron Paul and put Britain on the Gold Standard at pre-war gold-content of the British pound  -- this in order that the British ruling and financial elite -- who loaned money in the war effort would now enjoy the windfall that goes to creditors when debts incurred earlier as paper must now be paid in gold at a gold per dollar price (in this case the pound) that represents an incredible amount of purchasing power that must be earned with an incredibly larger amount of labor for the debtor to meet his debt obligations  -- of meeting the government's war-debt obligations through the paying of higher taxes through revaluation upward due to the arbitrary setting of the currency's gold content so high.

Note:  All fooled people who follow Celente, Paul, Beck and all of the pundits with gold-dealer sponsors  -- need to know that the Rothschilds monopolize money to scam people in this way  -- right now they are selling their gold accumulation at incredible prices as people panic into turning over their purchasing power for this dead metal.  They will get it all back again after the fall of the US.  The equipment for detecting gold at a distance by its density is already mass produced and standing in readiness for the day gold confiscation comes.  You Ron Paulers really made a big mistake when you bet on gold instead of on saving your country with good domestic investments in productive capacity and store of provisions for what is ahead.  I say this over and over  -- no Ron Pauler or Becker or Celenteist seems interested in defending their position against these criticisms.  I wonder why? 

At any rate, back to Keynes and Keynesianism -- his remedy for a shortage of "aggregate demand" his name covering the real problem of insufficient purchasing power for wage earners to buy products that have to cover production costs that include both wages, profits and usury  -- his "solution" was to have the government borrow money from the Rothschilds and use it to "stimulate" the economy, to "prime the pump," with growth of government.  But Keynes ignored the fact that the stimulus comes from borrowing which only adds to the interest burden.  He thought the "stimulus" would increase production  enough that the increased debt could be paid off  -- forgetting that a stimulus that is debt financed is nothing but "junk food" -- eventually draining out  more than in pumps in.

Mark S. Bilk:    Already, lots of people work at jobs that produce nothing, or even  do harm, like most advertising, real-estate and stock speculation, enforcement of laws against cannabis, and imprisoning people who use this herb (which is far less harmful than alcohol, and actually  beneficial in some circumstances if used correctly).  I think these  non-productive and anti-productive jobs exist partly because with  full employment, people would only have to work 20 or less hours  per week to produce everything that they consume. 
 

Richard P. Eastman:  Yes, the Dilbert comic strips are not far from the truth of corporation world.  A corporation is nothing but a small communist state -- they are run internally like the Soviet Union while outside they thrive because of monopoly power and other government bestowed anti-competitive privileges.  Single proprietorships like Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Henry Kaiser, Walt Disney, and perhaps Bill Gates always outperform a corporation apart from any exclusive patents they may have purchases.  Most of the government is inefficient.  For every person caring for the retarded for example, eighty percent of paychecks go to administrative and consultant personnel who never work directly with the residents. 

In fact when cuts have to be made, the skilled hands-on caregivers and the group home are replaced by an apartment with uninsured street people hired to be "caregivers" while compensation for bureaucracy and consultants remains undiminished.  (I was the administrator of a group home for severe-profound developmentally developed youth at the time care for people with developmental disabilities was being gutted in Washington State.  The state was totally dishonest and it came from the top down.

With Social Credit people will have the money to buy care for their own, without the state.  People do not realize that the real enemy of socialism as well as of usury capitalism is Social Credit.  I agree that Wall Street cares very little about entrepreneurship and investment in America -- it is all about speculation and grabbing peoples incomes so the billionaires can use it for their "o.p.m."  leveraged buyouts etc. 

And you know I will never agree with you on marijuana being good for people.  I have seen to many people, once sharp, become lotus eaters talking and thinking like Cheech-and-Chong (hey, remember them, man?)   -- As you know I nevertheless favor the government providing every addict with his substance at cost or for free  --  i.e., pennies, grown on government farms etc.  -- in order that people will not rob and kill to get money for drugs and in order that all those trillions of dollars don't keep ending up in the hands of Rockefeller/Rothschild/Israel/China hands.  

People adopting Social Credit around the world will not knock out Rothschild/Rockefeller organized crime unless the profit is taken out of cocaine and heroin and other addictive drugs.  When drugs are provided to all addicts no questions asked for pennies  -- the pushers will disappear  --  the pressure will be off to take it.  The jails will be empty.  People can get back to work again -- possibly with addiction health advice and therapy provided by private charities or local or state taxes.   But yes, I agree there is a lot of busy waste in corporations  -- especially because of nepotism -- keeping it in the families, while our ruling elite are jjust as sorry as the sorriest bunch of clowns any declining civilization has had to endure.

Mark S. Bilk:    Also, the state-run banks that make interest-free loans to businesses  would have to require some collateral and/or would have to evaluate  the soundness of the business plans.  And the borrowers would have to be legally bound to pay the money back.  Otherwise there would be  all kinds of con-men borrowing money and absconding with it.  Right? 

Richard P. Eastman:  Banks would charge interest on loans, but the loans would not be the source of our money supply.  Banks for business and home building investments  would have 100 percent backing  --  they would actually pay savers to actually lend to the banks  -- say at 3%  on the same terms that the banks, after bundling up the savings deposits to make big loans, would offer, say 6% to entrepreneur borrowers.  These banks would thus not control the money supply in any way.  It costs them to keep depositors' money in the vaults, since they are paying 3% for them to have the deposit, and so they will lend the money as quickly as possible to the entrepreneur with the most promise of being successful, paying the loan back and then coming to make a bigger loan. etc.  Notice that banks become only savings banks.    The checking account function, and clearing checks, could be done through the Social Credit Agency as a public service  -- people would use their Social Credit Card for everything -- the Social Credit dividend simply being added to everyone’s account at the specified time etc.  Remember, no more fractional reserve banking  -- no more creation of money out of thin air because of the fractional reserve system.  Banks will simply be borrowers from the many at low interest in order to be lenders to the few entrepreneurs who have worthy ideas that require a lot of capital for start up.    Muslim banking principles would also be allowed under Social Credit -- where the bank becomes a partner in the profits and the depositors get, not interest, but a yet smaller share of the profit -- profit sharing  on top of principal instead of interest on top of principal.  Profit sharing with the banks will last as long as the loan is paid off.  Lots of room for creative finance this side of usury.

Mark S. Bilk:  Oops, here's another point.  The people in charge of handing out  social credit money, and the people running the state interest-free  banks, would have to be watched and controlled very carefully,  and accurate descriptions of all their actions made instantly  available to the public (via the Internet).  Because the dynamics of such a situation, with people having power over the well-being of others, invites power-hungry people to seek those jobs, and also invites massive corruption.  Whether they're called commissars under communism/socialism, or administrators under populism/social-credit, the psychological factors of the situation are the same. 
 

Richard P. Eastman:  On the second Tuesday of each month, before live television, the comptroller of the National Social Credit Service and the official Dispenser of the Dividend will go to a small round domed marble building with a single room under the dome and space for cameramen and witnesses.  Directly under the dome will be granite block with a numerical keyboard and no letter keys and a windows to type in the date of entry,  9-21-2010, the day the dividend will be deposited and the dividend amount each person will receive, say $200;   and then both the Comptroller and the Dispenser of the Dividend will insert their individual keys which when both turned will activate the "enter" key which will be the entry, authorization and instruction for the distribution of that amount to each person's Social Credit Card to be created -- out of thin-air and without having to be paid back -- to be received at 12:01 am on the first of the month, Friday October 1.  The granite "credit stone" will automatically reset to receive the next entry on third Tuesday in October for the amount specified.  Then they lock up the Chamber of Social Credit until the next month. 
 

But what about verifiability?  Well, since everybody in the country gets the same amount, it is no invasion of privacy to provide that every citizen's name and city shall be listed on a Social Credit Website showing exactly the amount that the single specified amount was indeed created in that persons account.  (It is an error to say the money was "transferred" to people’s accounts.  It is created in those accounts by the Social Credit Agency -- but the Social Credit agency is not debiting its own accounts.  The Social Credit agency has no accounts, no deposits, no money.  It merely says "let there be money in each persons account" and it is done.    Now everyone will know what the social credit dividend is each month and each can check the amount against what was created for them -- and so can everybody else check to see that everyone else got the same thing.    If people do not consent to have their names on the citizen roster to receive the created dividend then it  it will simply be electronically impossible for them to receive their dividend.  But the ultimate fail-safe is this:  the program will be hard wired in such a way that everyone receives their created dividend together  -- that there is no way for the system to look up an individual and change his dividend amount from what everybody else gets. 
 

Public inspections of the software, with public access video of the entire process.  The system will be too simple to hack.   

Another fail safe could be that social credit money must all be either spent or converted to paper cash by the next month.  That way no Social Credit Card will ever have more on it than the specified amount for the current month.  Grocery stores, could simply give cash back for unspent social credit in a given month. 
 

I think such a system would be much less prone to tampering, embezzlement and fraud than the system we have now or any other  system I have ever heard of.
  

Third Tuesday of Every Month - Social Credit Dividends Created

Why Not?

finis 
 

Social Credit  is Household Spending Power -- sent to everybody like electric power from a public utility.    
 

It is real unborrowed legal tender money that households receive to spend as they choose and never have to pay back. 
 

From where?  Who pays for it?    From "thin air" and from the fact that good money managed nationally in this way creates an economic pie as no other system.  It is money from the same "magic hat" that the Rothschilds have monopolized and from which they have from "thin air" made their loans in usury.  Money from the same store of assets and potential that the Rothschilds got all their wealth from when they monopolize credit and lend to us for their own interest-harvesting, as they farm the fruits of our labors at our very great expense.
 

(Webmaster's note:  The Rothschilds' Assets Total $500 Trillion Dollars.  Think about it.  This is obscene.  The Rothschilds must also make and create wars to finance the debt created by their usurious system.  Social credit, a non-usurious system is what we should fight and die for to bring in real freedom, peace and prosperity not only for the nation, but for the whole Human Race --  and NOT for these Financial Gluttons and their artificially created and generated wars based on pure lies, deception and propaganda.  Wars in other people's lands are simply to maintain their system of usury.)
 

=========== 

Government administered basic-right dividend checks to everyone providing interest free 'money' backed by the willing acceptance of the entire nation in acknowledgement of the great benefit the system provides at so little cost to the nation.  The power of money at the service of all from out of thin air and right to your own home.  

===========
 

“Now you're going to have to make things a whole lot simpler if you want
 us to understand what Social Credit is all about."

"All right, Paul.  We will try.  On your planet you have a game, a game played on a board
 with pictures and slips of paper indicating purchasing power and other pieces
 of paper called deeds.  I believe this game is called 'Monopoly.' 
Here, let me show you a picture of it on the Explain-tron."

"In this game everyone is supposed to start out with a certain amount of money according to the rules.
  The object of the game is to buy property and get money and build rental houses and hotels
 and charge people money if they stay at those houses and hotels until you become rich
 and everyone else loses all their money and property."

Monopoly Under Rothefeller Rules

Under Rothefeller rules all players start out with no purchasing power at all. 

One player gets to be banker.   
 

The banker is chosen by himself.  Anyone who does not accept him as banker is not allowed to play the game. 

In the begining the banker has all the money -- his money and the bank's money are mixed together and there
 is no telling the two apart. 
 

In order for other players to enter the game they must borrow purchasing power from the banker
 at a percent that the banker specifies. 
 

All players entering the game must pay the banker interest on the money they are using every time they pass "Go." 

The banker may buy houses and hotels with the money of the bank.  If other players should be lucky enough to own a house or two but then fall behind in his payments to the banker  his property can be auctioned off and the banker who can outbid anyone because he has use of the bank til ends up owning all properties and buildings.

Under Rothefeller rules the banker gets to mix his money and the bank's money.  

Now this system is like the one you have now here on your planet, Earth.

End of Lesson on How to Free Planet Earth
from the Only Alien Invaders the Earth People will ever Need to Call The Enemy

 

First, as a system where the ruling elite, that is the financial elite, have separated the money circulation of the common people from the money of the elites.  They have the real purchasing power – and they have it in plentiful quantities – and we are the inmates of the asylum on a token economy, the Debtor's Prison for the Dumbed Down kept on short rations.  But what about China and us buying from the Chinese?  The fact is that at the low labor costs that the International Money Power pays to make the goods we import, we should be paying much less than we have been.  Deflation and monopoly pricing have kept the retail prices only marginally less expensive to us than where the good made in the US  – even though the labor price difference is (was)  tremendous.  But why?  Because the international money power wants to use its dollars to build Chinese factories paying little, but they do not want us buying Chinese products at equivalent discounts.  The upper loop buys Chinese at low Chinese prices.  The lower loop buys Chinese at high almost-American prices  – prices just enough lower than American prices to drive American firms out of business, but no lower! 

Second, we should view the economy as a two loop system in which the master players who use the top loop, will arrange booms and busts for the lower loop.  Why?  Because of the A+B problem – the chronic tendency to insufficent purchasing power to sustain domestic industry due to the flow of investment loans and housing loans to households and businesses being less than the flow of investment loan principal and compound interest on those loans being paid back – is a problem that justifies to the people the instigation of an inflationary boom to "end the recession/depression" – during which time interest rates climb – if for no other reason than that an "inflation premium" is being added on by lenders – but also because, since it is a boom, those high rates are what the traffic will bear. 

But guess what? 

There is another reason why interest rates are high in the inflationary boom  – or should I say – why the high interest rates and inflation always recur together.    On top of inflation premium and high investment demand in a boom economy, there is also the reason that the Money Power lenders know that the end of the boom will be another depression with deflation – usually imposed Rothbard-Volker deflation to "fix" the inflation problem  – and that means that the inflation premium they charged to lenders now becomes a giant windfall to the creditors.  Oh, wow!  We have just explained why booms and busts won't go away until usury is done away with.  Let me restate it so you are sure to get it:  Lenders not only offer loanable funds at high interest rates because they require an inflation premium, they also lend because they expect a subsequent windfall when the deflationary "correction" is arranged.   

How does the deflationary correction occur?  Simply by turning off the credit  -- or even faster  – calling in loans – as the Great Depression (the first one) was begun when Wall Street initiated the margin calls on the three black days – which works with a money-multiplier effect to contract currency in circulation and create the dearth of sales that soon leads to firing of workers and the shutting down and bankruptcy of firms etc.  They bring it on deliberately.  "They" being the credit monopoly.

===================== 

If in a depression a reduction in taxes is deemed beneficial then why should there be any objection at all to social credit.  What is the difference between tax going down from $5000 to $4500  and tax doing down from $500 to -$500  (i.e. a negative tax were the householder gets money instead of paying for it.

But with social credit there are two reasons why the new money will not be harmful.  1) It goes to households for spending and not to corporations for investing when US corporations, corporations that who haven't a clue about household demand other than that it doesn't exist because of lack of purchasing power. This means the new money will not go to "malinvestment."  The demand is real – it reflects what households want and it is true purchasing power that will reward the entrepreneur who best satisfied that demand.  Money for big windmills and for tearing down hydroelectric dams and for war on all Islam  – does not result in more domestically produced economic pie for citizens.  But with social credit  – the housewife with her social credit dividend check has money and only wants to spend it on economic pie that is good for her family.  And with the social credit dividend check coming regularly – and debt-free – and never having to be paid back  – there is not going to be any contraction of credit which is associated with every debt-financed credit expansion or debt-financed stimulus "malinvestment" by Government (which is what Obama economics is all about).
 

Zionist-Communist Rothschilds and Their 500 Trillion Dollars –
Soulless Money Grubbing Fascist Lovers at the Expense of All
 

In all future elections vote only only for candidates who sign a pledge to: 

1) break relations with Zionistan

(2) repudiate Rothschild debt

(3) switch to a debt-free fiat Treasury Dollar

(4) monetize the domestic economy with Social Credit dividend checks to all households rather than throwing our money away on the irrational and criminal measures of: 

          a) multi-trillion-dollar tribute to Rothschild/Rockefeller to "stimulate" / reinforce their ambitions of self-deification within the galaxy (or whatever);

          b) debt-based bubbles to a housing market where no one can afford houses -- like throwing a ball with a big rubber band on it, the interest on the debt will always snap you back to depression:

           c) open market purchases of securities that flood the international loanable funds markets with money that will never be invested in US productivity (i.e. easy money for the rich that never trickles down to the loop where the non-elite people earn and spend and look for jobs.

Forget the mumbo-jumbo superstition of the High-Priests of Finance which says that government can't  print up its own money but must have Rothschild (whose interests own the Fed) print it up and charge interest for each dollar created  -- and then charge the interest again when the money is deposited and serves as bank reserves.  Good inflation is not only good -- it is essential to our recovery and survival.  Giving Rothschild the levers to inflate and deflate where and when they want is like (or just plain is)  putting yourselves at the mercy of a gang of sociopathic killers.   Inflation is the only good way for governments to intelligently create the purchasing power the people need to produce goods for each others use.  Remember -- the car won't go right unless there is air in the tires  -- and it is better to inflate with free air rather than with air you have to pay for at compound interest.    And no way should Rothschild/Rockefeller be the ones to decide who gets and spends the new money first.  Everyone should get a per capital share of the new money that enters the circular flow -- money in the form of social credit dividend checks to households. 

And so far no libertarian, monetarist, Keynesian or neo-classical economist or any other economist has dared come against that fact.  They can't.  If they debate it they lose.  And they know it.he ontem that gets both big Government and big Usury out of the people's market economy. 

Everyone with eyes sees the collapse of the American economy due to the parasitic usury component and private monopoly of money and credit and money distribution for first-spender advantages.

But none are telling you that the disaster can be averted.  None are pointing out exactly which faulty components have left the door open for the few in a position to handle the controls to rob and destroy until there is nothing left for the families of mankind to live on.  Even their taking of a trillion dollars from future tax payers -- they then demand for fixing the problem -- more money, which of course they will not lend to anyone who would invest in domestic production.   
 

Who would invest in a nation where it is no so clear that even money loaned at zero nominal interest rate will be prohibitively high because of the very high deflation premium that must be paid back -- because entrepreneurs see that Americans will buy less, not more in the future, despite the "stimulus bailout" given to the banks with no obligation placed on them of what they must do with the money.  (What they are doing is hoarding dollars, even selling their gold to obtain them, because the dollar is their currency, not ours.  They are buying dollars at the bottom, knowing that once they own all of the asset in America and the middle class have been killed off, or else dumbed down and pushed to slum rental housing and near subsistence wages -- and futures for their children that are hard brutal and short.  The dollar will remain their currency to the end  -- its connection with the United States completely broken.

While you were waiting for hyperinflation -- you made all of the fatal mistakes that one makes in a deflation.  Meanwhile they positioned themselves to take full advantage of the deflation which they knew was coming because they were the ones who had the power to make it come or not.  They accumulated everyone's IOU -- but they were not after earning streams of interest income this time.  Rather they were after the collateral on those loans.  All of those middle homes they wanted to become their rental properties.  All those businesses that compete with their Chinese industrial plants  they wanted foreclosed and cannibalized and put out of business  -- providing them with monopoly power through market concentration, through the economic death of all of their competitors.  And especially they wanted competitor banks, like Washington Mutual, closed up or absorbed into their banks, like Chase.  They took on liabilities  -- but that was only on paper -- what they got was the title deeds to all of the valuable assets of the planet which they did not already own.  They knew Congress could simply be ordered to whip the taxpayers some more subsidize -- as a stimulus bailout -- the entire theft operation. 
  

And so we have a housing market where the only people in a position to buy are the elite of the financial sector -- who certainly don't by these houses for themselves to live in -- or the foreign investor -- both looking for rental properties with good former-middle class tenants who still remember how to mow lawns.  The government buys the houses that can't be sold because of insufficient demand  and sits on them.  That keeps supply low enough to keep prices higher.  Houses don't fall in price to fit people's new lower incomes, and property taxes don't go down, and debt still outstanding does not adjust downward to the new deflationary depression prices they should be at  -- all because of the monopoly power of big finance.  Libertarians are dead wrong. 
 

Government does not make these messes -- the bankers do.  If the Libertarian eliminates the state  --i.e. representative government, they are merely turning themselves over to banker rule with privatized mercenary debt collectors to replace the old tax collector.   Yet the people to not see the massive crime of the financial sector manipulating to keep highly priced the assets acquired in foreclosure -- foreclosure because of severe deflation (severe starvation for purchasing power in the domestic production and household loop of the economy.)  I am saying that houses should be selling for $12,000 not $120,000; for $90,000, not $300,000  but that government buying and withholding the "toxic" houses to keep prices high is the problem.  And of course in the face of the purchasing power crunch local property taxes have increased not decreased.  All of this prevents the prices, wages, incomes, output, purchasing power etc. from adjusting to allow the economy to recover with proper balance of all of it's components.   
 

 I have not heard one person comment favorably on my suggestion that debt burden  should be adjusted to an index to full-time wage earner purchasing power  -- or even average working day wage earnings.  To avoid giving the Financial Sector windfall real-value-of-interest-payments-received profits from deflation  -- by adjusting the burden to deflation.  Remember this -- when Bernanke super inflates but the helium all misses the balloon -- don't expect any lift.  What you can expect is that the Money Power will end up owning the balloon that you can't fly  and you will end up paying for $20 trillion of helium released into the atmosphere to affect that transaction.   And right now the plan is to do it all over again.  Why not.  So far it has never failed as a super efficient means to greater wealth for the better banks and the better corporations owned by the better people -- for the winners in this rigged game of strip-you-down poker.

There is only one Macro solution for all this.  We have to cut out some defective financial systems and replace them with systems that to not even offer the means for private Money Power manipulation. That solution is 1) repudiation of debt 2) nationalization of money and credit -- taking it out of the hands of wall street and the city of London  3) an impersonal mechanism that introduces money directly into the hands of the consumers  -- instead of into the hands of the speculators who then bet the multi-national-corporations horses while fixing the races so that only their horses can win etc.  Under this plan  -- called Social Credit  -- market demand will once again organize and build up production to meet that demand.  Where there are buyers with money there industry will grow.  That is what has been missing in this country through its long tragic history under the power of Rothschild/Rockefeller/Morgan/Baruch/Goldman-Sachs Usury.

 

Populists are trying to teach the public that the the economy has collapsed because of insufficient purchasing power in the hands of the public.  Of course the Money Power which Bernanke represents does not want this simple solution to be accepted because it will spell the death of international lending to governments and second mortgage and other lending to distressed households (and other reasons).  So Bernanke is creating a lot of money, but he is not getting any of it. 
 

Some people would like to fade in pure fiat money and phase out debt-based currency over thirty years.  In my view we need 100 percent fiat right now because we must have immediately one hundred percent repudiation of national indebtedness to the criminal  money power.  Repudiation is impossible if you plan to fade out of debt-based money.  Debt money has to be killed in one day and the replacement organ be ready to transplant and take over that same day.  Anyone who wants to do this slowly is a charlatan who has no intention of killing the monster. 
 

Other people want  "flexible credit" -- that the credit system should expand and contract whenever people need it.  This cannot be done without getting back to credit manipulation to rig markets for financiers against households and firms.  In some things rigid (like 100 percent annual balance of trade and 100 percent deposit backing of loans)   is better.  The money in the system should be set by the Social Credit authority.  They will provide the social credit dividend to households -- to each person -- so that the household will be where EVERY dollar gets its start.  They will not control the amount of money in circulation, which will depend on people saving and upon the velocity of money (which depends on things like how often people are paid).  The National Social Credit Office will provide the dividend checks and will set their amount according to new measures of household purchasing power.  So what about the entrepreneur who wants to build some new innovation on a large scale.  Credit will not expand to please him.  Instead, along with social credit there will still be state banks who lend money to businesses.  But the money they lend will be 100 percent people's savings.  There will be no fractional reserve banking.  When people put their savings in a bank there will be stiff penalties for withdrawal before the allotted time period.  Those penalties and durations may be set by state regulators.   If a bank has overextended its loans and people choose to withdraw their savings -- then let that bank borrow from other banks who have savings to lend.  The bank that suffered the unexpected savings withdrawals will lose and the other bank that loaned to it will gain -- but the net of the entire banking system will be zero.    
 

The idea that banks can issue fiat on their own "just as we do now"  is totally unworkable and would give us once again a financial elite with extraordinary power over the household and business sectors. 
 

Think about it.  If the financial elites who own the gold wanted to buy gold they would not have their mouthpieces telling you to buy it, bidding against them for each ounce.  They would have the mouthpieces selling you on the idea that gold is obsolete etc. as they quietly cornered the market with quiet buying agents.  Instead they have Celente and Ron Paul and Glenn Beck pushing gold like old-time carnival barkers selling a patent medicine. They are agents assisting the Money Power in buying up dollars.  Clearly Beck and Celente and all the others are not your financial advisors so much as they are Rothschild and Rockefeller buying agents.   The dollar is going to be around.  Remember a dollar is a share of the Federal Reserve Bank -- a bank owned by other banks which are in fact a consortium of Rothschild-Rockefeller controlled banks acting as a holding company in control of the Fed.  The appointed Board of Governors are token figures.  The New York Bank has the power, but only the power to conduct the open market securities transactions that the big investment bankers want conducted.  The Board of Governors and the Chairman are informed after the fact.   The Fed shares -- US dollars -- are being bought up by the Rothschilds and Rockefellers who are actually paying for them with US Securities.  The US securities are being shorted in anticipation of the default which the same Rockefeller-Rothschilds have engineered.  Trick or treat?  Guess who gets the trick. 
 

What will save America -- is keeping our dollars here and in circulation  and getting more of them in the hands of the American household sector and business sector and out of the hands of the financial sector. 
 

There is no honest economist who also knows what is going on to ask.  If you want to verify what I say you are going to have to do the the thinking yourself  -- that, after all, is the law of the jungle for humans. 
 

Dick Eastman

Yakima, Washington
 

"The FED has now said that they can  loan money directly to states and companies. Since the FED is just a collection of rich bankers, it will be interesting to see just who they loan to.  They will undoubtedly loan to companies that they would like to own,,,, hoping for a default. But, will they loan to states?  Since a state is not a money-making enterprise, I suspect that Rockefeller won't cough up a penny. 

"Now we see why the Fed is pouring out new money  -- called inflation -- when really it is a transfusion from the domestic loop to the international corporations so they can better vanquish the domestic economy and capture all land resources  and industry and assets (including privatized public wealth).  The Fed is buying government securities and giving the dollars to the international corporations and to China (the PLA being partners with every international corporation in China). 
 

"The Fed buys Corporation and Chinese held securities giving them dollars which they do not spend here.  The securities have value because they pay interest.  Whatever their market value when you buy them you get a stream of interest payments.  That stream of interest payments is paid for by you and me the taxpayers.  The fact that the Fed is buying up securities and putting out up-front dollars from them shows that the International Financial Elites are expecting the US to go down -- the securities to be worthless  -- but that actually the dollars will keep their value because the US still has land and resources and your labor it can buy (or control through debt slavery)  -- the Fed is a separate entity, not part of the US which will default on its securities.  So the securities will no longer be held by Financiers  -- just by pension plans and little people through their mutual funds etc. -- so they will be the ones stuck from the default.  Because in the default it is the securities that go  -- not the private central bank money.  That is why they want those dollars  -- dollars will be safe  -- dollars are what will be traded in for the new gold-backed currency they have in the works.  You will take the gold you have bought -- have it minted into coin and then use it to pay your debts which will still be there after the US is gone. 
 

"Or perhaps you don't like where they are taking you and would rather have social credit? 
 

"Remember this too:  The prices we pay for objects include 40 percent of interest payments.  Those are prices going to the financial sector which is not recirculating them back into the economy  -- those dollars paid in the price of goods that do not go to the producing firm but go to finance are dollars that will not be calling forth more production.  More than three quarters of our tax money goes to fund both interest payments on the national debt  and the military that maintains a world empire and, currently two major wars/occupations.  The wars themselves are a form of "export" (exporting destruction) that is make-work for US corporations. 
 

"Now if we have social credit households -- making strong household sector demand -- then entrepreneurs, engineers, managers and skilled workers will be called forth to create more household goods, more labor saving innovation, more beauty and knowledge  now that the slavery of serving the creditors is ended. 
 

"Only recently has it all come together  -- exactly what is wrong and exactly what the solution MUST be  -- to end the basic problem that has plagued the world since the creation of the Bank of England. 
 

"Anyway  -- now you know  -- if instead of skimming a hundred posts today you were to print out this one and really study what I have given you -- write it out in your own words -- then you will have equipped yourself to provide others with the medicine that can save us."

"Learn about why social credit is the only cure -- the nation's only defense in this foreign attack that involves the infiltration and destruction of our economy through the weaknesses of our system stemming from the usury component of our monetary system in the control of hostile international bankers who control our financial sector, and all three branches of the Federal Government."

"For details: 
 

"Learn about the hidden cost of interest here: 

http://www.margritkennedy.de/index.php?id=105&ord=56 
 

"Learn about why social credit is the only cure -- the nation's only defense in this foreign attack that involves the infiltration and destruction of our economy through the weaknesses of our system stemming from the usury component of our monetary system in the control of hostile international bankers who control our financial sector, and all three branches of the Federal Government." --Dan Breeden
 

Discussion
 

"Mark S Bilk" & "Richard Eastman"  
 

Brandon:  I had a few questions regarding social credit.

Do you recall the social credit schematic flow chart where everything is balanced and working under the social credit system? So, my thought was, what if you didn't have a social credit office? Would things work out anyway, simply because you reformed the system enough to make it work in an honest and sound manner without the need for social credit? 
 

Richard: My guess is yes -- "if you reformed the system enough."  But I have no clue how that could be done.  The system in need of reforming has injections going to investment and leaks in the form of investment going to a financial sector with no particular incentive to cultivate economic development evenly and no commitment to the "utility function" of the household.  If you have a plan I would like to see it.  

Brandon:   I suppose you are you looking to remedy the age old problem of unemployment and thus destitution, in other words, practical Christianity?  I take it that you want to ensure people can participate in the economy no matter what, correct?  Ok fair enough, I can't really argue against that nor do I really want to, but I did have some questions about the social credit office operations and establishment.
 

Richard: Not to be cheeky, but I agree with Clifford Hugh Douglas that the goal is greater unemployment not less.  People work far too much because of usury and monopoly.  Women were not liberated when they were forced into the work force, leaving their children and the development of the household sector where children are raised and the science of refined consumption cultivated.  I agree with Douglas that full employment is entirely the wrong goal.  Technology exists so mankind can work less.  We do not work in order that we may work.  Man spontaneously wants to serve others, wants to improve things.  But we like to give it as a gift out of our own leisure time.  Social Credit provides purchasing power for the household so that household demand will be sufficient to make invention and entrepreneurship and art and craftsmanship and efficiency profitable -- so that all of the creative ideas of the common man -- the man from whom all innovations come -- will be unleashed. All men want to be deemed good in the eyes of other men.  I oppose the Marxist doctrine of "from each according to his means" -- because it will always be the state who decides what those means are (as social security retirement age creeps from 62 to 67 etc.)  And I oppose "to each according to his need" - because then again the state determines need -- and everyone will be envious if someone's child gets braces or another child gets a trumpet.  Let each get a Social Credit dividend check and then delve into the market place and make good, because under Social Credit, Horatio Alger Rags to Riches will again be a reality -- deflation and monopoly will be no more."     

Brandon:   First of all, is a national credit office even constitutional?  I know that might provoke a rather crucial debate, but I'm willing to have it if it means I can learn something. Ok, so let's put that on the shelf and just imagine that we've built the office and we're now in charge of issuing the credit. First of all, is there a difference between a treasury dollar issued by the treasury and the credit issued by the national credit office? I remember reading something about that, but I don't recall what the article said exactly. 
 

Richard: Social Credit as an idea to discuss is constitutional.  I don't think the Supreme Court would not allow Social Credit or the Debt Repudiation that I have in mind.  However Congress and the States have the power to amend the constitution.  It is constitutional to make Social Credit constitutional -- and that is what I would like to see smoothly done.           

Brandon:  Ok, so the operations part, how much and how often does the social credit office issue credit? Regarding the difference between a treasury dollar and social credit, how is a treasury dollar issued? I suppose that's through the national credit office or through the treasury itself? 

Richard: You are asking the questions of the science that will replace macroeconomics. Many people have their paychecks every two weeks.  Stock dividend are paid once a quarter.  If no advantages are found for one over the other relating to velocity of circulation or something, I would just as soon see the checks every every month, to help families now living hand-to-mouth meet their mortgage payments and buy winter coats for their children etc.    
 

The social credit automatic deposit will be like any check from a bank or the US Treasury. Perhaps one will be issued a social credit card which can be used in stores but also can be taken to a bank to transfer to an interest earning savings account or even cashed for money to stuff in a mattress. I would hope the Social Credit system would not allow corporations to arrange for automatic withdrawals from SCD accounts.          

Brandon:  Alright, so back to the operations question, I have some more thoughts on it just to clarify some things. I came up with a projection based on a scenario in which people are paid $300 a week, totaling 1200 a month times 12 months = $14,400 a year times the population of the US rounded to 300 million, equals a grand total of $432,000,000,0000!

Now again, this is just an example to get some thoughts going about what the realities of this system would be. 
 

Richard:  You are a very generous man -- considering that the productive capacity to satisfy all that demand has not yet been called forth.  There is such a thing as overwatering a garden.  Consider that whatever money is circulated through Social Credit Dividends will be spent and re-spent with a multiplier effect.  The Social Credit dividend is not supposed to carry the family, but to stimulate household demand so that "good times" in terms of jobs, paying down debt, rising standard of living, more successful enterprises and loss only if an entrepreneur has failed to provide the housewife with as good a mousetrap as his competitor.  The question is ultimately an experimental one.  The kind of reasoning you engage in above is essential, and we must remember that with repudiation of the national debt and much securitized mortgage debt the nation is going to need a sizable injection of social credit to move the wheels of industry.  The price takes some thought, but on the other hand even "flying by the seat of our pants" and plucking a number out of the air, say between $75 and $150 per person per month for starters would be a reasonable first trial  committed for a definite length of time so it will be treated as income and not as a windfall.  It may take as much as a year or two to get a handle on what the injection is doing -- we will certainly never be able to measure the good that it does, because each household has its own plan for their own family. 
 

If every citizen receives a dividend deposit of $208.33 that would amount to 10,000 in a year for a family of four.  If each receives $104.67 the family would have $5,000 more for spending, saving or paying off commercial credit (stores will still have their own credit cards) or their mortgages or business loans -- post repudiation of course,  and under the new one hundred percent reserve requirement  banking system.)  That's not far from what the banks take in NSF checks fines in a year.            

Brandon:  Put aside the figures for a minute because I have yet, another question that needs to be addressed before figures can really be drawn up. So my question is, since the money is a fiat money not really backed by anything so to speak, what exactly is the value of the dollar in the sense of a price mechanism?   For example, what is the dollar pegged to as a standard of relative value that we can use to calculate projections about how the monetized credit is distributed both in terms of velocity and quantity? 
 

Richard: Fiat electronic, fiat paper, silver certificate, gold certificate or gold coin -- the purchasing power of a currency can only be arrived at by statistical sampling, in the way pioneered by Irving Fisher, by having teams of test shoppers each buy a standardized "shopping basket" of items (food, clothing, rent, education, medical care, insurance etc.) but also the wage, house work, leisure and seeing how it changes over time.  There will be inflation  -- or deflation if after cutting off usury they system does not replace sufficient purchasing power.  But the important thing is that inflation will not be anywhere near the terrible thing it is today, because the new purchasing power will be coming directly to households and directly to employers -- and not to some investment project for which there may or may not be a market as we used to do it until investment dried up completely.   
 

The dollar is not pegged to anything, except what each household recipient chooses to buy with it.  The value of the dollar is what it buys -- and that is a subjective value of the consumer himself.  The econometrician will simply price the price of a typical bundle of goods a household might buy. 
 

Doctors may monitor a patients blood pressure and blood count and heart rate, but they do not have to know where all the blood is going and how much is running in every single vein to keep the human organism happy. 

Remember, the invisible hand of the market system will still direct production and move production to efficiency and service of the consumer  -- as long as the consumer has the purchasing power to call if forth.           

Brandon:  Previous suggestions were of course gold and silver weight, at other times perhaps a certain other raw commodity and then finally as a debt-instrument. We of the more enlightened kind decided it should become something of wealth creation, but we were stumped on how to do it exactly. 
 

Richard:  Money can be sustained in purchasing power simply by the government accepting the money in payment for taxes (legal tender status).  That will make the money acceptable and that amount of value will carry it to taking on the value of all other things that will be offered for sale to get hold of the dollars.  I have never been stumped on this because I am familiar with the principles of Pavlov and Skinner on how a neutral stimulus can be conditioned as a conditioned stimulus, how, for example, a chimp or a rat or a pigeon or a man can be established in "working for tokens" and "spending tokens."  In the great conflict between behaviorists and cognitive psychologists and between behaviorists and economists  I find that we value things because of conditioning, not because of innate tastes or a built in appreciation of "intrinsic value".  We learn the use of things and when learn when they are rendered worthless (like after a hyperinflation).      

Brandon:  Ok, so if I understand you correctly, despite my questions let me see if I've got this right:

 1. Banking is simply a savings and loan operation with absolute rules governing lending activity set forth by the state governments? Or would it be a national standard for all the states to adopt the same rules so that the system was uniform rather than disjointed? 
 

Richard: Yes. (There would also be commercial credit -- by a furniture store or appliance store or car dealership.) Banks would transform from fractional reserve banking to 100 percent banking.  More savings put in time deposit accounts would the source of new loans.  The States would regulate the banks -- each would be a laboratory.  If Kansas develops an especially effective and easy to manage system then other states will be free to drop their system for one that has proven to be better.  Nothing is disjointed.  The household receives money.  The banks can offer an interest rate if they agree to park their money for a long enough time so that the banker can lend the money and share any investment earnings with the borrower.  It is simple. There is no good reason to meddle with that.                
 

Brandon: 2.  Government is financed through taxes collected from households and businesses, does this apply to both the state and federal governments? If the federal government collects taxes and is hence managed on that basis, how does it supply funding for large scale infrastructure projects at 0 cost to the states? Doesn't the federal government depend on the states for the financing from taxes to spend on construction costs in the first place? In effect, is the federal government simply monetizing credit to finance the building of infrastructure separate from the tax money it typically collects to fund the general government?

Richard:  The Treasury has the printing press independent of the Social Credit Office's power to provide the dividends.  The rule that the people can vote for public services that are tax funded or they can vote for them inflation funded.  The representatives of the people would determine how much in any government money would go towards this or that.  I would hope that Congress returned to the practice that for every spending bill they would vote the specific supply that would pay for it, whether a household levy, a sales tax increase.  Of course if the public has more purchasing power they could also buy bonds -- but that for an emergency repair job or else for something that would pay back the extra interest with entry fees or users fees.  Social Credit is not part of the tax system.  Remember, Social Credit is not tax financed.  State and Federal Government will continue to tax until they vote to do otherwise.  I personally favor a transaction tax on finance and a the elimination of the income tax.  A head tax would be better than an income tax. Again -- Social Credit has nothing to do with what kind of public versus private mix the community wants to have.  Social Credit will work with a minimalist night watchman government or as much of a nanny government the voters want to provide for themselves  -- but it will be tax finance, not debt financed.      
 

Brandon:  3. Since exports have to be balanced wouldn't that make it impossible to get certain products or limit the distribution of other products simply to meet an imposed government quota? I understand you're trying to avoid the dumping of cheap exports into our domestic economy, but I thought that was the point of the tariff and the tax measures outlined in the constitution? Even still, why would we want to limit the sale of imports that aren't necessarily cheap imports, but in fact might be specialized products or staple products of another country that we always trade for despite not really having anything to trade with that country because they either don't have the purchasing power to buy from us, or they have more expensive money that encourages them to buy from us more than we sell to them?.

Richard:  This is an old debate in our country.  I tend to side with Calhoun.  We should impose a tariff only to raise taxes, not to keep out industry.  Foreign trade be brought into conformity with a policy of balanced trade -- exports should pay for imports.  Investment should not be allowed to migrate.  In settlement of our debt with China we should give them the shares of overseas factories owned by American corporations.  The international corporation will be a thing of the past.  Corporations will be allowed to import and export, but they will not produce in multiple countries. The true law of comparative value under which obtains mutual gain from trade according to specialization according to comparative advantage requires that neither labor no capital migrate to the country with absolute advantage  -- otherwise there will be a loser and the country with an absolute advantage in cheap slave labor or the freedom to dump pollution freely will see all labor and industrial capital migrate there -- and the country without absolute advantage to be reduced to destitution forcing slavery and pollution to match the country with the cheaper labor.     
 

Brandon:  In other words, why can't everybody buy from everybody else, even in different countries, without there having to be barriers. I think there is a clear difference between honest and fair trade and free trade as we understand it today, I wouldn't want to arbitrarily impose quotas on the market, if that market was operating under and honest system, that just doesn't seem fair, unless I've overlooked something perhaps?  
 

Richard: They can.  No one restricts trade of goods and services.  What is prohibited is international speculation, international finance, currency manipulation, carrying the tremendous debt of the US with easy credit for cheap foreign purchases so as to vanquish US domestic production with foreign slave labor backed with credit terms that enable the US to go deeper and deeper in red while domestic production is driven to the ropes competing with debt-financed pay-later consumption of foreign goods.  But again, Social Credit is not a scheme for regulating international trade.  I do point out that our usury system encourages the system where leakages of purchasing power given away to foreign countries that do not come back and spend the money here  -- so that we have a drain of imports > exports  that harms us in the same was as loans from the financial sector are less than the principal and interest that has to be paid back.  I am saying foreign trade must be re-regulated and from the standpoint of the benefit of the domestic economy -- not just the exporter, not just the importers, not just the futures markets, commodities markets but for the good off the national economy, rather than the international speculator.      

Brandon:  Simply put, How do currency exchange rates work under the credit system? How do I go to a foreign country and buy something and vice-versa? 
 

Richard:  We would have to get out from under the problem that there are more US dollars and dollar denominated deposits outside the US than in it.  Most of a nations currency should be in that nation.  The people of Ying wanting goods from the country of Yang must exchange their currency for the currency of Yang to buy the goods.  The relative cost of currencies will depend on supply and demand.  If Yang has all the good stuff then Ying will be sending all of the currency to buy the Yang product and the supply of their currency of the foreign exchange market.  Too much supply of the Ying currency looking for Yang currency and not enough Yang currency looking for Ying currency -- so the Yang currency will become expensive relative to the Ying currency -- the price of the Yang goods in the Ying stores will go up and less will be bought.  Meanwhile, the investing in the Ying with Ying currency captured by the Yang  money will be illegal, and so the Yang will have nothing to do but buy Ying products.  That is how trade should be balanced.  The trade does not have to be kept small, but it should be balanced.  There are people who if assigned the task and with the right incentives could design a trade policy and rules to accomplish balanced foreign trade.  The point is if the people want it and elect an administration to get it -- the test of the administration will be to see if it can organize the right team of economists and administrators to obtain the desired effect.    
     

Brandon:  Ok, now that I got that out of the way, let me get a little more intimate on this subject. It seems that if you give people just enough money to live on where they don't really have to work, don't you kind of create a welfare state? Not that it's a bad thing necessarily, but given my previous projection, doesn't that rate and volume of inflation jeopardize the purchasing power of the money and thus eventually threaten the stability of the entire system because you have an unsustainable rate of expansion of unlimited purchasing power built on a never ending demand for limited resources?  
 

Richard: We have created a welfare state under the present system.  Prisons are our a welfare state. Welfare checks are our welfare state?  Crime is a help-your-self welfare state redistribution program. 
 

People want to work.  I don't know one Mexican man who does not work or would not accept work if he could legally have it.  People want to work.  They have a hard time in a buyer's labor market.  The great crusher of all young people today -- middle and lower class is that no one wants their services, that there is nothing worthwhile to do, that they are going to go to school, learn a job, get a job, have the job go under, go back to school and learn another job and keep going.  This is hell.  Social Credit gives them a variety of prospective employers all bidding for their labor if they have the right stuff.  They can bid one employer against the other because the household sector is placing orders with their dollars and there are not enough good laborers so to fill them.  No one wants to be an idle bum  and no one wants to be a slave working until May to Pay the Government and until September to Pay the Rockefellers and Rothschilds -- before you start earning money for yourself.  
And, as I wrote above, the object of life is not work.  Sixty years ago all futurists were anticipating four hour days, tremendous blocks of leisure to go with our high technology labor-saving scientific production  -- all captured by the Usurers.  (In the '80 the Japanese were pioneering the robots that would free us for better lives -- but the Rockefellers preferred the slave model and Chinese drudges making our products while our citizens got their leisure in the form of moneyless unemployment.  My puritan ethics are not offended that people get social credit for nothing.  I am offended that about 40 percent of the price of things you buy is to pay the lender of the business loan that financed production.  With social credit that percent will be much smaller  -- profit will replace borrowing as the financing engine of economic growth. 

And if the people don't want to work  -- let the media make movies about workers doing a good job, about innovators about great contributors to society -- try to rebuild the man with the work ethic they have done so much to destroy. 
 

Brandon:  How do you reconcile supplementing purchasing power with social credit, but then having to justify banks being used to finance the building of businesses and homes presumably because people do not have enough purchasing power, despite social credit, which in turn forces them to borrow in order to do what they want in the economy? 
 

Richard: Money is the reward of production.  Without it no one produces.  The problem today is that people do work long and hard  -- overwork  and still lose the house -- because of deflation and monopoly pricing and outsourcing and because of the interest payment amount that is carried over to the price of the finished product.  People do not have enough money to reward their work with the fruits of their efforts.  Social credit is added so that the workers can profit earners can get their due -- and not come up short because the payroll and profits were short because the bank took it all in interest.  Social credit increases sales which increases demand for labor and hence wages and employment.  With more labor output goes up.  With more profit rolled-back into new equipment work productivity goes up -- and work productivity is the basis of raises and a higher standard of living.     
    

Brandon:  I understand your disdain for corporations, but why doesn't a company have the right to issue stock to people in order drum up funds for the business?  
 

Richard:  Partnerships are good.  Full liability is good. And only 51 %  controlling interest of stock must be owned by full liability partnership -- which requires new laws.    The other 49 percent can be common stock -- since those investors do not make the decisions and so they are not liable.  When a corporation is taken to court, I propose, the 51 percent are on the hook for full damages -- just as if they had poisoned a customer themselves.  Also, no US corporation will be a legal person any longer -- and they certainly will not be allowed to make campaign contributions.   Corporations are not necessary in the computer age when people can organized a venture with the internet.  Real people can do that now, without the giant doing it. 
 

Brandon:  What about LLC's? What if two companies wanted to do business as some other 3rd company, but wanted to retain separate balance sheets and liability concerns as a member of the LLC? What if a person wanted to build a bigger business than what they could as a proprietorship or partnership and needed a more unique and flexible business arrangement? What if they wanted to do this without risking their home or entire personal savings from a business failure, in which they are only held liable for a certain reasonable amount that would typically be borrowed in order to start the business. I mean, after all, why else is liability an issue? It's an issue because people do not want to owe more than they can afford for failing in the economy and having that sort of protection, under a reasonable set of circumstances, tends to encourage entrepreneurship rather than hindering it because of barriers to entry and life altering risk concerns. Am I wrong?   
 

Richard: If they are that enterprising they will adjust to the constraints and streamline to 51-49 partner-stockholder arrangement.  Where those who don't want full liability can own up to 49 percent of the firm.  And those who want to to put their superior skill running the company without being exposed to liability, they can get the 51 percent to hire them as management rather than owner.  In fact a hired manager could also be a 49 percent owner -- as long as the 51 percent who hired him and take full responsibility for his decisions trust his judgment. 

And did you ever think that the bigger returns coming from the more high risk ventures -- big game hunting for the international speculator really didn't have to be that dangerous  -- for example getting involved with staging a coup in a country to get a more favorable deal from the new dictator  -- that is not what all-domestic US corporations are going to be doing any more.  Instead, a corporation will say to a foreign country. 
 

But the most pertinent answer is that under social credit there will be the household demand that has always been deficient in the US economy -- without building up a loan-call day of reckoning down the pike.  With social credit most businesses will succeed.  More entrepreneurs will succeed than are succeeding now.  Fewer will be failing.  And they will fail because their product was not competitive, NOT because of a contraction of the money supply.

Brandon:   It occurs to me that anybody should be able to make a business with their own money without having to borrow from a bank, but that only those people who are qualified or have thoroughly thought out a business plan and put it in writing would actually be able to create a business. Your system seems to support a more just consumption cycle, but unfortunately it is just that, a consumption cycle that is not organized for sustainability beyond the sustainability of the monetary system that helps run the economy smoothly under your social credit model. It has all the features one would like to have from an economic system, that of benevolence, freedom, and creativity, but I think it's missing that all important sustainability characteristic that is often lost in the mix in an effort to make a more just economic system. Would you disagree? 
 

Richard: With social credit Edison would have been able to go to people who believed in him and they could have pooled their money and bankrolled his early inventions.  With the success of the Model T Ford was in a position to start other ventures.  Disney went from successful cartoons to experimenting with amusement parks.  Increased profitability.  The most beautiful and charming ventures have failed -- after getting usury financing -- because of a recession where the money authorities have contracted the M1 money supply.  That kind of contraction will never happen again under SC because the same great flow will flow out of each household and into the shops of every town and city.  Big cities will have concentrations of social credit expenditure.  They will see revivals of their downtown areas.  Homemaking and leisure will increase  -- a good thing  --  people will have space -- freed from debt slavery -- to devote to politics, recreation, garden clubs, new institutions of unity etc., more parks , more public swimming pools  -- the money that would have gone to war or disaster relief or whatever else mass-murdering international banking could devise.  (If you have any doubt about who is responsible for 9-11, then perhaps you should put this letter aside until you have looked into it  -- because that is the one fact that makes replacing the current Usury system a moral imperative.        
 

Brandon:   Regarding my point about the unsustainable rate of expansion of unlimited purchasing power built on a never ending demand for limited resources, is there such a thing as a too much purchasing power? If that is the case, then what purpose do banks really serve? The only real reason people would borrow money is because they don't have the purchasing power to do anything productive in the economy, but under social credit it would seem that the average person, given my previous budget projection, would have an extra $14,400 a year income! I don't think anybody would need to borrow money with that kind of purchasing power, so why the pretense of having banks around to lend money to people that already have the purchasing power to consume, but simply need additional income to save up to start a business? 
 

Richard: Man is part of the ecosystem.  We speak of the economy as if it is self-contained, but in fact it is a component within the biosphere.  Men manipulate the environment to provide for themselves.  Once there were hunters and gatherers -- eating berries and whatever else they found growing on the forest floor and  killing an occasional animal.  What as a sustainable population then.  But mankind adapted.  First the discovery of seed planting increased the numbers sustainable on the land.  Next came irrigation projects.  Then breeding and domestication of animals.  The wheel. Science enables us to do more with less.  So far our science has been diverted to missiles, H-bombs, shock and awe -- a waste of human brainpower that could have been working for the Fords and Edisons and Buckminster Fullers or the Walt Disneys  and maybe Steve Jobs -- doing more with less  --  we still haven't tried living under ground, or making cars that float two feet off the ground so we don't need to cover all this good farm land with paved roads -- or the vast excavations that could build water systems that would provide north America with all of the water necessary to populate all that empty government land in the US.   It is not the middle classes who destroy land.  It is dire poverty, being so hungry and hopeless that the environment no longer matters.

As I said, your award of Social Credit is far more generous than I think is prudent  -- given multiplier effects and given the purpose of social credit.  The purpose of social credit is to originate demand in households and to provide enough purchasing power to pay for the providing of people with a better environment and better health and provision within that environment.   
 

We are learning animals.  When we reach a constraint with either adapt to it or we find a way of getting around it.  But no group of academics with Rockefeller grants are going to tell us what can be sustained and what cannot  -- because the Rockefeller NGOs do not know what adaptations free people with great means at their disposal are able to come up with.  The people who talk about sustainability or about overpopulation -- are just looking for rationalizations for not cutting them in on some of the wealth pie. 
 

Why are the banks necessary?  Because the banks pool capital (peoples savings) so that bigger projects can be undertaken in the private sector -- homes for young families that can't pay cash but want a house while their children are still young.  There is total freedom to try anything as long as you can convince a lending officer at a bank or a bunch of wealthy people on the internet to back you. 
 

But as long as we are kept on the short leash of tight M1 in order to "fight inflation" but in reality to keep us to a bear minimum of capability so that we do not compete with the Elite Loop who always have easy money from swaps with the Fed of securities and money at the discretion of the big investment banks  -- we are living in a slave society, on slave rations and with no future.               
 

Brandon:   Perhaps initially the banks would be used, but I think eventually they would go by the wayside as anything but a middleman between the people and the national credit office, despite the draw of an interest rate for depositing money, am I wrong? Just admit it, you want to get rid of banks and institute a national credit office to issue money in place of the banks and you want the treasury to agree to monetize the credit issued by the national credit office as a way of legitimizing the whole social credit operation, which in effect, cancels any notion of lending money in the first place, am I right? ;)
 

Richard: The need for people to accumulate large sums for large undertakings will ever be operating.  Social Credit, being a small check to everyone and nothing else does not and cannot fulfill or compete with that function.   
 

Social credit monetizes social credit.  Once the money is in circulation it is either spent or saved (in a mattress or family vault) or deposited in a time savings account where it is pooled with other money and may be loaned to people wanting to build production facilities or buy machines or build houses or private transportation or robotics repair or whatever.  The household reigns supreme over the market economy and the entrepreneur has all the people in the world and all the resources in the world to see if he can put together a good or service that people will buy leaving him with a profit.  Under Social credit that will be happening a lot more than it is happing now.       
      

Brandon:   Don't get me wrong, I don't really see anything wrong with that per se, other than basing the system on a constant consumption cycle, it's certainly better than paying thieves to loot us like they do now, but as you can plainly see I have some questions and concerns that I would like to try and hash out with you, if you're willing, which I really hope you are. Think of it like an intelligence operation where you have to teach the new young buck rookie how to handle life on the job, or whatever scenario of your choosing that you see fit to envision. I want to do this because I really want to come up with a better system or at least the means to achieve a better system through some sort of transitional system that bridges the gap between an old paradigm and a new one.  
 

Richard:  I see no constant consumption cycle.  I see the composition of consumption changing.  I see consumption really as depreciation of stock -- that has to be replaced, perhaps with an entirely new means of satisfying that personal utility function of the individual.  Consumption can be high -- or, if people have a rage for asceticism, it can be low -- and saving and investment higher.   
 

Social Credit can be "Small is Beautiful" but it does not have to be.  I think in terms of family households. Communes are always a thought in the back of the mind of anyone who really enjoyed living in a college dormitory -- so there may be efficiencies of scale in larger groups -- but that would take another revolution of tolerance.  Nor is the system against wealth per se.  The wealthy are able to try out new living technology that may become available to others later on.  No need for envy.  But the wealthy will be the innovators, the savers, the ones who could spot the entrepreneur and inventor to bet on.  And the money would be possible just from donations -- once school children funded the building of a battleship with their collections  -- once we were the most generous people in giving aid to the poor of other countries and coming to relief in disasters -- we the middle class that is.  Social Credit is the path back to that kind of world, that kind of middle class affluence.  The debt incurred at each step in the past has largely been excessive if not completely unnecessary.  We haven't dreamed of what we could do set free of that constraint.               

Brandon:   I would really appreciate your thoughts on these matters and hopefully you can follow all my line of questioning and address them accordingly without getting bogged down in too much minutia! LOL, well, I look forward to your reply, Agape.

Brandon  
 

Richard: I appreciate your questions and criticisms.  
 

What part of social credit would you keep?  What part discard? 
 

Someone wrote:

Making MAN a slave is not the remedy and if we want to be free, we have to remove everything that is enslaving us. It's a big job but we are the only ones who can do it and the more of us that do it, the easier the job will be.
. . .

Eastman reply:

New money never enters as a market transaction.  It is "thin aired" into existence.  The only question is who "thin-airs" it and who gets to be first spender and what fee (interest rate, repayment of principal) does he have to pay for that privilege.

Right now the international private money power have arranged the economy so that new money is "thin aired" by the financial system and the borrowers have to pay to the "lender" ("lender" is a misnomer -- because the bank is not lending from a static stock that already existed and that was accumulated through saving -- rather it is thin-aired and it cost the banker nothing to create it.  Real LENDING is when someone has saved a stock of something and they lend it, whether at interest or not.  Charging interest and demanding an equivalent amount of purchasing power on money that was simply "thin aired" is a criminal racket  -- or should be considered so and defined as such by law.

Social Credit merely takes the power to "thin-air" new money from the financial sector and instead arranges that every citizen have an equal share of the new "thin-air" money originated in his household -- free and clear (no interest to be paid, not principal to be "repaid")  In this way household demand will direct the economy, there will not be ever accumulating debt, the financial sector will not suck up all the wealth of the economy, and the market system will finally be able to operate as Adam Smith envisioned - with the entrepreneur serving household demand and being rewarded with ample profit to continue production or even expand if he is doing a good job of satisfying the consumer at lowest cost  or else he will suffer loss for bad entrepreneurship and will revert to the work force  -- which is how the system should work but never does under the unjust expropriating usury system.

On 19/11/2010 10:00 AM, David wrote:

Yep! you are right about this issue Dick ~ Loans created out of thin air ~ create  deposits; which in turn create debt at no cost to the loan sharks who own & control the system ~ put in simplified terms. Check books still play a major role in this financial chicanery.........not hard cash money printing presses.

"Iconoclast"

Dick Eastman:  You chose the right name for yourself.  Let us smash the icon of the monopoly power of a few financiers to create the new money and to decide who gets it and to extort payment of principal and whatever the traffic will bear in interest (with the ability to jack up the price covertly through a policy of deflation) and set up the virtuous system of giving out the "thin air" money to everyone equally with no strings attached. 

================

Pellli reply:
 
"The only question [about new money] is who "thin-airs" it and who gets to be first spender and what fee (interest rate, repayment of principal) does he have to pay for that privilege".
 

But the only question for me is who wants some of my "thin-air" money?

Dick Eastman: Everyone who works works for the things money -- and only money -- will buy.  The thin air money is legal tender -- which means it can be used to pay taxes.  It is also still the dollar unit that everyone is accepting in payment -- and which even if people lose confidence in it they will just spend all the faster.    

I need someone to paint my house and if anyone's interested I will buy the paint and materials and you only need to show up.

Dick Eastman: You will buy the paint with money -- and the paint store will not care whether you dollar was originally "born" as a "thin-aired" bank loan as is usual today or as a "thin-aired social credit dividend that originates under the full ownership and command household members.

If you can bring an extra ladder that would be good as I only have one. I will all but guarantee that you will be the one that gets to be first spender of the money I will pay you "IF" you do a satisfactory job and clean up your mess afterwards.

Dick Eastman:  Actually YOU would be the first spender when you give him some of your social credit payment to help pay your house.  He would be the second spender.


And there will be no fee (interest rate, repayment of principal) that you will be required to pay for the privilege of painting my house and making this "thin air" money.

Dick Eastman:  That's right.  If you have a house you want painted and your receive your social credit allotment of new money to inject into the economy you are fee to spend it on the services of a housepainter if that is what you value most of the things you can buy with that amount of the new money.   It is called the market system.  All we are doing is fixing it so the banker does not have monopoly power as the man who rents out  the medium of exchange which costs him nothing to provide.

I refer to this type of transaction as my "get a job" philosophy!

Dick Eastman:  You still get a job or start a business under the social credit system.  The only difference between that system and the one we have now is that when you get a job or start a business you have a good chance of the job continuing to exist and of the business making money -- rather than succumbing to "interest death" in a usury induced deflation/recession.  Social Credit makes the market system work the way we all have been taught the market system should work  -- where the better and less expensive mousetrap brings success to those who produce it and sell it thanks to the rule of household demand -- of sufficient purchasing power to sustain the national economy.

====================

Highlights of Another Discussion about Social Credit and the system it replaces.

Was Cheryl talking about what should be or what makes sense rather than what is being done?  I think she is advocating what ought to be, not describing what is.  She also describes historical examples -- Lincoln greenbacks -- which are closer to what we should have today.  I think she is right.

In practice today it is the open market purchases of securities which gives Goldman Sachs and other FOMC market participants in these transactions fresh money is one mechanism for putting new reserves in the banks which may or may not result in commercial banks getting fresh deposits added to the money in circulation which after many transactions ends up expanding the money supply by a multiple of the amount that was added from the open market sale by the Fed  -- this multiple above and beyond the original injection being the new money that is "thin aired."  Of course Goldman dictates to the New York Fed the terms of the open market transaction -- it is not really a market  -- merely a "money market account" of the big money families -- interest is paid on the securities when they are held  -- and Goldman etc will withdraw from their Fed "money market account" when they can make more money on investments (say in new factories in China or in weapons production for war against Islam) than will be earned in interest from the bonds  (of course these rich families also own the banks which own the Fed -- so they still get the interest earnings from that channel even after they have sold their bonds to the Fed for the new loanable funds).  Social credit eliminates the bonds and liquidity changing hands  -- no more open market operations by the Fed.  Instead. all new money originates in credits to household social credit accounts.

I would replace the Fed and the IRS with a national treasury system that pays out the social credit dividends (unless we want the states to do that) and which collects the taxes for whatever public goods congress approves and the president signs (or that overrides the presidents veto).  Social credit will be received like a return of overpayment to the IRS, like a negative income tax that goes to everybody.  It will be under the administration according to rules laid out by Congress.    But there could be a better way.  It is the general idea that we are considering here.


====

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Cheryl wrote:

Yes, according to Bill Still's research as shown in his documentary The Secret of Oz, the question of who thin airs something is obvious -- it is the government that has the authority and credibility to do so, not some private family across the ocean.

The government thin-airs the money, as Lincoln did with his greenbacks and as America did with colonial script and 4 other times in our history when we issued our own money.  The government thin-airs the money and uses it to pay its government servants, road builders, army, congress, whatever.  Then this money goes out into the economy.

Dick Eastman:  This puts first spender power in the hands of politicians, which is what social credit avoids. Whomever has "first spender" rights to the "thin air" new money is sovereign.  This can either be the financial sector (rule by wall street), the government sector (Lincoln running a Civil War economy -- although he also did some borrowing), or the household sector  being sovereign. If the government gets to be first spender - then corporations will court government -- pay for expensive campaigns for friendly politicians -- and will concoct a nice war -- so that corporations don't have to go through all that trouble of finding what kind of clothe or washing machine or hair spray or mousetrap the housewife wants -- just produce the bombs, so the government can drop them on some enemy and then come back and buy some more -- real simple      

The second question is the amount of thin-air money that is issued.  If too much is issued, then there will be inflation.  If not enough is issued, then there will be deflation and depression.  You cannot have an economy without a unit of trade, i.e. money.

Dick Eastman: Did you know that there is always inflation when "thin-air" money is introduced -- more claims to the economic pie, means smaller pieces per dollar or more dollars per slice.  But did you also know that under the usury system where loans bring new money but payment of principal plus interest takes away more than the original loan introduced so that there is always increasing deflation.  The inevitable deflation under the usury system is what causes recessions.  Big new debt-financed war, or unemployment benefits, or bailouts may inject new money into the domestic economy (although the bailouts of the banks have not really done so) may inject money to counter the deflationary drift -- but eventually the paying to the financial sector of principal and interest will eat up the boom of the new debt-financed spending.

Inflation is bad only for savers locked into a fixed interest savings account and people on fixed pensions or people holding bonds that pay off in the future when dollars will purchase less.

However when social credit is established and is paid out at a certain rate each period -- markets will adjust -- prices will be more stable than ever.

But even if this did not happen -- inflation is something we could live with.  Did you know that recessions only end with inflation, with rising prices from new demand.  And it is not the inflation that causes the next recession  -- that view is the old von Mises mal-investment theory and it is false.  What really causes recession is a failure of demand and a failure of demand is caused by the constant drift to deflation resulting from injections of new loans being smaller than the leakages of the paying of principal and interest on old loans.  Social credit eliminates the eating away of new money  - by interest and principal drain to the financial sector.  Instead under social credit the purchasing power originates in the household sector.


Now let us look closely at inflation.  Inflation of prices resulting from too many dollars chasing too few goods, as we all know, harms savers who are earning a fixed interest rate on their savings; it also robs purchasing power from people on fixed pensions; and most important to the elite -- it takes from people who own bond wealth -- just as the current systems tendency toward deflation gives bond holders a windfall of unearned and uncontracted purchasing power -- the dollars being "paid back" each having more purchasing power and being harder to acquire than the dollars that were originally lent -- apart from the reward to the lender of the interest payment.

But under social credit there will be no leakage of principal and interest to the usurer for each dollar in circulation.  And with leakages less, the tendency towards deflation will be less and the social credit injections can be much smaller.  The only leakage will be uninvested savings and government taxation when government runs a surplus and does not spend all that it taxes.  Social credit payments can then be very small and the economy will still be deflation-proof and recession-proof.

And if inflation should occur it would not be a major disaster because the householders are first spenders -- they get the benefit of inflation that now goes to the pet corporations that the investment banks favor with new money loans.

In today's economy all but a tiny percent are debtors.  The great holders of bond wealth are certainly deserving of some inflation.  They were certainly pro-inflation in the late 1970's when the middle class had savings to rob.  Why not let it be their turn for once -- that is if the social credit office economists happen to set the social credit dividend too high.  (The field of economics will be transformed by the switch to the social credit system  -- Irving Fisher and price indexes will come back in style  and the question of the optimum social credit dividend  amount will be a question.  But there will be no right answer.  Mistakes will not be fatal.   Social credit makes inflation a very small and a very temporary problem.

Remember, inflation does not cause recession. It eats up bond wealth but that does not harm the real economy, the interaction of the household and business sectors.  Bond wealth adds nothing to production.  Remember, we will not longer be dependent on the grace of international lenders to keep our businesses afloat against the deflation/recession tendency.  Social credit will end that tendency as it ends debt slavery.


England got along famously for about 600 years on tally sticks.  Bill Still shows how this worked.

Rome got along for about 600 or 700 years on cheap brass coins, and built an empire that way.  Julius Caesar changed the coins to gold with his image on the coins, and killed the system.  People hated it, the Senate hated it, and Bill Still says Julius Caesar was assassinated because of it, but the gold coins remained and helped to bring down Rome and its economy.

IOW, the gold standard is crap.

DE:  Except that it makes very poor fertilizer.

Bill Still spends a lot of time discussing the election between William Jennings Bryan and (the other guy?) -- when Bryan was advocating for silver coins, known as "free silver."  His slogan, "you shall not put a crown of thorns on labor, you shall not crucify us on a cross of gold."


DE:  Actually Bryan was owned by the silver miners  -- the real populist  -- or people's party of the time advocated pure fiat money -- the Lincoln greenback of which you wrote above.  The cross of gold was real enough and his arguments against the gold standard  -- but switching to a cross of composite silver and gold is not much of an improvement  -- especially as the fractional reserve banking practiced still enabled the financial sector to expand and contract credit at will.  J.P. Morgan created the depressions that led people to beg for the Federal Reserve system, which was misrepresented as "progressive" legislation.

The people were clamoring for silver coins.  There was no money.  You cannot run an economy when there is no money.  The Banksters dry up the money supply and deliberately cause depression, and so people are forced to sell their assets for pennies on the dollar.  This is what they have been doing for centuries.

Earl Reese

To compel a man to subsidize with 
his taxes the propagation of ideas which  he 
disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. 
Thomas  Jefferson

 

Larry and Richard   —  Gold  versus  Social Credit  — final part. 
 

Larry:  What should our response/attitude be to the threat of total economic collapse?

Richard:  People who buy the gold are getting a metal that will not circulate for buying and selling until after the economy collapses 

Larry:  I'm having a tough time with this statement you've made.  First of all, what do you mean by "collapses?"

Richard:  The economy collapses – under the present rules which no politician is seeking too change --  when foreign and upper-loop American rich lenders determine that the US cannot make its interest payments or is on the verge of not being able to meet its obligations.  At this point government debt-financing will become impossible.  The US will not longer be able to fund government services through loans as they have been doing.  The government will have to cut its services except for what it can pay for through taxes – except what is paid for through taxes will have to go towards payment of those creditors for interest payments on what has already been loaned.   The government will tax but it will not spend.  The pubic too will feel the collapse as all business becomes unprofitable due to the complete loss of purchasing power from government.   

The people will not longer be able to import food and clothing on credit as we have been doing without realizing it.  (When  we got second mortgages on our homes and refinanced our homes with companies that sell their mortgages for securitization  -- we were in fact getting loans in order to buy clothes and feed ourselves.  Our equity is gone, our homes foreclosed.  We can no longer get food that way.  We have to provide for ourselves without the aid of government – the government is from now on nothing but a tax collector so the debt can be paid  -- the IMF will dictate all policy in every area.   At such a time we will no longer have Babylon to support us .  And there we will be.  No factories left.  No small farms  -- the foreigners own the agribusiness.  We have no skills  -- we have been in the service economy so long that we can’t produce.  Those who know how to produce are in rest homes.  Sons have not learned their fathers trade because their father have had no trade.

With all credit gone – with no money in circulation – all of the organization and institutions that make our modern society will stop functioning.  The organic economy will die for want of blood in its veins – the complex division of labor will not be possible because there will not be purchasing power enough to sustain all of the interconnected organs of production and service.  With the means of producing plenty – we will perish for want of the tokens with which we pay each other for services,  And most certainly, gold will not be able to replace the credit money that is now gone.
 

And guess who the real heroes will be then.  Guess who the most valuable man will be when Credit Babylon falls.  The most valuable man will certainly not be the financial accountant or the corporate lawyer or the stock jobber or the investment banker or the gold dealer  -- the most valuable man will be the Mexican peasant in the US.  Because they alone know how to build their own house, to live close to the land, to make things grown, to get by with less.  We will look to them for the way to becoming self-sufficient again  -- but of course without a money economy  an extended division of labor cannot exist --  an economy without purchasing power is like a computer when there is no power of any kind to operate it.  
 

Gold is sterile.  All it really is for is buying your way out of the country after it has fallen  -- as I have said before  -- and for outbidding your neighbor for the morsel of food that will either keep your child or his child alive.     
 

Gold is merely one step from barter – the final collapse of the modern economy – where you have to find someone who has something you want  and who wants something that you have and don’t value as much as you do in order to make a trade.  Gold – when people have confidence that it will be accepted – enables you to buy something from someone who doesn’t  want any of your possessions in return.  He can accept your gold and then go look for someone who does have something he wants and is likely to accept the gold for it.  But you can’t rebuild a country with gold.  Only credit builds a country  -- and that is what has been stolen from us.
 

Economic collapse is when everyone is suddenly unable to provide for themselves and there is no longer any money to keep the great systems of production and provision operating.  It is an atomic war without the explosion and the radiation  -- but in the end just as devastating. 

I remember the 1950s about survival after an atomic war “Panic in the Year Zero” with Ray Miland and Frankie Avalon come to mind --  in which the real problems that would be faced were never considered.  When the collapse comes you can have your gold and your guns  -- but it will do not good  -- without domestic production and processing, without imports  so many score of millions will perish. 
 

It is madness to invest your money in gold against that hour – when you can keep your dollars and spend them and work with the social creditors to prevent the collapse  -- to take away the credit power  -- to create our own purchasing power and distribute it among ourselves right now  -- to avert a collapse.   People who listen to Beck and Celente and the other gold sellers pretending to be your friend  are throwing away the one thing that can save them  -- purchasing power with which to provide reinforcement for the continuation of the operation the economy that keeps us alive  -- and which cannot be kept alive if the dollar collapses and all that remains for to finance commerce is our individual hoardings of gold.  And of course not even our dollars can sustain the economy – because we have been living on international credit and have while we have been feeding and clothing ourselves with foreign products paid for by second mortgage equity that is now gone and while were were doing that our industrial base just crumbled away – even as the financiers took our savings and our tax money going to pay the interest on the national debt  and used to it build productive capacity in China so they could produce with labor of a few dollars a day rather than the rate of wages in this society.  Yes, under free trade where capital can migrate and goods can flow without protectionism  -- wages will everywhere equalize  --  we will be living on the real wage the Chinese get  -- except that we are no longer an industrious people – having been corrupted by living bank credit attached to our assets and demanding our payment of compound interest on top of the principal of the loan. 

If there was an honest politician who was also educated  -- we might have been warned   -- we might have been lead out of this trap  -- but we were not.  Our elite has accepted the rules  -- because High Finance can afford to pay off a few million traitors in order to take down a nation of 300 million.
 

And yes, we have every right to repudiate all debt owed to international  organized crime  -- just as the Greeks and the Irish have that right.  Just as the Iraqis had that right under their elected leader Saddam Hussein who had closed the central bank and was attempting to build his nation without the interference of international bankers. 
 

Larry:    Do you mean that our society is so broken that dealers cannot even trade with metals any longer? 
 

Richard:  I mean that if we reach the point where gold is the only money people will accept – that a large fraction of the American population will die because the economy that feeds us  -- and even now it can’t feed all of us because we have become dependent on debt-financed imports which will no longer be forthcoming .  If gold becomes the medium then we are dead because the economy that keeps this large population alive cannot operate on that little purchasing power  - it can’t operate without the flow of credit that keeps the Zeppelin in the air.

In the collapse the gold will remain money  -- but little people will not be able to hold on to it.  It will be taken by them rather than spent by them.  Only people with private armies will have gold.  It will be a return to feudalism  --  gold will be for the aristocracy – we will be the debt-slave serfs.  But, yes, gold will still be honored  -- aren’t you glad?   
 

Larry:   If we reach a point where the banks all have to close, and businesses simply cannot do business any longer, then I'm not sure even most barter commodities will be of any use.  People may resort to looting and will have no interest in gold.  Before such a time,  most gold hoarders will have already sold their supplies, since they will perceive that they need to get the value out of the gold while there's still time.  That point, I clearly see. 
 

Richard:  If we let the collapse happen people would barter to the end – except in contexts when one party is in a position to take from the other with reasonable impunity.  But production will end.  One again those to try to revert to a productive peasant life growing food to feed themselves and to trade for other items of need  -- woolen socks and so forth  -- will find that the bandits get it all  -- and in come cases the bandits will let the peasants live if they pay tribute in food or slave labor  -- and so the old middle ages return  -- while the financial elites how are now enjoying billions in real wealth  -- and ownership of factories around the world  -- will be the gods of the planet.  They won’t miss us and they won’t write an honest history of what we were really like and what we were really capable of when free of their depredations.   
  

Larry:    A great deal depends upon the speed of the collapse, the intensity, and the government response.  However, before this happens, in all likelihood, there will be a time when the gold has increased in value to be traded for what paper money is still left, and those who were smart enough to invest in physical metals may be holding the rest afloat. 
 

Richard:   I’m sorry, Larry.  With the collapse of the US economy and the plight we will be in without credit and with creditors thinking they have a right to vacate the current occupants and resettle the US all over again with their aristocracy firmly in charge from then on  --  I can’t see how you can be worrying about  what advantage your gold hoard can get you.  My point restated:  If you have reached the point where gold is your only reliance then you are likely going to be dead soon and if you live it will be as a slave  -- it is a future not worth planning to adjust to.

For Americans of the lower –loop who will not receive any consideration from the money power now absolute masters of a bankrupt people with no legal standing under the master’s rules of bankruptcy – we can’t allow ourselves even to think of accepting that future.   If the economy is crushed and the creditors are moving in with their plans to do with this country  -- with giant estates of the rich and a sustainable servant population to keep it smoothly running for them -  are you going to be going around with your gold trying to buy yourself a little freedom, a little consideration?
 

Only a slave will prepare for living in that world.  Every man and woman of worth – of golden hearts and character – will put out all of their effort, all of their dollars now to prevent this world enslavement from taking place.
 

And the consequences of collapse that I am painting are not fanciful.  After the fall of the Soviet Union millions died.  Millions died in Iraq when that country was placed under sanctions by Bush Sr and Bill Clinton and Bush Jr. up to the invasion.  People are starving and freezing right now.  Old people are dying – rest homes are killing old people and concealing the fact.  The worth of a human being is being forgotten in the brutalization and desensitization that comes with hunger and hopelessness.  We are already in the collapse  -- but not so far yet that we cannot reverse it if we rebel against the criminal conspiracy that has put us where we are.
 

Repudiate.  We owe these criminals nothing.  They owe us everything in restitution for the wars and depressions and other crises they have arranged.  We can provide our own debt-free purchasing power that will revive our production, or existence as people who can provide for themselves.  Who can live within their means while always expanding their means through good management and the banishing of the speculators and credit monopolist bankers.   [I differentiate between speculators and entrepreneurs --  the entrepreneur leads the production sector  -- the speculator is a product of a dysfunctional financial sector where the power to create money and a monopoly of credit has bred the most ruthless corruption and counter-productive exploitation. 
 

Larry:    Those individuals can just as easily turn around and blame people like you for convincing people not to buy the metals when there was still time! 
 

Richard:  And I will answer them telling them that they brought the calamity on themselves by giving up the god of economic cooperation and trust that we can all work it out if they get behind reforming the economy that is keeping us alive.  You might as well drain your family members of all their blood and buy gold with it, as take the precious dollars for want of which we are dying,  so you can buy some accommodation for yourself  after the return of the stone age.  If you want to save your family then save this economy in the only way it can be saved  -- with repudiation, debt-free fiat currency and social credit.   We have to save the dollar  -- the purchasing power distributed to citizens in this country  -- and do so by breaking all  the taboos of banking and finance  -- we must repudiate, take back what has been stolen from us by fraud.  We are dying for want of purchasing power  -- and our starvation of he means of payment is part of a deliberate plan by a ruthless  combination of foreign enemies and domestic sell-outs.   We have to fight now – to avoid the collapse and the post-collapse world that gold will not make any more tolerable.   If after the collapse someone comes up to me and says:  “Richard, I could have bought gold that would have enabled me to feed my family etc.  if only you populists  hadn’t  talked me out of listening to the libertarians and conservatives who said to buy gold  --  and if only you hadn't talked me into buying  from my neighbors to keep them in business and investing in domestic production  -- I would have gold to pay people to take food out of other peoples mouths so I can survive. “   Then I will tell them.  “Your problem is that you did not listen to all that I told you.  You needed to get together with your neighbors and with the victims of criminal finance all over the country and world and repudiated the debt slavery system  - and led in the banishing of the money changers from government and media and  commerce  -- and having the people simply provide for free the purchasing power that for want of which the nation perished.  Things did not have to come to this.  You could have been a good citizen and stood with your neighbors against a ruthless enemy seeking your ruin  -- but instead you listened to Glenn Beck and Celente  who told you that the world was doomed and it would be very man for himself and that only gold would have influence on people in the future.  Well, sir, here is the very hell you chose for yourself.  The very consequence of your selfishness and greed – your wish to gain at the expense of your neighbor through the worship of the golden idol. 
 

Larry:   The vast majority of the people out there can afford to buy a silver dime, for a dollar.  Most of them don't care, and by some power beyond my comprehension, they end up able to afford cigarettes and alcohol!  I cannot tell you how many times I've heard, "I'm broke!"  while they're smoking a cigarette.  The pack of cancer-sticks ran about three silver dimes.
 

Richard:   It exasperates me that  you are completely by-passing all discussion of whether there are means of averting the catastrophe  in order to make sure that someone has a few silver dimes  --when all the gold coins and silver coin and bullion in the country are not enough to  keep the engines of our national life support  functioning.  Certainly, the outer-loop elites don’t want us to change the rules of the game and hand out fresh purchasing power to keep us little people of the household and domestic production sectors “in the game.”  The moneyed elites have built their portfolios to profit from our catastrophe – and not just with gold  -- they are selling gold too fools who listen to Beck/Celente – and using the money to buy the real wealth – the non-financial tangible wealth – of this country  -- our lands and houses and businesses and resources and patents and copyrights and inventions and organizations and ports and roads and airports.  They are taking it all by cheating  -- by manipulating money and credit  over which they never should have had any control!!!!!  And we can save ourselves if we get together and stop them.  But your concern is that after our nation and world are destroyed that you will have enough gold to buy – not produce or grow  -- food out of  other peoples mouths. 
 

Let me summarize:  If we let the collapse happen and hedge against it by buying gold, millions will die and those who survive will be either an aristocracy with the power of gods, and a servant people who will exist only at the sufferance of their absolute masters.  If that is the world you want to have some gold in  -- let me give you this advice  -- spend your money not on gold, but on the professional training  of a successful prostitute on the best way to lick an ass – because that is going to be the only coin that buys anything for the surviving lower classes in the post-United States of America world that is on the way unless we prevent it with the measures I am advocating. 
 

Larry:     Can you imagine what would happen if all the silver and gold gave smokers the same kick as nicotine . . . and they all had silver the way they now  have the tobacco?!  Can you imagine all that silver  being pumped back into circulation?  
 

Richard:  Cigarettes have been used as money in prison camps and in occupied countries after wars.  But I don’t see your point. 

Larry:    Now, you can tell me they'd hoard it, but I see nothing wrong with that.  Yes, I have sold some of my gold and silver without a collapsing economy.  it was because my own economy was collapsing!   
 

Richard:  Is owning gold an investment?  Does it add to production?  Does it keep someone employed.  Does it reward an entrepreneur who has organized production to provide things for consumers?  No.  It does  just the opposite.  To get that gold you had to send your dollars out of the country where they will do no American any good – where they will be used to borrow a foreclosed house to turn it into a rental property where the rent will not be going to a foreign landlord  -- who will use the rent to buy yet more houses etc  -- and the lower-loop Americans will not have any purchasing power to bid agains them.  What you call the  collapse of your “personal economy” is exactly what is happening to everybody below the elite upper loop of international billionaires.   
 

Don’t you see there was a disconnect between you investing in gold at the behest of Celente and Beck on one side and the failure of the economy to provide you with a sustainable livelihood on the other.   You save for the “Panic in the Year Zero”, while neglecting to wisely manage and invest and support the world that provides for you and for everyone else.  We can avert disaster – but you are convinced the disaster can’t be averted and just want to make sure that you have some gold and silver coins so you can buy snacks as you witness the unfolding of the end of the world.
 

What about buying some populist reform to prevent the catastrophe  -- in fact to reverse the catastrophe?

Don’t you want to see the country saved – the people lifted out of this misery?  Or do you just want to outbid them for the remaining bites of food with the gold you have hoarded?
 

Larry:   But the primary issue is, while you're working on a social credit system, which may never happen,  if you buy gold, you'll have something solid that will work throughout nearly any economic crisis.  It will hold its value most of the time, and might be used for certain transactions.  It's real and here right now, to protect your future for most scenarios. 
 

Richard: 

 I have a different God upon which to rely -- and different obligations to my fellow man than to ensure I have the means of controlling them later on with a hoard of gold.  My protection is my bond of cooperation and mutual help and shared intelligence and good will of my fellow man -- of my fellow common man  -- because, by the grace of good, good men have devised a system that can very easily save us from the collapse that Beck and Celente and those who hold their leashes have bet on.  Social Credit promises the immediate deliverance of all people from the worshipers of gold above mankind and mankind’s vision of all men as brothers looking out for each other, saving people from unnecessary hardship.  I won’t get into religion here – but that comes into play too. (I am a Mormon, a Mormon who disagrees and opposes the views of Glenn Beck  and Mitt Romney.) 
 

Larry:   You tell me you want to prevent collapses, and of course, i totally agree with you.  Go ahead and fight for social credit money , , , and if it fails to ever be implemented,  what have you got left?
 

Richard:  If I fail to save my family, and neighbors and my community and my country with all of the good people I know are worthy of a better life and better prospects  -- then gold and the things gold will buy won’t mean anything to me.  The only thing I would be interested in would be how mankind could possibly free themselves from this tyranny  -- but I know I will be too old and shaken and broken to be able to contribute anything towards that end.    I am more like the Captain who goes down with his ship after doing everything in my power to keep it afloat.  Let others worry about whether there are extra rations on the lifeboats  -- because I know that there aren’t enough lifeboats to save even half of the passengers. 
 

Larry:    In my situation, as long as gold is being traded, I will have the ability to help those less fortunate than I . . . and,  as the case may be,  those too stupid to have bought their own stash when they could have! 
 

Richard:   When you get to that situation, just stand up on a big stump and yell to all the “stupids”  --   “If only you stupids had bought gold like me we would all be feasting now?  But too bad for you.  I am eating because I have gold and you are starving because you didn’t buy gold.”  But tell me Larry,  -- how could it be that if those people took their wages and instead of buying goods and services with it bought gold – how doing that would put more food on tables than if they had spent the dollars on food keeping a farm going, or on local products that would have kept local production going?  If they bought gold too then there would have been even less food in the country for that gold to bid against.  There would be gold inflation.   Just like paper inflation.  But don’ t worry.   There is never enough gold to meet the needs of a nation.  Only a minority of the powerful.  Gold is how they control the world.      
 

Larry:   And that is, to an extent, already happening to me.  Most of the people I'm currently helping will not buy even one silver dime.  Their brains cannot comprehend long-term value.  In the coming years, if my own stash increases a thousandfold, I'm sure they still will not buy any of it, and nor will you.  You will be out there screaming about social credit money, and how rotten the bankers are . . . and perhaps wondering if I can cash in a gold coin to keep food on your table.  Thank you for writing to me and working my brain cells.  We are both in the upper one-percent crust of patriots who actually care about this matter, and would like to do something sensible about it.    
 

Richard:  You draw a picture of a world where there are winners who trusted in gold and losers who did not.  You envision of world of scarcity – where gold can pry the scarce goods from people  -- zero sum game where gold determines who gets the remaining crumbs.  That is hell.  I will not spend my time thinking of how I can get an edge over other people in hell.  I will put all my effort in saving people from this hell  that is the logical consequence of usury and fractional reserve banking  and the private monopolization of credit. 
 

Larry:  This coming December 15th, I will be picking up some repaired clothing, and the woman doing the work was offered cash, silver, or a seminar in the money problem.  She has roughly two weeks to make up her mind, and I gave her a promotional sheet on the seminar.  Now, I have a feeling she's going to want cash, but what if she said to me,  "I want silver, and I'm going to start selling eggs here, because you told me you wanted to buy some.  I will accept your silver for the eggs.  They will be more expensive, and you'll be paying for what I already bought at the store, but you'll be paying with silver." 

Now, if she did this, I would have a choice -  either pay at the store with dollars, or pay her with silver.  If I use silver, I will be putting silver back into circulation, and end up buying more of it.  Even though the banking class may end up with most of the dollars, We the People will have one more silver dime in circulation.  If she sells more products that I know I will want, she'll get more silver, and I will buy more.  Now, she might tell me what she was planning to buy, and that she'd rather go silver with me.  Ok, now we're both in silver-based businesses.  To a very small extent, we've started a new country -  one with a silver standard.  Population:  so far, only two.  Employment rate:  100%. 

If a third person comes in, we will have the productive capacity of three, instead of only two.  And the silver will be used among us in trading - never going to anyone outside the "country."  If we want to trade with the outside world, we have to go back to dollars, but since our "country" is using silver, no one is hoarding it.  My dealer is having a field day, because he's selling more and more silver to us, to expand our economy.  And We the Three People are fully employed, and prospering.  One complained once about the changing market value of silver, but the advantages were outweighing it . . . such as total privacy, and that we could do anything we wanted.  it was an attractive "country" for several others who were broke, and wanted to get a silver-based job, after they were turned down by the store up the street.  I'm going to stop the story here, but you get the idea, don't you?  Unlike your social credit money, the silver would not require any major actions by government, or other gargantuan institutions that never listen to poor people.  It is limited only by our own willingness to get the silver, and put it into action.  And you can forget about any kind of "economic collapse,"  since people like us were running the money system itself.  Now, if the people wanted to use social credit money instead of silver,  how would we determine how much each piece of money was actually worth?  In the case of silver, we would have the dealer's reaction for our reference point.  We might not always use it, but it would have some sort of home plate.   

Okay, that's it for now.      
 

Previous exchanges between   Larry and Richard  (most recent first) 

Richard (1):  . . . of course dollars leave the domestic economy when you buy gold.

Larry (2):   My dollars went to the dealer, who often, he told me, buys at trade shows, from other dealers.  The gold goes to the customers, and away from the foreign bankers.  The dollar devalues, so the foreigners, as you tell me, will end up with losing value in the paper money.   But the dealers are making a profit, and spending the bucks both on more gold, and other commodities here in America.  They are all in the business of putting the metals back into the hand of Americans.  Let's say the the foreigners are making money at this game -  what of it, as long as the real commodity money is coming back to us, for future usage?  Do you have a problem with us having precious metals, even if it's with someone else's short-term profit?   If you have a problem with them buying houses through an illegal, unconstitutional foreclosures, that is a whole separate topic.  That has nothing to do with buying gold. 

Richard (2): Yes, Larry, I agree.  The gold the dealer sells does go to the people why buy it and away from the the international speculators who owned it.  I am saying this too. The point is that the people who buy the gold are getting a metal that will not circulate for buying and selling until after the economy collapses.  What I was saying is that we can prevent the collapse if we reverse the deflation in the lower-loop economy where households and domestic production conduct exchanges with M1 money supply (checkbook money).  The money that you give to the gold dealer goes to the people who supply the gold -- the international market from which your dealer buys at spot.  Your dealer has a spread upon which he makes money for being a middleman in this transaction between Americans who let Paul and Beck and Celente do their thinking for them and the international sellers.  The money earned by the dealer in the price he charges over spot may stay in the country --  but the dollars equal to the spot price leave the country or -- which amounts to the same thing -- goes to Americans who operate in the elite loop of lending and speculating -- neither of which are going to use that money to buy US goods or invest in new domestic companies that will produce American goods and hire American workers.  Perhaps this will clarify the issue:  Just as most US dollars are held by foreigners and "internationalist" American elite who operate in the outer-loop - so the most of the gold is held by this "exogenous" moneyed power.

The elite have created a lower-loop depression by design  -- they do not want to stimulate it by restoring dollar purchasing power to the lower loop.  The foreign-held dollar deposits are not coming to America.  They are waiting for us to collapse, loose everything, and be killed off in war, revolution, man-made weather and plague disasters, and IMF and other creditor-ordered draining through taxation and give-away privatization sucking up every pocket of wealth that we have.  Now if you and your family live in the upper loop and don't associate with the "grapes of wrath" crowd down here --  they do not view this transition as much of an issue.  All of the American elite have that attitude.  They look at boom numbers of the upper loop economic performance and combine them with the bust of the lower loop  -- and the average of the two aggregates  conceal the too-great wealth going to the financial sector and international corporations and the too-little-and ever-diminishing means of life of households and domestic production.  This average is the GNP -- one number for value of output of the entire country (including financial services output) and so the lower-loop depression is hidden  --  as when one man robs another man the sum of both their assets remains unchanged and that sum is all that is reported.  Now, as I was saying, the money going to the upper-loop gold sellers is life-blood money drained from the veins of American commerce.  The upper-loop gold sellers have not thought of taking those dollars and making easy credit available to revive the domestic economy.  In the same way those who got the bailout don't want to invest in revitalizing an self-sufficient domestic economy.  In the same way too, those upper-loop well-off who get an extension on their tax breaks also do not put any of that money into the domestic loop.  As likely as not they invest it in foreign industrial growth that will take yet more of our jobs etc.  even as we have no money from exporting with which to buy this foreign production and even though our credit is all burned up to keep our families feed with a credit card or the government's credit card.

All of the above has been inflicted upon us through the robbing of purchasing power by usury in one form or another.  When you buy gold you are banishing the dollars you had.  Those dollars, if there were enough of them, could save the American people.  The gold cannot save anyone  -- it only ensures that when the nation collapses you will be able to bid food out of the mouths of your starving neighbors  -- what I call the "Glenn-Beck-Ha!-Ha!-I'm-smart-and-bought-gold-so-I can-eat-while-you-starve-brand-of-patriotism."  (Why not try asking Beck or Celente or Ron Paul  if he thinks the nation would be better off if the entire nation took all of their spare cash above what they need for food, gas and rent and bought gold with it.  Ask him who that would help the economy?  Ask him how that would make the country better of in the collapse it would most certainly instantly precipitate.

----


Richard (1)  . . . the super rich who own the gold . . .

Larry (2):  Important correction here.  Please note:  The super-rich do not own the gold!  They only own their own gold!   Well, they sure don't own my gold!  They don't own my dealer's gold!  The super-rich might be able to affect the markets for a short time.  They profit, I believe,  from temporary changes in the prices of gold, which I believe they can affect.  But they do not own other people's gold . . . and the more we all buy, the less the super-rich will be able to affect the markets.

Richard (2):  They control your gold in a great many waves.  As I said, right now they have their salesmen -- Beck, Celente, the Ludwig von Mises institute and all the gold sellers -- pushing the doom scenario.  The gold dealers back all of the doom sellers  -- they are sponsoring disaster talk.  They have the power of reversing that whenever they choose. They also can create any crisis they want  -- and they can create a crisis and demand that citizens turn over their gold as happened in 1933.  Or they can just wait until the mobs come to your house and take all of your gold and the food you bought with the gold.  They can always get their gold back -- wedding bands, gold in teeth, gold buried under the shed, etc. after their war on the middle class is finally all the way finished.  Do your really expect to use your gold to hire starving street gangs to escort you to safety and to protect the food your gold has outbid from their families' mouths?

The time to save you skin is now with dollars  -- with reform that puts lots of dollars in the hands of households so that they can go out and buy creating the effective demand that will put people to work, that will get us converting the nations resources into goods and services.  Gold in your vault cannot do that -- and it will not be able to do that after the collapse if you continue to let the collapse happen.

Your statement that "the more gold we buy the less the super rich will be able to affect the markets" - is the opposite of the truth.  The command of dollars is what effects markets in the economy that matters to you and me  -- the lower loop economy.  Gold is for international transactions and as small compact marketable asset you can run away with to get out of the country when the predators have brought it down for plunder.  In your mind the country is already destroyed and you are just thinking of how you can outlive your neighbors, who you can eat while they starve.  Some great neighbor and countryman you are!  What you should be down is telling everyone to shove that gold back up the Rothschilds' ass and start saving the dollar by the American household sector and the domestic production sector taking back the power to make new money and to expand or contact credit from the hostile and destructive and criminal financial sector which now controls government and corporations and everything else through the debt system.

Larry:  Moreover, since I have yet to see the price of a whole ounce of gold going back down to $35 an ounce, the super-rich obviously cannot distort the market more than a tiny fraction of what they might.  Therefore, I remain of the opinion that every American needs to have positions in at least gold and silver.  I personally have a love for rhodium as well, given that it can be divided without melting.  It comes as a powder, and if only it offered more ease in trading, I would have already bought some.

Richard: I assure you that you are wrong.  When the drain of purchasing power from the lower loop is complete and the middle and lower classes that are still alive are completely dispossed of everything they once owned -- then a new money will be introduced and the gold will become worthless, if it is not already confiscated.   The new currency will be available by trading in dollars for it.  And guess who will have the dollars?   (Hint:  Not the people who trusted Glenn Beck and Gerald Celente.)

Richard (previous):  . . . the fact that the household originates the new money instead of a bank creating a deposit for a borrowing corporation  will  . . .
 
Larry:  Hold on a second here.  Where did Lincoln's Greenbacks originate?  The Treasury dept?  Or "households" as you put it.   Lincoln threw the money into circulation for the war effort.  People accepted it . . . but it wasn't a long-term project carried into peacetime.

Richard:  The Civil War was financed by bonds but also by the printing press with fiat greenbacks what did not originate in a Rothschild loan.  This is the kind of money I favor.  There is no need to borrow from the Rothschilds to have a currency -- the North just prints up the currency, make it legal tender to pay debts and taxes, then spends it into circulation to pay war expenses.  And yes, the greenbacks were continued after the Civil War.  It was one of the big issues all the way until 1913 and the passage of the Federal Reserve Act  -- along with the issue of minting free silver.  The gold standard and the Robber Barons actually won.  And so we lived in misery, with big depressions in that era  -- only relieved by some gold discoveries.  But the greenback funded the civil war and it could have funded the building of the west  -- but instead Rockefeller-Morgan-Harriman and others exerted monopoly power in finance and railroad and other corporate trusts to drain the wealth and life of the nation to fatten Wall Street and the City of London.

Yes, you are right -- Lincoln did not have the new greenback originate in the hands of families in the household sector  --  that is what I am proposing (taking the idea from C. H. Douglas and the scattering of his followers in Canada, Australia and New Zealand.)  Just having all new money created debt-free  is not going to cure the problem of dysfunction stemming from the financial sector dictating who will be first spender.  The financial sector's job is to gather the small savings of people and pay them a small amount of interest -- and bundling up those savings and lending them out to businesses to want to produce on a large enough scale to make a profit selling something householders find to be worth the price.  That honest function does not qualify them to be the ones who create new money "out of thin air" and then lend it out -- insisting on your house or car as collateral and then charging you interest until the day comes when you pay back the principal and remaining balance.  It was a very corrupt deal that set up that arrangement.

New money must be created at no cost by the treasury and it must be made to originate in the hands of the citizens for their own household expenditure.  That way households direct national production.  If people want public goods, supplied by government, then let them vote for it and pay for it with taxes -- not with big loans from international lenders who charge a big interest rate and then take over the whole country when the sabotage the economy making it impossible for you to keep up your interest payments.

Larry: Lincoln threw the money into circulation for the war effort.  People accepted it . . . but it wasn't a long-term project carried into peacetime.   Not enough time was allowed for this, and to watch for devaluation of the paper.  So, I am at a loss here to compare the Greenbacks to gold.  Now, if it had worked, your case would have been demonstrated.  Actually, I'm more in favor of ledger money than paper, since it can be transported without carrying it.  You'll never lose it as you might lose paper.  This ledger money would, naturally, be run by citizens, not banks.  And without debt.  But implementing it would involve a lot of trust and integrity.  And how do you place values on different types of work?  With gold and silver, you have an objective market value placed on all of it.  While other systems might fail or get corrupted, gold really "hangs in there." 

Richard: Fiat money has been tested in many periods in the history of many countries besides the US.  I've done a survey more extensive than I am sure 90 percent of people who teach economics in this country have undertaken  -- and with better sources.  But I agree with you that Greenbacks can be mere electronic data entries.  The social credit payment can simply go on a card  -- as can a tax refund or a food stamp payment.  The important thing is that the increase in your account is not the result of you  or  anyone else going into debt.  Instead of Goldman-Sachs creating a new spending account for a defense contractor or other "American" multinational corporation  --  the Treasury department will create the new money in the hands of the people -- who will spend it on the well-being and development of their families  -- so that the entrepreneur will once again, in order to make money, have to learn to figure out what the American housewife wants.

It's so simple to me -- and I have a mind that takes in a lot of complexity when complexity is there.  I have seen through the complexity and found that the real solution is this very simple one.   I am a nobody -- but Kitson, Soddy, Douglas and the rest I have consulted are for more brilliant than any of the economists who have become famous and celebrated in my lifetime (Friedman, Galbraith, Samuelson, Stiglitz, Summers etc.)  (Summers is a good mathematician, but he is where he is because his is one of the most able criminal minds -- as a factual biography of the man reveals.)

Well, it looks like I have rambled a lot and got too political.  Nevertheless,  I hope you will write again.  You are the only gold man I know with the sand to actually stand up for what he believes in.  You have my respect for that, Larry.

Richard Eastman
Yakima, Washington

------------

Larry:   Any kind of non-debt currency is impractical right now, unless citizens generate their own paper barter instruments.  
 
Richard:  Non-debt currency "right now" a few years ago could have prevented the entire collapse.  The analogy of a bubble people often use is false.  Respiration is a better one.  What is breathed in as loans is exhaled as principal plus interest.  A thousand dollar loan from the financial sector at 18 percent withdraws a thousand in interest after four years and two thousand in five.  The money multiplier begins working in reverse upon each interest payment.  Only free and clear fiat money originating in the hands of households can stop the ongoing spiral of collapse brought on by more lower-loop (M1) credit contraction  -- where the liquidation of debt is destroying so much purchasing power leading to so much deflation that the debt burden actually increases in the liquidation process. In  the end there is more multiplied contraction than expansion -- since both repayment of principal and payment of interest are subject to the money multiplier in monetary contraction. (Remember - the Bernanke helicopter inflation is going to the elite loop at the top -- not to the domestic economy.)  Only non-debt currency can save the day.  So the move is practical.  

As for the claim that it is impractical "right now" --  it is impossible to do right now because the institutions to administer it do not exist -- but it is most practical to begin creating the legal structure and agencies to replace the failed system with the workable one.  That is the only practical thing we can be doing right now.

Also, "generating their own paper barter instruments"  -- bills collateralized by our wealth -- cannot sustain a complex economy.  A lot of banks issuing their own currencies must have a metallic standard for inter-currency transactions.  This of course would give the gold monopolist total control over the banks as in the early 1800s.  The banks backed by gold would insist upon specie payment bankrupting Western banks which were trying to sustain western development with fiat.  Wildcat banks would create with fiat and then gold banks would foreclose on all of it and get control by forcing the wildcats to pay in specie.  The banks with easy access to gold  - did not compete with the western banks, they farmed them and they farmed those the wildcats lent to.   In my opinion, we need a national fiat currency.

Larry:  If I printed up a non-debt barter instrument, would Eastman take it from me in return for something I wanted from him?  

Richard:  He would take fiat if it was made legal tender.  Fiat is established when it can be used to pay taxes (which everyone knows are, with death, inevitable). A promise to pay in gold or other wealth to the bearer by a bank is not necessary for a dollar to have purchasing power.

I am not sure why Larry inserts the word "barter".  All money as medium of exchange facilitates buying and selling -- makes barter - with the requirement of a double coincidence of wants - unnecessary.  Fiat money is a generalized reinforcer in the language of experimental psychology -- a token which people are conditioned by reinforcement under the system to accept.  A hundred dollar bill doesn't have to be backed by my dining room set or my promise to work 10 hours for it to be acceptable as money --  what matters is what it will buy  -- not what backs it if anything.   Currency needs no backing  -- it merely needs scarcity and acceptance.  Legal tender makes it acceptable to some and the acceptability by some makes it acceptable to all.

If you have a "barter instrument' intermediary, then you do not have barter -- you have a money transaction.

Larry:  When was the last time the bankers tried to destroy the value of gold?  They tried to confiscate it back in 1933 (and succeeded to some extent), but they never actually jailed or fined anybody, nor can they crash the value.

Richard: Bankers are causing the price of gold to go up or go down all the time.  There is monopoly control in the gold market.  If there is such a thing as the intrinsic value of gold  -- I say there is not -- but if there is, then certainly gold has never traded at this value -- the intrinsic value is not an equilibrium price towards which gold tends.  Gold is speculative, and too much relied on as a hedge against disaster.  In fact it is the world thing to spend money on gold when you see impending financial catastrophe.  When financial collapse is being inflicted upon us -- the thing to do is buy real assets, seed, machines, staple resources as the best investment to weather the storm.  When people hoard gold in a panic they are contracting actual money in supply even more -- causing more contraction of money and credit when money and credit are most needed to keep the economy alive.

Now Roosevelt did not try to destroy the value of gold, he tried to destroy the purchasing power of the dollar against gold--  while at the same time taking gold out of the hands of Americans so the government could have the use of it as collateral in international borrowing.  That amounts to Roosevelt increasing the value of gold held by his rich friends in Swiss Banks etc. against the dollar.  Roosevelt was robbing the savings of Americans held in dollar denominated deposits.  Of course he did this to help the City, because in 1925 Churchill went back on the gold standard -- destroying the beautiful fiat system devised to win World War One -- and he put the pound back at the old pre-WWI weight in gold. He did this so his friends at the City who now would be collecting on the war bonds they owned, would be collecting in gold and at the old pre-war exchange rate.  This was a crushing burden upon the British commoners who had their debt burden greatly expanded by this act.  And of course the currency markets responded to the over-valued pound by cashing in the pound for gold and using the gold to buy dollars -- giving the US a dollar surplus in the late 1920's which was corrected by the stock market crashes of Oct 1929  where margin calls contracted the currency and caused deflation. This was an even stronger dollar and, thus, a bigger burden for debtors and boon for creditors.  This deflation brought the dollar in line with the pound -- and so the US commoners suffered the consequences in terms of reduced purchasing power being earned by production leading to the depression.

Larry:  He is telling us not to rely on precious metals.  Since when were such metals subject to the same problems as paper money, as long as they weren't debased? 

Richard:  They are subject to different problems.  Go to the store and try to pay with gold.   Gold is not the medium of exchange that sustains the lower loop.  The purpose of gold in most portfolios is as a hedge against lost purchasing power of the dollar.  The M1 dollar is in deflation in the lower loop -- despite the "quantatative easing" of money from the fed being pumped to wall street sellers of securities in open market operations at the NY Fed.   

Gold prices can be manipulated.  Now we have a gold bubble.  The gold monopolists (colluding oligopoly) are selling their gold to the rubes.  In other words the gold monopolists are buying dollars and selling gold -- and getting Gerald Celente, and Rand Paul and Glenn Beck to hawk gold for them  -- in other words getting them to hoard purchasing power in the very un-liquid form of gold  -- which hording adds to deflation and deflation adds to the collapse of the US economy.  (Remember, we are now experiencing severe deflation on the lower loop and tremendous dollar purchasing power on the international loop where the creditor class invests, borrows, lends, speculates and invent derivatives instruments for every conceivable need.)  The hoarding by buying gold is the last things Americans should be doing if they want to save their economy and country from collapse and hostile takeover -- converting the nation to rent-slaves, debt-slaves, tax-slaves of foreign absentee landlords  -- with all the rent going to the elite upper loop and draining the lower loop of yet more purchasing power.

Larry:    True, the metals will fluctuate in value per market demand, and there is some manipulation of that market.  But the metals were of value even before the industrial revolution. 

Richard:  Glad we agree on the most important point.  Gold prices are manipulated.  Now as to gold prior to the industrial revolution -- it was of value and the world was dependent upon it for commerce.  Gold always tended towards deflation  -- there was always a chronic shortage of purchasing power -- which kept those who had it in power -- the kings who taxed and the usurers who lent money to knights for armor and supplies to capture Jerusalem or Constantinople.  Only big discoveries of sliver and gold in the new world -- silver that would be accepted in trade by China for example -- increased commerce and created more middle class wealth.  But that is because the metallic system was all anyone knew.  Paper money was simply warehouse receipts for gold.  FIAT MONEY WAS NOT INVENTED, nor the means of making fiat not easily counterfeited.  Even the banks of Amsterdam had 100 percent gold reserve backing for their notes.  

With the Bank of England came fractional reserve banking  -- a bank lending more than it has in its vaults and creating unbacked paper as a privilege granted by the King.  

But gold has always been a deflationary constraint, not a neutral currency that would expand with the production of goods etc.

That gold "keeps its value" as all other money becomes worthless -- simply means that we revert, not to the commodity currency, but the metal that people have been told is the only safety in bad times.

I am merely saying that if you bought tools, and seed, and water purification equipment, and tools and machines that build tools etc. you would have done a lot more to maintain the standard of living of your community in a collapse than if everyone in the community took all their money and bought gold coins and kept them hoarded for buying food and shelter in the end of the world etc.

The security of gold is for survivalists -- not for people trying to prevent economic collapse.  In fact people who have invested in gold are selling their country short and are betting on collapse and are hoping that when the collapse comes their gold will buy food from the mouths of others who don't have gold.  Some market system that is!!!

The gold hoarder starts to reap his rewards just about at the point where the altruist who would save the situation is defeated by the ruin that the wish fulfillment of "How you can profit from the coming collapse" crowd --  save-you-family-by-buying gold brought about.

Suppose everyone took all of their money and bought all the gold they could with it  -- instead of using the money to buy from local producers to keep the economy going?

Larry:   This is a remarkable fact, when many claim that we need both commercial and industrial applications for the metals for them to retain their value.  Gold and silver were both used as money, and considered valuable, in Biblical times.  Can't we say, based on historical performance,  there is virtually no chance of any kind, that these metals can ever fail us for effective use as money (being both portable and holding their value)?

Richard:  Gold is for the merchant who can grab it and get out of town, knowing it will be accepted wherever he goes with some worthwhile level of purchasing power.   Larry is speaking of this undoubted virtue of the metals.  The peasant is the man who grows food and he sells his produce in barter or for coin.  When coin disappears he operates with barter, informal barter credit and charity and maybe starvation.  

For the masses gold is no refuge  -- even in Biblical times.  Read the book of Ezekiel -- how gold becomes worthless in war and famine.  How can this be?  Simple.  Gold is not really wealth.  It can command wealth under given market conditions.  And of course the first thing people look for after guns and food when they raid a house is one's hoard of gold.  Metal detectors make gold easy to locate in their hiding places.  And "intrinsic value" of gold will mean little when gold coin must be against gold coin for scarce bread.  A chicken or a cow will hold their value in barter for grain in a famine, much more than will sterile and non-nutritious gold.

Larry:  Now, the last question for Eastman and anyone else who puts down gold:  Suppose I want to pay you for something that you want to sell.  Which do you want from me?  Gold, or a debt-free barter instrument made out of paper, that I've run off my inkjet printer?  

Richard:  That depends on the price of gold in terms of the fiat money on the markets I utilize.  If you ran the money off on your inkjet printer chances are the money is not legal tender  -- which means that your money is straw rather than paper.

I oppose local currencies as insufficient to sustain a complex society like ours.  I have recommended state and local governments issuing their own scrip and making that scrip legal tender with which taxes can be paid.  But this is for after a collapse.  This is to restart civilization after the economy is reduced to a gold standard and all of the gold is up in the hands of a new feudal aristocracy and all credit is gold based.  Civilization under these circumstances could only be restarted with the creation of fiat currency that could create the demand that would allow new investment that would actually be profitable because of sufficient demand.  etc.

Fiat is appropriate for sustaining the production and high levels of consumption of a commonwealth.  Gold is appropriate for bringing deflation on a nation and bringing it to ruin, and giving power to those who control its supply and lend it out at interest.  Gold is master/slave, effecting redistribution of wealth.  Fiat is purchasing power that brings prosperity, competition and enterprise.  And it is free from collapsing as long as fiat is not made payable in gold -- which gives the gold monopolist power to contract the fiat currency at will.  Inflation does not cause recession.  Debt financed inflation that is afterward eaten up by interest payment on top of repayment of principal is what causes recession.  Collapse is not caused by mal-investment made in the inflationary phase of a business cycle -- rather recession is caused with interest payments catch up with loan injections and deflation sets in.  The deflation causes recession and then wars or other government borrowing is resorted to to attempt to stimulate or reinflate the economy -- but the seeds of the next inflation are sown by the same act  -- and in the end the creditor gets the interest, the principal and, in foreclosure, the assets themselves.  This system was perfected by the Bank of England as a gold system.  (We also now have it here with the Federal Reserve Bank Act of 1913.  The Bank of France and the German Reichsbank are similarly chartered through intrigue and bribery.  dsk)

Gold causes recessions and works against debtors to the advantage of creditors.  Fiat under a social credit system ends recessions and distributes new money evenly among households rather than at the discretion of a banking elite not really mindful of the public good.  Social Creditors have the means of pulling the economy out of its tail spin.  The social credit solution will be viewed negatively by those looking forward to dominating the world economy through an international gold system where they control the gold supply and can set its price.  It is altogether reasonable for the creditor class to want a gold system and a collapse of fiat  -- as long as the ruin and misery of the masses is not a real concern to them.

I hope you will undertake your own examination of the social credit as a means of ending recessions and the domination of the financial sector over the household and productive sectors, which domination gold always facilitates.

Sincerely,

Richard Eastman

-----------------

Check out:  The Beginning of Rothschild Central Banker Fraud and Thievery

 

There is no place for the Rothschild's who get between buyer and seller, between entrepreneur and manager and labor and insist that before those people can cooperate to meet each others needs they have to sign an agreement hiring money  -- the market signal tokens -- on a compound interest arrangement -- with the Rothschilds having the power to change the terms of the contract  -- making the burden of debt on the borrower bigger -- simply by allowing  the system's built in tendency to deflation and recession to run its course - so Rothschild can take ownership of all the collateral, all the foreclosed properties and convert them into rental properties.

Among the thinkers who have contributed to the solution are those named in the gallery of pictures below.
 

From Kitson I learned that the gold standard is deflation and slavery to the gold monopolists and that it doesn't cure depressions but rather causes them and and makes the cure all but impossible.  Kitson's solution of course was the nationalization of credit.

From Hobson I learned that when wealth is not distributed to the household and productive sectors but stays with the financier speculators the result is insufficient demand in domestic markets and therefore a drive to "invest" abroad, which ends up being imperialism  -- including the funding of revolutions, the provoking of wars, the plundering of resources  -- and yes, what goes around comes around, the US is now itself being treated as a "developing country," that is as just another victim of imperialism.

From Douglas we learn that the productive sector pays for production incomes from which is drained as interest a portion of the payout that does not go to households and government and from there to buy the product that has been produced.  (This ties in with Hobson, above.)  To produce production factors must be paid and financing (Rothschild, Goldman-Sachs, Rockefeller etc.) must be paid -- and financiers are not using the earned interest either to buy domestic economy production or to invest in domestic economy productive capacity -- allowing the deflation to wreak havoc on the lower loop, while the cosmopolitan loop hoards the money and watches it grow in value as deflation proceeds apace in the domestic economy.  In the bankruptcy of the nation the the Rothschild-Rockefeller interests then dip into their dollar hoard and buy up the land  and all of the improvements on the land -- homes, factories, airports, timber land, farmland -- until along side debt slavery there grows rent slavery and monopoly slavery (monopoly slavery because all of the competition is bankrupted and only the Rothschild-Rockefeller oligopolies in collusion to share big revenue from monopoly prices.  [This is of course my reading of Douglas and my reading between the lines of Douglas.] And of course Douglas is the great provider of the solution -- the ending of the power of the Financial Sector to create new money, to contract and expand the amount of loans outstanding at will thereby bringing on relative booms (as long as they choose to expand credit) so we build more houses etc.  followed by a switch back to normal deflationary mode, so that all of the housing produced and sold is taken back in foreclosure and turned into rental homes etc.  Instead Douglas would have new money originating in the household sector, going to each American, so that the household can be the one to profit from "money out of thin air"  -- so that household's can live by one workers income, so that businesses can earn a profit from which to meet expenses and expand the business if it really satisfies the customers in terms of value per dollar.  This would end debt slavery forever.

Soddy is the noble price winning scientist who read Kitson and devoted the latter part of his life to urging a system that would do away with slavery to compound interest.  His argument was very simple.  Whenever something is built it immediately starts to decay or "go bad" it it is organic, or fall apart or wear out, or become obsolete if it is an inorganic machine etc.  Loans go to finance the construction of things that return to dust.  But the interest obligation is not part of the physical world that decays  -- it is of the indestructible realm of a mathematical equations, the eternal abstracts of Plato or Pythagoras.  Compound interest is perpetual motion and perpetual growth and it does not adjust downward when the world's ability to pay it is diminished as the world is crushed beneath its demands.  Such a harvesting machine in the exclusive hands of Rothschild-Rockefeller interests spells the slavery and unending misery of the human race.

Gesell was for free money.  He  taught that  under the usury and rent system   free, fair business competition with equal chances for all is impossible. He called for the removal of all legal and inherited privileges so that those who gained most in the world would on do so on the basis of their personal abilities and contributions.  There is no reason why those who get there first and buy up the land as speculators should then be masters over all who come after, over all who do the actual inventing, engineering, entrepreneurship, management, and skilled workmanship -- where the financier speculator and the landlord take all of the wealth so that the productive classes must live from hand to mouth in the land of plenty that they improved and prospered.  Gesell wanted the  most talented people to have the highest income, without distortion by interest and rent charges. The economic status of the less talented would also improve, because they would not be forced to pay interest and rent charges. According to Gesell, this would lead to an equalization between the poor and the rich. Further, there would be more means available to help the disabled and untalented because the higher average income would mean that families and friends and churches and communities would have enough money to happily provide all was necessary to help -- as people are naturally inclined to do when not under the gun of rent, interest payments and taxes that go to paying the national debt.  Irving Fisher (see below) said of Gesell's idea:  "Free money may turn out to be the best regulator of the velocity of circulation of money, which is the most confusing element in the stabilization of the price level. Applied correctly it could in fact haul us out of the crisis in a few weeks ... I am a humble servant of the merchant Gesell."

Feder identified the Rothschild and other merchant banking families as international stock exchange finance that was responsible for "interest slavery."  Hitler discovered the basic truth of Feder's analysis and rode it to power.  The SA were followers of Feder's ideas as they heard them from Hitler.  When Hitler made his deal with the corporations with ties to the same international finance -- he murdered the SA leaders (the Strasser brothers were Feder followers -- one was murdered and one was exiled) and put Feder in an obscure academic post -- where Feder wrote a letter to Hitler which has recently come to light stating that Hitler had betrayed the principles he earlier has accepted and championed.  Feder is why international cosmopolitan finance declared all out war on Hitler and Hitler was who they used to destroy Feder's economic solution of the nationalization of credit.

Franz Oppenheimer, last of the conflict sociologists, viewed land conquest is the basis of the state.  Originally nomads conquer peasants and make slaves of them, working the land and paying tribute.  The system is streamlined after the nomads settle as a ruling class and a money system is developed to make it all run smoother.  But large land holdings -- the rent system -- is the cause of the continued class distinction and the driving of people from the land into the cities forces down wages in the factories etc.  Government taxes the people, but to get the tax money into the hands of the real conquerors it is necessary for government to be heavily in debt.

Henry George -- also held, and and was the first to do so, that land rent is the key to the impoverishment of all producers and workers who improve the land for the rent charging landowners.  Remember, the interest system robs the people of the fruits of their productions and causes their enterprises to fail -- whereby the land is bought up with the money that was taken in and hoarded -- and so rent on the land -- and you must view "land" as including the "improved land" with houses, factories, public buildings, roads, crops, mines, transportation lines etc as part of land  in the Henry George sense.  The interest system enables the organized minority to own the land from which rent is extracted -- rent in the very broadest sense of payment simply from ownership with the power to lay claim to income from production when in fact no contribution to the production was made.  The speculator simply has to buy up the land first  -- and all of the differential in land rent earnings from undeveloped land in a wilderness to the rent gained in a big city accrues to him without any further contribution from him.   It is from Henry George that I now wish to quote extensively below.

Daly shows us that if investment capital is allowed to migrate from one country to another then the result of free trade will not be mutual gain from nations exchanging according to comparative advantage as the libertarians falsely preach, but rather the result will be that investment is all go to the nation with the greatest "absolute" advantage  -- for example industry will migrate to China because the Chinese dictatorship has the power to force the Chinese people to work for only a few dollars a day and to force them to take in all of the pollutants of the productive process that once upon a time in the United States corporations would be fined for creating.  Daly exposed all of the lies by which globalism -- "free trade"  -- was foisted upon us.  And the fact is that David Ricardo who developed the "mutual gain from trade" thesis specifically stated that the important assumption was that capital must not be allowed to migrate.  My economics professor at Texas A & M Akera Takyama showed mathematically in the Ricardo model, that if the assumption of immobility of capital is suspended than the nation at absolute disadvantage in production will not gain but lose, will lose in a decay of production and standard of living that ends up "at the origin" (of the graph), i.e., at zero.

Irving Fisher is the real expert on depressions being caused by debt that eats up purchasing power, by the deflation disease.  He had the solution  - "reflate the economy"  but the Money Power hired Khan to manage the production of a book under the name of Keynes, the General Theory, which advocated debt-financed government spending as the cure for the depression -- and backed up by men like John Kenneth Galbraith (the "Alger Hiss" that got away )  who argued for an all-big corporation economy and blamed inflation on a "wage-price" spiral, as if monetary policy had nothing to do with it -- and advocated wage controls and price controls  -- but no one saw that all of his recommendations were favoring the financial elites at the expense of households and production.  Irving Fisher was brushed aside -- even when his explanation of the depression was the only one that made sense.  
We must take the lessons of all of these teachers together to reach a solution - the solution of American Social Credit.

Now here are key chapters  from Henry George's great book Wealth and Poverty which I hope everyone will read.  I am typing out a collection of key points  -- but don't think I will get it finished any time soon.

Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
 

Henry George Progress and Poverty 

Chapter V the Real Functions of Capital 

Chapter Iv Disproof of the Malthusian Theory 

  Book Iii the Laws of Distribution

  Chapter I the Inquiry Narrowed to the Laws of Distribution—necessary Relation of These Laws

  Chapter Ii Rent and the Law of Rent

  Chapter Iii of Interest and the Cause of Interest

  Chapter Iv of Spurious Capital and of Profits Often Mistaken For Interest

  Chapter V the Law of Interest

  Chapter Vi Wages and the Law of Wages

  Chapter Vii the Correlation and Co-ordination of These Laws

  Chapter Viii the Statics of the Problem Thus Explained

  Book Iv Effect of Material Progress Upon the Distribution of Wealth

  Chapter I the Dynamics of the Problem Yet to Seek

  Chapter Ii the Effect of Increase of Population Upon the Distribution of Wealth

  Chapter Iii the Effect of Improvements In the Arts Upon the Distribution of Wealth

  Chapter Iv Effect of the Expectation Raised By Material Progress

  Book V the Problem Solved

  Chapter I the Primary Cause of Recurring Paroxysms of Industrial Depression

  Chapter Ii the Persistence of Poverty Amid Advancing Wealth

  Book Vi the Remedy

  Chapter I Insufficiency of Remedies Currently Advocated

  Chapter Ii the True Remedy

  Book Vii Justice of the Remedy

  Chapter I the Injustice of Private Property In Land

  Chapter Ii the Enslavement of Laborers the Ultimate Result of Private Property In Land

  Chapter Iii Claim of Land Owners to Compensation

  Chapter Iv Property In Land Historically Considered

  Chapter V of Property In Land In the United States

  Book Viii Application of the Remedy

  Chapter I Private Property In Land Inconsistent With the Best Use of Land

  Chapter Ii How Equal Rights to the Land May Be Asserted and Secured

  Chapter Iii the Proposition Tried By the Canons of Taxation

  Chapter Iv Indorsements and Objections

  Book IX. Effects of the Remedy: Chapter I of the Effect Upon the Production of Wealth

  Chapter Ii of the Effect Upon Distribution and Thence Upon Production

  Chapter Iii of the Effect Upon Individuals and Classes

  Chapter Iv of the Changes That Would Be Wrought In Social Organization and Social Life

  Book X. The Law of Human Progress: Chapter I the Current Theory of Human Progress—its Insufficiency

  Chapter Ii Differences In Civilization—to What Due

  Chapter Iii the Law of Human Progress

  Chapter Iv How Modern Civilization May Decline

  Chapter V the Central Truth

  Conclusion the Problem of Individual Life
 

1.  Irving Fisher, the best statistical economist of his time and the inventor of the price index, wrote that in the 1929 depression period  the total nominal amount of debt outstanding decreased (because of foreclosures and liquidation) by 20 percent while the "real" debt burden on Americans (in terms of the purchasing power of the dollar due to inflation) increased by 70 percent.  Debt burden increased even as debts were liquidated and actual dollars owed become fewer because dollar supply had diminished.   This is happening today.  Most people don't have the incomes to meet their debts as they lose jobs or are cut back in hours or pay or as their small businesses founder for lack of sales revenue  -- and you will note this please:  statisticians do not look at family debt burden when computing the cost of living index!!!  they just look at the typical things we buy.  Remember, deflation hits all prices, but debt is never adjusted downward to allow for the swelling purchasing power of the deflated dollar.  This is a windfall to the creditor class, and why they always use their formidable political influence to promote deflationary policies.  And the biggest tragedy is that Americans are so misinformed that they think the economy is experiencing inflation -- they do not realize that the price of items at Wal Mart are monopolist administered prices (with most kinds of items supplied by oligopolies in non-competing collusion, i.e., monopolistic price fixing.

2.  One of the biggest weapons of the criminal financial elites in their war of plunder against non-elite Americans has been the drug war.  Banking families have been profiting from the drug trade since before the Opium War in China.  We know they profit from drug revenue.  We know they rejoice at how drugs destroys our people, how it destroys families, vocations etc. while filling our jails.  But just as big a cost and completely overlooked and an even more powerful boost to the criminal financial elites is the fact that all of that cash drug revenue leaving the country increases deflation in a devastating way.  A trillion dollars leaving the country to be laundered in international banks -- joining the "outer loop" dollar hoardings  -- actually has a "money multiplier" contractionary effect on the money supply -- so that every penny of debt owed by Americans becomes all the heavier  -- one trillion?  two?  three? over a number of years just due to the deflationary effect of drug money leaving the country.  The fact that no one in government or academia addresses this fact -- just tells you who is running our government and academia and think tanks.

3.  My thesis  -- in case you haven't been paying attention is that the Moneyed Elite profit at our expense from deflation more than from anything else  -- that the operate both inside and outside the domestic economy and they make money by lending money to the domestic economy at compound interest which ends up in the long run of loan-flow-in  and principal-and-interest-flow out draining purchasing power from the domestic economy, i.e. deflation, which leads to business losses, more unemployment, business bankruptcies, home foreclosures etc.  all of which puts these real assets on the market.  Now consider this:  Did the Fed or the government act to stop the deflation that was causing the foreclosures?  Did they pump in the billions to counter the deflation so as to prevent the foreclosures?  No they did not.  They let the people default for want of purchasing power  -- and only when the homes and businesses were in receivership -- only when they were in the hands of the bankers  -- did the bailout money start to flow -- and flow only to the bankers, never getting near the people whom even a fraction of that bailout money might have saved.   You see the bailouts give the banks the money to sell the houses --  an earlier bailout would only have had to pay an amount that would have caught up people on their two, three or four months delinquent payments  --  al they would have had to do, was what I suggested three years ago  -- simply lower the reserve requirement to give banks extra-reserves so they would not have to call in loans, so they could reflate the economy.  But all of you ignored that  -- and if you recipients of my e-mails don't pass on what I write it goes nowhere  -- and certainly none of the Federal Reserve presidents or governors thought that idea worth considering  - certainly non of the zealous young Jewish staffers of Congressmen or Larry Summers or Barney Frank, or Geithner or Volker happened to think that a good idea.  And neither did Ron Paul or Glenn Beck or Webster Flocking Tarpley.  Bottom line  -- they waited until the damage was done to be sure that none of the bailout would reach the lower-loop people, i.e., we Eloi.  All the money went to Ruppert 'Morlock' , Soros and their kind.

See The Two Tiered Economic System here

 

Depressions will still obtain under a gold system simply because all economic grown must come from a gold backed bank loan (whether there is 100 percent backing or not) and under all such systems it will still be true that the flow of loans from the financial sector to the household-business sector loop will be less than the drainage to the financial sector of interest payment plus principal repayment.  This means deflation must be chronic  -- and under deflation, investment will be less attractive meaning fewer investment loans.  And under the gold standard, if a bank tries to expand credit, the other banks will simply take their redemption certificates (bank money) and demand the gold -- causing a run on that bank.  There will never be recovery again.  (Note: Most recoveries happen under inflation.)  Note too that it is not the bubble, but the bursting of the bubble that is the real problem.  The bubbles burst when after a bulge in loans for some new industry (electronics, dot com etc.) the subsequent payments of interest and repayment of principal bring deflation to a point lower than when the loan bulge was made.    

Note too that Fed open market purchases of securities -- provides money to the international loop that never reaches the domestic loop except to buy up foreclosed properties so that businesses become foreign owned businesses where profits leave the country (deflationary) and houses become foreign owned rental properties where rent leaves the country (more deflation). 

And of course if there is deflation it profits the creditor at the expense of the debtor  because the dollars buys more and is harder to earn  at the time of repayment than it did at the time of borrowing  -- including labor (i.e. you work more to earn a dollar to make loan payments)  so debtors pay back heavier dollars than what they borrowed.  In deflation investment dries up and bond buying increases. 

Only the friends of the gold monopoly dare think of being entrepreneurs -- but most entrepreneurs will not get a chance to show what they can do.  Gold fosters speculation, not investment.  It fosters international gold owners to alternate boom and bust by alternately investing their gold and then withdrawing it again.  Easy credit when foreign gold smiles -- and a boom in business and housing -- then interest and principal payments eat up the sunshine and cause a bust whereupon the gold is withdrawn and all businesses fail and all households go into bankruptcy and the internationals re-enter to buy up all assets in distress sales and bankruptcy auctions. 

Also -- the very notion of "intrinsic value" of gold backing money is a direct contradiction of the Austrian tenant of value being subjective.  The fact is that the value of money is never its backing and the intrinsic value of what backs it -- but is rather the subjective present evaluation of what an amount of money will purchase.  The intrinsic value argument and the subjective value theory are totally at odds.  (The subjective value theory is the correct one -- and thus the intrinsic value argument for gold falls flat. 

I ask you to consider this exposition of the Social Credit answer for the current economic crises as an alternative to the Austrian view and the Keynes, Neoclassical etc views.

– Dick Eastman
 

"Calling investment "a bubble" is simply a rhetorical trick to place the blame of recession and depression on the investment, and not on the deflationary interest and principal  payments that exceed the amount of the loan -- which is the real cause of the crash and collapse.  Creditors always want deflation and they always want to blame all of the damage done by deflation on inflation, that is on our investments and enterprise.  It is time for that process to be clearly spelled out for the average citizen. --  Dick Eastman

Let's assume we beat the international organized crime conspiracy and are not quick frozen in the new ice age, so that we actually do become  free to change our system of money and credit to better satisfy our needs.  Immediately two questions arise.  What part of the current system is causing the middle-class destroying depressions and what is a true cure that would set us free to build a great and good future free of debt and high taxes  and where the household sector is sovereign and government serves the people? 

This note focuses on the one problem from which all other national economic problems flow  - and on the solution which will eliminate that problem for good and open the door to the kind of happy future for all mankind which most of us have stopped thinking would ever be possible. 

You all have read a thousand articles about the Fed and the crimes of the financial elites -- but this message identifies the flaw in our lending system, the flaw which gives birth to all of the evils that inflict us. 

If it is still worthwhile to know what part of our malfunctioning economy is the wrong part for the engine and to know what kind of part the economic engine really needs -- then this article people need to read.

* * *

Ardeshir Mehta: If Tom loans Dick $100 today, and then Harry loans Dick $100  tomorrow which Dick then uses to repay Tom, would not the original $100 Tom lent Dick remain in the system? Or do you think it will all vanish into thin air somehow?


Dick Eastman:   

Nothing will happen to money in circulation if they all use their checkbooks and Tom is not a bank. 

So let us ask the right question:  Where does our debt-money system fail us and what can we do about it.

First understand what is meant by money remaining in the system and by money being withdrawn from from the system.

Money "not remaining in the system" means either:

Loan principal and interest being paid into  the black box of the financial sector and never coming out again.  Say for example, if Dick pays back principal on a zero-interest $100 bank loan and the bank does not make a new loan to anyone to replace the debt retired.

Also grandma may have a $100 bill in her old mattress which has been there for years and she lends it to Dick who after two weeks pays it back to her and she sews it back into her mattress where it is buried in a landfill 8 years latter.

And the final one --  the bank lends Dick $100 which he puts in a Swiss bank account or uses to buy an import from a country where people keep dollars in safes to hedge against inflation of their own currencies.  etc.

Now let us take a look  at  money coming and going into "thin air" versus money being "in the system or not in the system"

Money "in  the system," I suggest, should be considered as being a deposit in a checking account or being currency in a pocket or handbag or grocery store til, or in a company's payroll safe, but not currency in a bank (financial sector).

Now we need to consider the important notion of "first spender" and "last seller"

A man is a first spender when he writes a check on a new bank loan.  He is also a first spender when grandma gives him a dollar that has been in her mattress.   In either case  the that new money entering circulation (entering the system of buying and selling among households, businesses and government (consider government  as a branch of the household sector  -- collective buying and selling - however poorly managed)   - that new money when first spent -- is then deposited in the bank of the seller who first accepted it -- from then on it will always be in someone's checking account -- jumping from person to person as check writing dictates.

That money as a rise in the water line of total checking deposits in the economy will only exit the system when the bank loan is repaid. 

A "last seller" is a man who gets money and then exits it from circulation  -- either by using it to pay interest or principal on a loan or by depositing it outside the country or into a mattress where it will not be spent for a long indefinite period. 

Now we come to the source of our troubles.

New money entering total national checking deposits tends to multiply after it is deposited.  How much it multiplies depends on banking rules about how much deposited money  must be held in reserve against the loans a bank makes.  Let us look at the so-called   "money multiplier" which determines how much "thin air" money will be created under fractional reserve banking rules. 

Say $100 in new money is added to total checking deposits in the country.  Because that $100 has risen the water line in the great tub of deposits  (remember the new first spent $100 is always either one one persons checking account or another -- our real money is not "checks" but rather "transfers of balances from one account to another")   -- now the fractional reserve system allows that however high the tub of deposits in the bank a certain fraction of that total can be lent.   It is easier and quicker to understand when we forget individual banks and talk about the water line of all deposits in all banks.  

Start with new banks that have no money deposited.  Then Tom, Dick and Harry get a sum of money from their grandmothers' mattresses as birthday presents and deposit them in these banks.  Now the water level on all this banks together has risen to a certain level.  And as Tom, Dick and Harry work taking in each other laundry paying with checks - the amount of money in checking deposits does not change.   But low and behold!  the bank has been given power to issue loans up to a fraction of their bank deposits.  (This is a safe bet since Tom, Dick and Harry are not likely to withdraw their money from their accounts and put them in their own mattresses or to deposit them in a Swiss Bank or Cayman Island offshore bank.)   If the fractional reserve ratio is 10 percent that means that the system can lend -- that is create new "thin air" deposits for borrowers up to 90 percent of what they have on hand.  This of course will increase the water line in the total deposits tub by 90 percent.  Now this rise in the water line from the old level to the new level  is new deposit that can also be considered new reserves against which new loans can be made  -- so 90 percent of that 90 percent of the original Tom Dick and Harry can be loaned by those banks, loaned to Tom Dick and Harry to expand their laundry facilities.  But this 90 percent of 90 percent itself raises the water line of total deposits -- and the additional deposits from the old water line to the newest line is also new deposits which can by the fractional reserve banking rules can back new loans up to 90 percent of that rise in the water line.  And this is the money multiplier effect.  Each new loan gives birth to new deposits that have a life of their own being transferred between Tom, Dick and  Harry.

But we are forgetting that each of these loans must eventually be paid back to the bank.  Which means taken out of the system.  And that lowers the water line  -- and of course the total amount of loans cannot reach higher than 90 percent of water line of total deposits.  So if a loan is repaid, then all of the fractional-reserve-based loans that came from thin air because of that loan must now go back into thin air because that loan is being retired.  Now we have a money multiplier of contraction.  Because as the reverting back to thin air of 90 percent of the repaid loan, will force loan calls of 90 percent of that amount  -- which in turn will lower the level of the total deposits tub once again requiring yet more loan calls.  And so it goes  -- except it is goes even further than that -- because we have so far not mentioned the interest payments that also are draining the tub.

Tom, Dick and Harry must end up turning their laundries over to the bank  because while they started with their grandmas' mattress money to stake them in their laundry business --  they took out loans that were far more than that to build their laundry's.

Each 100 from a grandma led to a 90 dollar loan which led to a .9 of 90 loan which led to a .9 of .9 of the 90 dollar loan  and so on, until Tom, Dick and Harry are owing the bank far more than $100 for each $100 of grandma money they deposited.  And on top of all of this that is owed in principal on multiple loans  there is also interest on each of these loans.  So if the bank after it is all loaned out simply collects the interest and the repayment of principal  Tom, Dick and Harry will loose all of their checkbook money and their laundries will be foreclosed too  -- grandma's stake and all of the work they have put into it.

And of course the bankers will own the laundries and the land they are on.   

But the bankers have to save their reputations in all this  -- so they offer to loan the government of Tom Dick and Harry that will be used to put Tom Dick and Harry to work building wind generators to power the laundries now belonging to the banks.  Of course the money loaned to the Government of Tom, Dick and Harry will have to be repaid with interest.  Now since the government of Tom, Dick and Harry has no laundries  what it can do is tax all of the work that Tom, Dick and Harry do as they try to dig themselves out of their hole.  But as more and more interest is needed and more and more loans to make up for the net drain on money from the system -- the debt slavery and tax slavery of Tom, Dick and Harry consumes all of their lives  -- they and their children and grand children will inherit the slavery in the form of the Government of Tom, Dick and Harry and their progeny forever. 

And notice this about what has been explained above.  Inflation was not the cause of the problem.  Inflation is simply another word for investment.  In fact "economic bubble" is just another word for people investing (smart or stupid) with borrowed money.  The trouble enters in when "anti-inflation" that taking back of that loan money and yet more than the amount of the loan in the form of payment to the banks of principal and interest  causes deflation -- causes the money multiplier of contraction (collapse) of loans.  Actually inflation is not bad at all.  It is deflation that kills us.  Only the holders of financial wealth, the lords of the financial sector, like deflation because it is when they take back what they created out of thin air and then more -- which is a drain that is multiplied so that the lender/creditor ends up owning everything the borrower had before he came seeking a loan and the business that the borrower built up with the loan.  Borrowers are farmed and fleeced and so are entire nations.

Now of course the answer to this is social credit -- which just gives every person money debt free to go out and spend and build an economy without fractional reserve banking building up their debt and then, by deflation because of interest drain, taking away everything they build and then some.

If Social Credit is the real answer, shouldn't you learn more about it? 
 

by Dick Eastman


Everything you and I have been taught about the importance of interest rates in helping or hurting the economy is wrong.

We were told that when interest rates are low the cost of investment will be less and economic growth will result and so forth.

But this is not how Big Finance and the Central Bankers think at all.

For them high and low interest rates are set merely to time the onset of recessions.  For them the interest rate is the control variable that determines how fast the new purchasing power from a loan will decay to zero purchasing power and continue decaying other purchasing power as an "anti-loan."   Setting interest rates is merely setting the time release of the poison pill of deflation that is hidden in every loan.

People are in a depression caused by lack of purchasing power.  Loans are extended by creating a checking deposit   and at that moment purchasing power  is jumped up by the amount of the loan (with money multiplier effects.)   Now the question is how soon -- how fast --  will that jump be eaten up by interest payments and the eating continue until where the jump in purchasing power was there is now a drop lower than before the loan?  It is by setting interest rates the rate of decay of purchasing power is determined.

Our economic depression is being treated by quacks to with precision keep us just as sick as they want us, so we will always be needing to buy more financial medicine from them.

You are told that easy money and low interest rates create booms or bubbles and that these bubbles must collapse and that all of that investment that took place was a mistake  -- called "mal-investment" -- and that it all must be liquidated (which means possession or proceeds from a distress sale must go to the creditors (who are also the buyers in the distress sales.)

Interest rates, therefore, are either short or long at at any given time so that Big Finance can time the onset of periods of recession (of asset acquisition  -- their "harvest season") against the onset of periods of capital investment that creates  new assets (the "planting" season of bankers when they let borrowers develop the businesses and build the homes) which the bankers will grab for themselves bankers later on during the  "harvest time" of depression which they have scheduled with precision through their setting of interest rates. 

Not until now has the true function of the Fed -- the function of interest rate coordination to generate the seasons of sowing and harvest of the banker-imposed business cycle.

To summarize:  Purchasing power has an adjustable half-life and interest-rate level is the knob by which it is set.  Interest rate determines the speed at which a loan or debt-financed stimulus decays to nothing and then drops past nothing as it becomes becomes an "anti-loan" - the deflationary power behind economy implosion.
 

I received this email:

From:
To: oldickeastman@q.com
Subject: Re: You have read a thousand posts about the economy. Now try this one.
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010

"It's all in the artificial boom & bust cycles.  In the bust cycles it's like playing musical chairs for people and business.  People and business end up going bankrupt as they end up with no chair (no money to pay their debts.)  Banks then are able to come in and buy up their assets for pennies and if they were in debt the banks already own their assets.  All from thin air.  Or like now it's so bad, debt or no debt, they just end up with no money or not enough money to carry on business as usual.  This is why inflation needs to be kept in check. 

"With each artificial bust cycle the banksters end up owning & controlling more & more."

The History of the House of Rothschild Part I 

The Rothschilds have, with their founding of Zionism, betrayed the principles of the Torah and as you will see in this timeline, the people who have suffered the most at the hands of these Zionists are the Jews. 

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=4277  

=================

The History of the House of Rothschild Part II 

This is not a surprise, the whole idea of Zionist support for the slaughter of innocent Jews was to scare the survivors into believing that their only place of safety was Israel. 

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=427  

====================

The History of the House of Rothschild 

The Rothschilds claim that they are Jewish, when in fact they are Khazars. They are from a country called Khazaria, which occupied the land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea which is now predominantly occupied by Georgia . The reason the Rothschilds claim to be Jewish is that the Khazars under the instruction of the King, converted to the Jewish faith in 740 A.D., but of course that did not include converting their Asiatic Mongolian genes to the genes of the Jewish people. 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_iraqi/message/2291  

=====================

The Rothschild’s Colonization of India and Looting its Gold 

Lord McCauley in his speech of Feb 2, 1835, British Parliament: “I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar or who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values & people of such calibre, that do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage." 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_iraqi/message/2437  

====================

 Mr. Rothschild and his valet Mr. Rockefeller 

Henry Kissinger is the chief lieutenant of David Rockefeller, who is the American commisar of the Rothschild empire, which runs just about everything. 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_iraqi/message/2713  
 

=================
 

Rothschild, world Zionism and world capitalism has been fleecing US 

The wealth of America has been siphoned off by World Zionism and World Capitalism. World Zionism and World Capitalism are the sides of a single coin, on the front is an image of Rothschild and on the reverse a Red Shield. 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_iraqi/message/2194
 

=========
 

Secrets of the Federal Reserve 

It is now apparent that there might have been no World War without the Federal Reserve System. "The effect of the war upon the business of the Federal Reserve Banks has required an immense development of the staffs of these banks, with a corresponding increase in expenses. Without, of course, being able to anticipate so early and extensive a demand for their services in this connection, the framers of the Federal Reserve Act had provided that the Federal Reserve Banksshould act as fiscal agents of the Government." 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_iraqi/message/549
 

====================
 

Zionism is the Worship of Rothschild Ownership of the World?

Or is there a secret society that is still on the gold bullion standard -- who are behind all of the chaos so they can re-impose the gold standard.  Exactly that is what is described by these two Lords in their speech to the house of Lords -- which I (Eastman) have transcribed below from the video linked below.  It seems that the House of Lords are in the Dark and many in the City of London are in the dark as two who this gold-standard clique of super wealthy people may be and what their plans are or whether they can be trusted not to be the words biggest rotters.  Listen to the video as you read along.  The curtain is pulled back -- only to see that there are more curtains that those on the other side of the curtain we have just penetrated are wondering about with, as the British are always very good at, concealed great concern.

First , Lord James of Blackheath, addressing the UK House of Lords, November 1  --  was dead within 21 days of when this address was delivered.
 

http://bl138w.blu138.mail.live.com/default.aspx
 

Dick Eastman quick transcription (in case it disappears from youtube):
 

"...simply because I've been engaged in some rather delicate work on behalf of our cousins in the United States and it's been quite the dangerous work, uh, is that we have been exposing the biggest corruption story in the history of the world uh which is  basically surrounded uh it concerns the derivatives operation  uh all derivatives are fraudulent finance activities - the United States  moved this week unto the Bazel 2 norms which means that all off-balance-sheet transactions are illegal and uh which means that the entire derivatives sector is worth zilch. 

Now the reason that the pound in your pocket is a piddly little little coin which you can't even buy the Daily Telegraph with is precisely because this leveraging and hypothecation of fraudulent finance activity has been taking place.  Now it um was originated in the bowels of the - what are called the US intelligence power um  and the proxy name for that is the CIA but actually we're referring to 16, possibly 18 uh agencies which are subsidiaries of the CIA including the FBI um The brains behind this is Doctor Henie Kissinger, also known as Heins, he is a triple agent.  His Soviet code name is BOR - quite well known.  We don't know what his uh pan German code name is. [break in video continuity]  We did not win the war.  What happened was we finished Hitler off, we personalized the war, so we thought that when Hitler ceased to exist ... [break in video continuity]   . . . at the Ramsey (Lamsey?) Conference the Nazi intelligentsia realized that there  must be a 50-50 chance that the Germans would lose the war. 

And so what they did was that they exported their big brains to Madrid and in 1942 they set up what it what they called the German political center.  [break in continuity of video]  Now, the German geopolitical center does nothing but think about what would happen if Germany didn't succeed in taking over Europe. And - in other words it was a long-term think tank and they developed a long range deception strategy called (??? Elherkashaverlschaftzskermeinschaft ???  European Economic Community published in 1942 in Berlin  [discontinutiy in video] ... is enemy of its member states. 

The European Union is, of course, not our friend, it is our enemy and has been over a long  [discontinuity in video] It's purpose is to usurp our sovereignty and take us over.  [applause]   And in fact what we now have now have  [break in continuity] under feif (?) we handed over general powers to an unelected group in Brussels which is a self-perpetuating situation. And the real problem with this enemy of ours is that it is on auto-pilot.  The problem was or has been that a) the people running the criminal finance including of course the criminal enterprises and by the way I have referred to Citibank and other very large uh banks in the United States as criminal enterprises for the last two and a half years and I am still walking and the reason for that is if you go into the main court house in New York and you pull out Citibank you would have to spend about three weeks taking down information about the court cases concerning Citibank and fraud which are  still before the court and that's just one one court. 

Anyway, what happened this week is that the Chinese have made available to the United States or to the Federal Reserve ten metric tons of gold.  It's been loaned to them. -- it's a sort of loan, but of course there are  huge strings attached and it's no coincidence that Hillary Clinton, who is up to her neck in this corruption, as you well know from the Clinton background [break in video continuity] ... In fact what we are talking about is a two pronged attack on the main enemy.  The main enemy, according to the Germans and the Soviets is  Britain and the United States.    [video cuts to a picture that cannot be read -- then the video switches to a new speaker -- who addressing some formal gathering, perhaps also the House of Lords) 
 

Second speaker (identified across the screen as  Lord James):
 

Lord James:  I'm going to have to make a very big apology to my noble friend, ?noble lord so soon?? because I'm about to raise a subject which I shouldn't raise which is going to be one which I think is now time to put on the higher awareness and to explain to the House as a whole as I don't think they have any ?? as sorry ??? of pride is not ??in them  because it deeply concerns him also .  For the last 20 weeks since yesterday afternoon I have been engaged in a very strange dialog with the two noble lords, in the course of which I have been trying to bring to their attention the willing availability of a strange organization which is to make a great deal of money available to assist the recovery of the economy in this country. 

For want of a better description of their names I will call them Foundation X, that's not their real name, but it will do for the moment.  Foundation X was introduced to me 20 weeks ago last week by a very eminent ah City firm, FSA controlled, that chairman came to me and its Chairman said "we have this extraordinary request assistant doing this extraordinary reconstruction, it's mega bucks, but we need your help to assist us in understanding whether this business is legitimate."  Uh, I had the biggest put-down of my life from the noble Lord ??  Strath-Clighborn?? when I told him this story first.  He said, "Why you?  Your not important enough to have the answer to a question like that."  And he's quite right.  Number one, I'm not important enough -- but the answer to the next question,  "you haven't got the experience for it"  -- yes I do. 

I have had one of the biggest experiences in the laundering of terrorist money and of funny money that anybody's had in the City.  I've handled billions of terrorist money.   Not into my pocket.  Ah, the biggest terrorist client I had was the IRA and I'm pleased to say that I was able to write off about a billion pounds of their money.  I've also had extensive connections with North African terrorists but that's of a far nastier nature and I don't want to talk about that as that's still a security issue.  Um, I also hasten to add that there's no use in getting the police in for me because I shall immediately call the bank of England as my defense witnesses, they put me in to deal with these problems.  So the point is I was in the course of doing this very strange activity -- I got a very interesting set  of phone numbers and references which I could go to for help when I needed it -- and so people in the City have known that if they want to check out anything that looks at all odd they can come to me and I can press a few phone numbers and get a reference, and so it came to me and asked me whether I would get them - reference of the clearance of Foundation X and for 20 weeks I have been endeavoring to do so. 

I myself have come to the absolute conclusion that they are completely genuine and sincere and that they are quite directly wishing to make the United Kingdom one of the principal points for which they will use to disseminate their extraordinary great wealth into the world at this present moment as part of an attempt to seek the economic recovery of the global economy.  And so I made the phone call to my noble friend Lord ???Strath-Clyde??? on a Sunday afternoon - I think he was sitting on his lawn?? pol?? lan  and he did the quickest ball pass I've ever seen,  --  if England can do anything like it at ?? trick?? in? a? mons on Saturday we have a chance against the all blacks -- and the next thing I knew I got the noble Lord Sasoon on the phone and he from the outset took the quite right proper defensive attitude of total skepticism and said this is ?? can't possibly be right.  In the course of the following weeks I had -- first of all, the noble lord Sasoon said go and talk to the Bank of England, so I phoned the governor of the bank of England and said could you please check this out for me.  And he came back after about three days and said,   "you can get lost  I'm not touching this with a ??barge ??pole?, it's far too difficult. 

Take it back to the treasury.  So I did.  I waited another day , the noble Lord Sassoon come back and said "this is rubbish, it can't possibly be right."  So I said, I'm going to work more on it.  And then I had another meeting with the noble lord Strath-Clyde and I brought one of the senior executives from Foundation X to meet Lord Strath-Clyde.  I have to say that as first dates go, it was not a great success.  They neither one of them ended up inviting the other up for a coffee or a drink at the end of the evening and they didn't exchange telephone numbers in order to follow up the ?? col?? In fact I found myself between a rock and a hard place represented by both a rock and a hard place which were totally paranoid about each other.  Because the Foundation X people have got an amazing obsession with their insecurity -- uh, they are expecting only to be contacted by somebody equal to head of states   status or somebody who has an international security rating equal to the top six people in the world.  And this is such a strange situation .  So that both the noble Lord Sassoon and the noble Lord Strath-Clyde both came up with what should have been an absolute killer argument as to why this could not be true and should forget it. 

Then Lord Sassoon's argument , first , was that  these people were offering evidence or they claimed evidence that they had lodged five billion pounds with British banks last year and they gave dates and they gave transfer dates and the details of these transfers as noble Lord Sassoon said, if that was true it would stick out like a sore thumb.  You couldn't have five billion popping out of a bank account without it destroying disrupting the balance sheet completely.  But I remember that at about the same time those transfers were being made the noble Lord ??Minus?? was indulging in his game of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with the British banking community and if he had had three banks at that time which had, say, a deficiency of, say, one and a half billion each, then you pretty we have absorbed the entire five billion and you wouldn't the sore-thumb stick-out of this at that time because you would have had one and a half billion into each of three banks and you would have lost the lot -- or absorbed the lot.  That would be a logical explanation -- I don't know. 

Then Lord ?Strath-Clyde?  came up with a much different argument.  He said cannot be right this cannot be right because these people said at the meeting with him that they were still effectively on the gold standard  from back in the 1920's.  And that their entire currency holdings throughout the world, which were very large, uh, were backed by bullion.  And then Lord Strath-Clyde came back and said to me he had his analyst working on it and this has to be stuff and nonsense because he says they have come up with a figure for the amount of bullion that would be needed to cover their currency reserves as claimed which would be more than the entire value of bullion that had ever been mined in the history of the world.  I am sorry but the noble Lord Strath-Clyde is wrong  --  his analysts are wrong --  because what he had done was tapped into the sources which are available -- there is only one definitive source for the amount of bullion.   --  I have to quit here  -- wife wants me to watch TV with her before she goes to bed. -- will finish but want to get this much out in case there is a power outage or something  -- 
 

Q: What is the core knowledge the world must have to overthrow debt slavery and chronic economic depressions and such extreme redistributions of wealth to financiers, speculators and monopoly corporations? 
 

A:  Each class, creditor and debtor, operates in a different economy.  The creditor class regulates both.  In the lower class -- consisting of the household and production sectors of the domestic economy -- is constrained to operating in the lower loop.  Banks and government are the means whereby the upper loop regulates and "farms" the lower loop.   

In the lower loop money exists only as loans made by banks.  Every loan for a time reflates purchasing power to the lower loop, but every loan eventually ends up deflating more purchasing power than was added for the simple reason that  both the principal of the loan and compound interest on the loan must be paid back. 
 

The upper loop provides the lower loop with a flow of loans but it takes back over time a larger flow than it takes in.  Since the lower loop of households and domestic businesses of the domestic economy cannot pay back the loan with money, it must pay with assets. 
 

If the upper loop wants to own new industries that exploit new technologies they extend loans to lower loop businesses so that the lower loop entrepreneurs, engineers and skilled workers will have the tools and payment to develop and build this new industry.  Then the upper loop simply stops making loans until the drainage of principal and interest bring on deflation and depression.  The new businesses will fail due to lack of demand for their products which in turn is due to the drain of purchasing power.  The new businesses will go bankrupt and will be bought up cheaply by the upper loop with their large reserve of accumulated interest which they have been withholding.   
 

However the upper loop does not by the failed businesses directly from the people who started the businesses and built them.  Rather they wait until the businesses have gone into receivership -- so that the money they pay for the bankrupt properties will not go to lower loop people.  The upper loop loses power if every the lower loop people ever have purchasing power free and clear. 
 

Now the upper loop money is not loans.  The money of the upper loop is bets.  It is a money of pure speculation.  When speculators gamble in the derivatives market they create marketable bets called derivatives, but also commodities futures, swap options or whatever bet they choose to make.  The upper loop is completely unregulated.  The upper loop is all about gaining assets from values they have created "out of thin air"  -- they find that "thin air" moves and physical matter and controls human behavior.  The upper loop uses "thin air" to gain the assets of the earth.  

One more thing.  If a nation should try to run its own purchasing  power system, the upper loop creditor class will us some of their accumulated interest or just their great "thin-air" event-shaping power to buy politicians or revolutionaries or other trouble makers to bring those nations down.  (See the article on Khondorkovsky)

It is my hope that if enough people knew what was going on, that they could band together and capture the thin=air machine and modify it so that it provides thin-air purchasing power exclusively to the household sector of the lower loop.  There would be no more upper loop.  Each household would receive new purchasing power free and clear with which to spend as he or she sees fit.  (Children's social credit can be saved for an education and a house or spent on present family expenditure.)   This new money appearing in households would be the only source of new money in the economy.  Thus all economic power and political power would stem from the household sector.  Household demand would direct production.

There would be a financial sector, but it would no longer create our money.  Banking would be a simple matter of paying savers for the use of their savings so that money can be given to entrepreneurs, engineers and skilled workmen to meet the needs of the country.

First, let us define the words “social credit”: instead of having money created by the banks at interest – a banking credit, one would have money created within the household sector by a check from the  HRS (Household Revenue Service) – money credited to society by society for society's use.    The Social Credit system aims at nothing but to have American households and the entrepreneurs who organize production to satisfy their demand for goods to direct the economy.   
 

No more bogus financial sector which is supposed to take our savings and lend them for investment in producers goods.  That never did work.  Under the present usury system savings out and investment in never did match up so that purchasing power remained constant.  And certainly interest rates, whether market determined or manipulated by central banks or speculators never did give us a proper balance between the production of investment goods and producers goods.  And absolutely positively never did the system not end up with all wealth being redistributed from working households to the financiers and corporations providing producers goods, war "export"  goods and "reconstruction" goods.   Deflation was chronic  -- interest payments pouring into the hands of the financial sector (the creditor class) leading to under consumption by households and thus unsold consumer goods.   But of course with depressed demand, investment would stop.  And it has.  And disappearing purchasing power would lead to defaults on loans and a recession, leading to bankruptcies and loan calls and more bankruptcies and austerity and less wages and less purchasing power and more bankruptcies and busted budgets leading to foreclosures.   And then the phony stimulus  -- which usually never reaches the domestic householders.
 

And above all we do not need the creditor class  -- which having all of that interest owed to it -- all of those payments the households and domestic businesses must keep making to them far into the future -- so that they become so vitally interested in seeing to it that there is monstrous deflation to ensure that the money we will have to pay them as interest has the maximum purchasing power possible  -- so it will require the maximum of our working time and our earnings to make the payments.  No more will this class direct monetary policy in their own pre-deflation interest. 
 

Under Social Credit the households would lay out cash for the products they want, making profits for the entrepreneurs who provided those goods and losses for those who did not produce what the sovereign household demand was looking for.  From the profit the successful entrepreneurs would have money to expand or to move into other fields where their business acumen indicates that more profits can be made serving households.   No more would bankers decide where corporations invest.  No more would bankers create wars or man-made natural disasters (hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis) to create demand for their industrial complexes.  No more would we have big stimulation in the construction industry -- which is the only industry that big finance allows, because construction contracts is how political payoffs are made to ruling elites in the smaller communities throughout the country. 
 

Moreover, because wages are not sufficient to purchase all of existing production (wages being just one part of the production cost of any item), the Household Revenue Service would give every citizen a monthly dividend, a sum of money to fill the gap in the purchasing power (and make it equal to the collective prices for consumable goods for sale), and to ensure each and all a share in the goods of the nation.  Those who would be employed in production would still receive a salary, but everyone, employed as well as unemployed, would receive his or her dividend.
 

The dividend formula would be infinitely better than the present social programs like welfare, unemployment insurance, etc., since the dividend would not be financed by the taxes of those who are employed, but by new money created by the National Credit Office. No one would therefore live at the expense of the taxpayers; the dividend would be a heritage that is due to all  citizens, who are all stockholders in the human race in the United States. 
 

The beauty of a portion of income going to everyone that is not tied to loans or tied to labor, it gives people power to bargain for wages.  Social credit is a "strike fund"  for everyone that makes labor unions unnecessary.  No longer would the Creditor and Corporate Ownership classes have bargaining superiority in setting wages.  There would always be demand enough for people to got into business for themselves or to find another employer of their particular skills so that they do not have to tolerate low wages or injustice in the workplace.  Social credit ends not only wage slavery but also debt slavery.   Machines were invented to increase productivity from labor and to increase leisure available to man.  With modern factories all mankind should be enjoying great leisure, except that the usury system has taken all of the the gain for the financial sector at the expense of working households. Under social credit the household will be the main thing  -- where families are raised and where culture is improved through leisure and the means of self-development and community improvement.

It was St. Paul who wrote that the love of money is the root of all evil.   Money is an invention that is not inherently evil in or of itself.  It is simply a tool that can be used for evil purposes.  It can also be used to accomplish good.  It was written in Acts that the early Christians sold their possessions to feed and clothe the poor.  They used their money also for Christian community purposes.  If a morally responsible government administered the usury free creation and payment into circulation of honest money, these deliberately contrived boom and bust cycles that the bankers use to acquire property through foreclosure need not exist at all.

No dividend for any household will be based on a proportion of their income.  Everyone will get the same sized dividend.  The purposes of this dividend for every household are --- to establish a money supply in sufficient quantity so that what is available from production will be moved at satisfactory speed --- and --- to insure that no one in the nation lacks food, shelter and heat especially in the winter --- and --- to remove the ravages of usury and fractional reserve banking forever from the life of our nation.  The dividend in Alaska goes not just to households, but to every individual in every household that are legal citizens and have established residency after one year.  It works well there, but it is based on quantity of oil sold.  They do have a very harsh climate and surely need it to survive.

The biggest conflict of interest and moral hazard in the US -- the root of all corruption, the source and empowering of conspiracy is the fact that the intermediaries who supposedly take peoples savings and then lend them out to entrepreneurs are also the bond holders, the creditors to whom all debt is owed.  Intermediaries are supposed to make money on the spread between depositors savings accounts and the rate at which business loans are made.  Bond holders simply own IOUs and can only gain in wealth if they can engineer deflation.  When the bond holders and the intermediaries are the same persons, investment will simply not be made -- because creditors have much more to gain from engineering deflation than intermediaries have from lending savers' savings to entrepreneurs.

That is why American bankers have quit providing money for domestic economy entrepreneurs.  They much rather profit by deflation, with occasional refilling of the pot to drain by extending easy home-equity credit which they know will be soon eaten up again in deflation by virtue of the fact that no matter how much new money they create in the form of home equity loans will be taken back again with a vengeance when both principal and compound interest must be repaid.  The deflation continues apace, but with each short period of boom, more assets are created that will be captured by the creditor class in foreclosure.

Bank intermediaries simply should not be allowed to own bonds.  It is a conflict of interest and a crime.

Look at the debt that the people are in - all owed to bankers, i.e., to the intermediaries who are supposed to bundle savings and lend it out to producers but never do.

If I could be Führer for a day  the first thing I would do after a) repudiating all debt to the international bankers, 2)  initiating social credit dividends for the creation of all new money in the household sector exclusively,  3)  making money US treasury "thin air" debt-free fiat and 4) ending fractional reserve banking would be to 5) impose a law separating bonds from banking  so that  Businesses selling bonds and Government selling bonds - will be kept a quadrillion light years from the banks which I would limit exclusively to lending   savers' time savings deposits to businessman borrowers and home buyers.  

Once the human race separates bonds and banking every day will be the first day of spring.

Dick Eastman

Yakima, Washington

No matter how bad the lemon you drive, there is always someone willing to sell you a worse lemon.

These men when they call for a gold standard and the abolition of the Fed are actually proposing that all of the assets held by the Fed be turned over to the National Banks, that is turning over all of the US debt they hold  -- the securities the Fed has been buying in its "Quantative Easing" program  (the name was invented to keep the open market operations mechanism hidden from the public)  giving the securities to the Rothschild controlled banks that own they system.

These Rothschild owned regional banks and big New York banks will simply get all of those securities for their own portfolios -- that is why the investment banks changed the rules allowing them to merge with the Fed owning national banks. And under this plan, the "nationally chartered" banks -- probably just the biggest ones, will get to issue the money if they have the gold reserves. Thus they are putting Rothschild's gold holdings in total control of money and credit in the US.  Its the most stupid thing the American people can do  -- but all of you folks  love to dance to Paul and Celente and Schiff because they have learned what songs make you laugh or cry, or stand up and salute, or scare you into doing stupid things without even starting to think about the consequences.
 

===============

Dick,
 

I think that, in its prime, the Birch Society was the biggest controlled opposition organization that ever existed in the "patriot community."  Years ago I accused it of being the first outfit to spread the lie that monopoly capitalism (which is the ONLY kind of capitalism) and free enterprise are the same thing when, in fact, they are 180 degrees opposed.  No one ever responded.  Also I constantly described its policy as "forever learning and never coming to the truth."  I know for a fact that two chapters in So. Cal. were shut down by headquarters because they were studying the Jewish involvement in just about everything that the society was supposedly trying to correct.

Tony B.

 

The gold panic is suicidal. Americans are being stampeded of a cliff by the gold monopoly.   Stop the panic to gold.  You are bleeding this country to death when you buy gold -- and there isn't any monetary inflation.  You are being had and it will cost us all everything. 

The Money Myth Exploded. Louis Even
 

Social Credit puts money in its proper place. Louis Even
 

Money, an instrument of distribution. Louis Even
 

To solve the problem of poverty. Louis Even
 

The interest kills children, kills nations. F. de Siebenthal
 

“Another kind of terrorism: the unjust economic system“. Archbishop Concessao
 

In This Age of Plenty. Louis Even (book with 52 chapters)
 

A Sound and Effective Financial System. Louis Even (booklet)
 

What do we mean by real Social Credit? Louis Even (booklet)
 

Social Credit, for a healthy economy. Louis Even
 

A few questions and principles on Social Credit. Louis Even
 

It's time people knew the money trick. Colin Barclay-Smith
 

What can economic science do to get Social Credit applied? Diane Boucher
 

The Government Must Create Its Own Money. Alain Pilote
 

The Government does not create money. Louis Even
 

The pen that rules the world. Louis Even
 

For a Better Understanding of Social Credit. Alain Pilote
 

The Environment — Where Money Is Concerned. A. Pilote
 

Social Credit, a scientific technique of finance. Gilberte Côté-Mercier
 

Social Credit: humanism and common sense. Gilberte Côté-Mercier
 

About Clifford Hugh Douglas, the genius who discovered Social Credit. Louis Even
 

Social Credit: not Socialism, not a political party. A. Pilote
 

Our economic liberation through Social Credit. Louis Even
 

Canada is rich in real wealth, the Canadians are poor. Gilberte Côté-Mercier
 

Restore to the people the control of their own wealth. Louis Even
 

A civilization of men financially free. Louis Even
 

What should be corrected! Louis Even
 

As the people build, the people get into debt. Louis Even
 

Unemployment, a condemnation of the financial system. Louis Even
 

Social Credit and labour problems. Louis Even
 

The young people want a new financial system. Louis Marie Roy
 

To make financially possible what is physically possible. Louis Even
 

A brief outline of Social Credit. Vic Bridger

How to apply Social Credit locally. François de Siebenthal
 

Social Credit and the Menace
of the Financial Sector

A

* * *

"The current system uses officially imprinted money that is universally accepted for all commercial transactions and for taxes. Social Credit would operate in the same way but with the general welfare being the primary objective as required in the Preamble [of the Constitution]. There will still be free market capitalism (minus fractional reserve banking), property ownership and even gold and silver exchanges. It is your and Dr. Paul's system that will fail to perform its promised libertopia since there will be no uniform way to inject money into the currency stream fairly and justly. At present, and under your system, only the money creators (a select few) are allowed to inject the money into the currency stream -- thereby being first users of the money and directly benefiting from its creation." -- Daniel Krynicki

 

THE VERY CREATION OF MONEY BY THE BANKERS -- BE THEY COMMERCIAL, FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL BANKERS in the form of debt, out of nothing and demand payments of original loan plus interest or usury is the prima facie evidence of the financial-economic crime!

The bitter fight would be between PEOPLES VERSUS THE BANKERS. "The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks." – Lord Action.

THE ONLY HIDDEN ASSET OF THE BANKING SYSTEM is the creation of money out of nothing – the fractional reserve banking system, otherwise, bankers do not have any real assets of their own at all.

How can peoples in this planet file lawsuits against the bankers when peoples are controlled by the very system without which they cannot seem to tackle to survive? How can we break it off?

Do the people need to change first before we can change the banking system?

Money problem is like a Mt. Everest-sized problem. About 90% of the global population is in chronic money problems.

It is a daily torture for most, and squeezing everyone to the bone to death. All peoples in all walks of life are extremely damaged spiritually, morally and physically by money problems without exception.

Common households and families are burning the candle at both ends trying to stretch out the money to the very limit in extreme austerity measures to keep them surviving and thriving daily. Young and old, single and married, divorced and separated, retired peoples are on the same plight.

Homeowners, property owners, landlords are held off by the bankers to pay interest for their interest-bearing loans. Failure to fail loans at scheduled time means compounding interest. Taxpayers are hosed off, pressed upon, squeezed on to pay their dues. Taxes are collected by adroit methods by which peoples would be intimidated and forced upon by the Governments to comply with the conditions and requirements of the financiers, bankers and economists.

Hundreds of millions to billions of people across the planet are hog-tied, chained, shackled and enslaved by debt finance irrespective whether they are the lenders or the borrowers. The very fact that money is created as a debt by the banking system through the scam of fractional reserve banking, and criminally ~ out of nothing, in a ponzi scheme, is a prima facie evidence of addiction of the money lenders, money creators and money controllers.

All nations, continents, communities, and inhabitants are under the savage cruelty of the cobweb of debts. And in view of the gravity of the debt problems, it appears that both the lenders and the borrowers are addictive to the money and wealth. Government is debt-addict and most government officials, politicians and their political parties are addicted to money down to being poisoned by money. Corporations and all various institutions are also debt-addict through massive expansion of wealth, or profit-oriented-money addict just as their incorporators, investors and workers and members are addicted to money and wealth.

I am convinced that WORLD DEBTS OF NATIONS to banking system cartel are all odious by adroit conspiracy, based on “ex nihilo” creation of money. And on this premise, it is genetically criminal, and therefore must not be repaid. On the Law of Reparation, the Bankers must return what they have stolen, extorted, scammed, racketed both by legal and illegal means, and thus countries must take initiatives to establish a new financial-economic system for justice, equality and financial security for all.

Debt Moratorium isn’t enough!

Debt Moratorium is a sham and therefore, futile by principles. Debt Management is futile by its rubbish theories of voodoo economics. WHAT WE NEED IS WRITING OFF DEBTS ALTOGETHER AND CREATE MONEY DEBT-FREE BY THE PUBLIC BANKING SYSTEM BY LEGISLATION, BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT AND BACKED UP BY THE PEOPLE.

What about the heinous crimes by which the root-cause of such is the present banking system – THE DEADLY SYMPTOMS OF CHRONIC MONEY, WEALTH AND... “Ex Nihilo Money Creation” – out of nothing. Please see the attached as extremely important for all people to understand how money is created.

But money is only available for bail-out to bankers and there isn’t any bail-out for the people. Can we clamor for bail-out for the people?

US gov to give $100 Billion+ to Goldman Sachs (Again)

Another bailout for chosen investors. They buy at 10% resell at 50% and make megabucks. IF fedgov auctioned the houses directly the taxpayers would get the 40% (50% - 10% auction cost) rather than Chosen banks.

Public Taxes and Private Profits.

How largest portion of money is being sucked out by the dinosaurian financial cabals in the world today. Below is just a tip of the iceberg on the lists.

Citigroup got $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley got $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch got $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America got $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom) got $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns got $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs got $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK) got $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase got $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany) got $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland) got $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland) got $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers got $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)

THE WORLD IS VERY UNFAIR AND THERE IS NO HOPE TO MAKE IT FAIR SINCE HUMAN NATURE IS UNFAIR under the most disastrous and pestiferous debt finance disaster capitalism and exorbitant usury.

The bankers are only doing a diversionary tactics and gimmicks to confuse/tomfool the peoples now in vast crisis.

Is this verified true?

How this "First Settlement Payment" for US$30 Billion Completed And Clinton, Obama, Bush Jr. and Geithner Take It For Personal Accounts.

August 5, 2011 - WHITE HATS REPORT #27

Also this one below: SPECULATORS MAKE MONEY ON FOOD WHILE MILLIONS GO HUNGRY? Let us be lashed out to be damned.

Here how we budget our food stretched out to the very limit in complete austerity just to survive with our money losing its value in front of the rising and heavily-taxed prices of food, commodities and services, and yet the suckers make money out of greed!

Chosen speculators make money on food while millions go hungry

Speculation and hoarding are criminals acts perpetrated by US/UK commodity markets. The speculators do nothing useful. They neither grow the food or process it or transport it or sell it or feed people. Simply make money from money. and that is why Allah has banned speculation and hoarding.

We're all being tapped, swamped and squeezed to the bone by the present financial crisis but it is a consolation to think what is right although we're being held up by the very system under which we live.

I think even if the bankers continue into their lawsuits, they're still the winners, and the peoples, the losers at the end. Lawsuits, by using people's money. Taxes would continue to be siphoned off from folks and used for such financial-economic lawsuit gimmicks.

FHA Files a $196 Billion Lawsuit Against 17 Banks

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), as conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises), today filed lawsuits against 17 financial institutions, certain of their officers and various unaffiliated lead underwriters. The suits allege violations of federal securities laws and common law in the sale of residential private-label mortgage-backed securities (PLS) to the Enterprises.

Complaints have been filed against the following lead defendants, in alphabetical order:
1. Ally Financial Inc. f/k/a GMAC, LLC – $6 billion
2. Bank of America Corporation – $6 billion
3. Barclays Bank PLC – $4.9 billion
4. Citigroup, Inc. – $3.5 billion
5. Countrywide Financial Corporation -$26.6 billion
6. Credit Suisse Holdings (USA), Inc. – $14.1 billion
7. Deutsche Bank AG – $14.2 billion
8. First Horizon National Corporation – $883 million
9. General Electric Company – $549 million
10. Goldman Sachs & Co. – $11.1 billion
11. HSBC North America Holdings, Inc. – $6.2 billion
12. JPMorgan Chase & Co. – $33 billion
13. Merrill Lynch & Co. / First Franklin Financial Corp. – $24.8 billion
14. Morgan Stanley – $10.6 billion
15. Nomura Holding America Inc. – $2 billion
16. The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC – $30.4 billion
17. Société Générale – $1.3 billion


DEBT MONEY SYSTEM is an ultimate arithmetic of scam and mass destruction.

Debt money is not mathematics but a voodoo hocus-pocus abra kadabra manipulation of numbers for controlling money, food, wealth and resources of the planet and ultimately controlling human life mainly targeting the innocents.

Debt Money System with usury is the real frightful monster, not debt-free money creation. Money supply is not actually finite as it could always be increased on demand by the facility of the central bank through Government’s legislation as debt-free, not debt-based.

We’re all bamboozled by the bankers with their adroit way of robbing the money that belongs to the people. The bankers arrogate themselves of the power of the People’s Credit. Now, we’re shackled with chains of horrendous debt with skyrocketing interest payments. There is no end of miseries and sufferings.

The real solution of Government’s debt-free money creation, without any debt from any bankers, the DEBT FREE MONEY, that must be circulated in the land for economic democracy provision to every citizen as a matter of economic and divine right and of citizenship must be implemented without delay.

What we also urgently need in the 21st century is the mechanism of distribution, not accumulations of wealth at the expenses of others.

And if all peoples across the planet will have sincere unity and will agree on MONETARY REFORM DEBT-FREE MONEY SCHEME -- PROPOSAL TO EACH AND EVERY LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT in the world, then we can iron out century old problems of money, debt, interest, poverty and hunger all over the world.

The extraordinary remedy, after all our tremendous exhaustion, is to make the system collapse by its fatal course, and as such, change the ENGINE OF DESTRUCTIVE FINANCE. This must be exigible, not just by exigency, by people’s mandate and legitimate demands in the 21st century.

Social Crediters and Monetary Reformers should be tough enough. But how long this debt money system last? There are tremendous roadblocks to financial-economic reform for the benefit of all people. THE BANKERS DO NOT WANT US SUCCESS. We see over the years the dirty hocus-pocus of the bankers to adroitly discourage and even destroy the monetary reform proposals. The bankers discourage the distribution of income in the form of extra basic income.

We have to find a new level of pragmatic insight. Money-reform seeking campaigners must continue to assert the truths and the facts in spite of incredible hardships. In Hebrew 12:1 - it says: "Let us run with perseverance the race marked for us."
 

We can think of several ways in which capital can be created. But social credit is the only fair way to create capital. Others can be fair; but social credit is the only foolproof system able to prevent manipulation and cronyism.

What libertarians identify as "force to make all people equal" misrepresents what social creditors offer. Social Creditors propose that all receive an equal National Credit Dividend as the only means to establish a money supply fairly. No one shall be forced to receive it; and we are certain that a money supply that is not established through a debt/usury system can benefit the nation. By contrast, Ron Paul's system of money creation through gold-backed loans only perpetuates the debt/usury cycle. Except for a few injections of publicly created money into the currency stream, almost all of the existing money in the world has for 417 years been created by privately owned cartels.

Now here is the crux of what the social creditors observe. Privately created money has always resulted in high-handed manipulation of the money supply. Better economists than myself predict there will continue to be a chronic shortage of currency under a Ron Paul administration. It will be the same as when Herbert Hoover and FDR were presidents. Money was very scarce during the 1930s because the international bankers made it so.

The “liberty” to privately create money that libertarians speak of will only continue to allow Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans and Melons to withdraw their gold from being deposited at banks. Available credit will be curtailed greatly, because the liberty they desired gave the money creators (capitalists) the power to stifle commercial activity. We have all been eyewitnesses to the symptoms of chronic shortage of money for three years running now. It should not be necessary to cite our speckled past of all the panics, recessions and depressions mirroring these past three years. These all have been orchestrated by the money creators, so they can take a spoil from the assets others have worked for all their lives. The Austrian Schoolers will only continue what already has been accomplished by the private creation of money for centuries, most of which was accomplished under the guise of being backed by gold.

It is good to hear Mr. Paul debate on a broad spectrum of issues. But in economics he is woefully inadequate - not properly relating historic data to how he perceives gold as being an acceptable form of backing for money. He and the Austrian Schoolers are flat-out wrong. Fiat money of a realm has already replaced gold as a standard since 1974. It works for commerce and it works for taxes because it bears the imprint of the United States Government. His arguments against fiat money do not even tread water: it is the usury obtained during its creation that causes the destruction.

Our Constitution by Unanimous Order of the Convention on September 17th, 1787 gave Congress the authority to 'coin money and regulate the value thereof'. This authority is much misunderstood by the People. As our understanding evolved of how a monetary system operates in practice, some of us who are the honest enough sorts came to see how opportunities emerged for the capital creators to abuse the good will of the people and their economic welfare.

The most apparent pitfall, one not even contemplated by almost everyone, is inherent in the private creation of money through debt/usury. When gold purportedly is used as collateral to back the money certificates private banks issue, two sets of money exist simultaneously: (1) the gold that the issuer never cedes his ownership to and (2) the paper representation (and it is fiat) that enters the currency stream. The moneylenders require it to be paid back with compound interest, and they never give up possession of their gold. But the interest doesn't even exist yet. Where will it come from if it isn't even created yet? Yes, more must be borrowed in order to pay the interest, because this is the only way money can be created under the present system.

Also, in this system we have private issuers of currency who always - as proven time after time throughout this 417-year history - rig the system for personal gain. Public utilities as well as defense manufacturers and contractors are now owned by institutional shell corporations tracing back to the banking-cartel families. These represent the assets over which they have obtained control during this named 417-period of history. Let us call it the "International Bankers' Epoch". Additionally, they fund almost all of the foundations and the campaign war chests in Washington DC.

I have never heard Ron Paul speak out against the money powers. In fact his Austrian School solutions would only entrench the cartels even more, because they own most of the world’s gold. I have read estimates of between 60% and 80%. We should be asking, 'Who is Ron Paul actually working for?'

All of us have to put on our thinking caps. If the Republicans win in 2012 and the national rally cry is austerity, live within one’s means, spend less - and nothing is done to change the system back to public control as the Constitution mandates - then the banking cartels will jump for joy and dry up the money supply even further. And a depression even greater than in the 1930s will ensue.

Social credit takes this power to create money away from the banking cartels and makes a capitalist out of every American citizen through a National Credit Dividend. With this system, there will be an adequate money supply for commercial activity and full employment, because the power laid at the feet of Congress through the Constitution could be used to do what is right.

But it won't happen that way, because the sheeple will listen to Ron Paul and his morally bankrupt Austrian School. And the rest will be led to slaughter by the morally depraved Republicans and Democrats alike.


Daniel S. Krynicki
St. Clair Shores, Michigan

Top