FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The Money Scam: the cornerstone of our slavery
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Pre-Planned Economic 9/11 - Global Financial Conspiracy
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Cruise4
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 292

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 3:31 am    Post subject: The Money Scam Reply with quote

I've read all about the Federal Reserve System... but can someone suggest articles or videos that relate to the way the British Central bank operates the same robbery?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great ask. Let's get to it.

The Bank of England seem to have been better at hiding their tracks than the Fed. I will see what I can find out over the coming weeks.

As I understand it (and until I firm this up consider it as hearsay)

BOE controls interest rates and affects money supply - is responsible for the amount of T bill money in circulation. BOE in effect is the institution that racks up our NATIONAL DEBT.

Our gov (ie us) owes BOE and (other banks also) a ton of money called the 'National Debt' - money spent on wars, social programs, big salaries for the boys etc. This debt is payable by Her Majesties Subjects. Collateral for this debt is at first base public land - eg National Trust etc. Push come to shove and I bet we (& our childeren ad infinitium) are indentured to work the debt off.

Other banks create money too, by debt lending. This is where the money caomes from for house price inflation, which has been rampant. HPI is a measure of just how much debt money is being created. Private debt is like you own personal National Debt. In the US little guys can no longer escape by declaring bankruptcy. After they lose everything they become slaves to the state.

In the USSW we will all labour under unified leglislation, decided by the World Court. Some say this will be based in a building Rothschild had built in Jerusalem.

http://www.abidemiracles.com/555701.htm

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have posted this @ the GIM forum. Let's see what our resident experts have to say...

http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?p=644814#post644814

Ownership of the Federal Reserve is no longer an esoteric subject. It has become in a year or so a hot topic of internet debate and books on the subject by Mullins and Griffin have become widely known.

The same cannot be said about the Bank of England.

Who owns and controls the Bank of England?

The act of 1946

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about/legislation/1946act.pdf

Quote:
An Act to bring the capital stock of the Bank of England into public ownership and bring the Bank under public control, to make provision with respect to the relations between the Treasury, the Bank of England and other banks


A 'nationalisation'?

Quote:
the whole of the existing capital stock of the Bank (hereinafter referred to as “Bank stock”) shall, by virtue of this section, be transferred, free of all trusts, liabilities and incumbrances, to such person as the Treasury may by order nominate,(3) to be held by that person on behalf of the Treasury;

(b) the Treasury shall issue, to the person who immediately before the appointed day is registered in the books of the Bank as the holder of any Bank stock, the equivalent amount of stock created by the Treasury for the purpose (hereinafter referred to as the “Government stock”).


Can anyone decode this gobbledegook? Does it mean that this appointed person takes ownership of the stock, or merely manages it? Because if the stock is in THEIR NAME they own it surely?

Quote:
The Government stock shall bear interest at the rate of three per cent. per annum


Payable to who?

Quote:
The Government stock may be redeemed at par by the Treasury .....after giving not less than three months’ notice in the London Gazette of their intention to do so.


This suggests a deal that enables the Treasury to 'buy back' the stock????

Quote:
After the appointed day, no dividends on Bank stock shall be declared but in lieu of any such dividends the Bank shall pay to the Treasury, on every fifth day of April and of October, [a sum equal to 25 per cent of the Bank’s net profits for its previous financial year, or such other sum as the Treasury and the Bank may agree.]


The Bank pays the Treasury a sum agreed in private... based on what? The weather?

Quote:
As from the appointed day every member of the court of directors of the Bank shall be a member of the said body corporate, notwithstanding that he holds no Bank stock, and accordingly the members of the said body shall be the members for the time being of that court together with the person who for the time being holds the Bank stock on behalf of the

Treasury.


The same old team run the show, supposedly denuded of their 'shares'.

My Initial Take on this...

Nothing changes in 1946 except a fig leaf of 'Nationalisation' is introduced.

The bank is controlled by the same people as before - let's call them the Firm. The shares are no longer nominally held in their name, and instead pass to an appointed 'person' via the Treasury. What recompense do the Firm get for their shares? None apparently. IMO none needed, because in reality the person who takes ownership of the shares is an agent of the Firm. Note that the Treasury may buy back the shares 'at par'. This means they do not own them.

I would appreciate help on deciphering this situation.

Also what really happened when Gordon Brown gave the Bank 'independence'? Cover story was that the Gov would no longer set interest rates, the bank would, removing political expediency from rate-setting and allowing for smoother growth.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This thread is a MUST READ - all nations will be in an analogous position as that outlined by Sen James Traficant

http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=148942

Quote:
It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress me session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America.


and this

Quote:
Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913),”Hypothecated” all property within the federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their “subjects,” the 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, to the Federal Reserve System.

In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all the credit “money substitute” it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their “economic slaves”, the U.S. citizens as collateral against the unpayable federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution, feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the people have exchanged one master for another.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elohim
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Nov 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Ipswich

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would seem that the BOE was nationlised in 1946, the private shareholders being bought out by the goverment.

However, the goverment having no money to buy the shares bought these through issuance of goverment stocks.

From what I have read the BOE (unlike the fed) is now primary a institute that prints a set amount of paper money each each.

The real power now lies with the private banks, indeed, their profits dwarf those of the BOE. The BOE openly admits it's profits come from printing money.

The BOE does not lend money to the goverment, but rather the merchant banks do.

In short the BOE has been made a white elephant by the private bankers.

It's another illusion of the money scam, slightly different from the FED system, but nevertheless a scam all the same.

I URGE EVERYBODY TO READ THE TWO LINKS BELOW:

http://www.prosperityuk.com/prosperity/articles/boe1.html

http://www.fdrs.org/commercial_banks.html

They will explain it much better than me.....

EL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The second link refers to the first. The first refers to - what? An interpretation of how the BoE is structured. Does this interpertation square with the banking act of 1946?

Any legal eagles out there willing to help?

I suspect that we owe the national debt to the usual suspects - the banking dynasties, not privatised banks. I also supect that our present Royalty are blood brothers of the bankers - all the same sect/dynasty - having ousted our indigenous monarchy.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Craig W
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting thread.

Coincidentally, I had the following exchange with a helpful member of staff at the BoE a couple of weeks ago. All the bolding and underlining is mine. I have added some comments in bracketed red text:
Quote:

I was just wondering if you could help me with a couple of questions about the Bank of England.

I have looked around your web site but cannot find the answers, so here goes:

- Who owns the Bank of England? I understand that it was a private corporation prior to 1946 when it was nationalised and that it became "independent" in 1997 (1998?) according to the latest legislation. Does that mean the Bank is currently a privately owned corporaton? If not, what does it mean?

- Who owned the Bank prior to 1946?

- I read the .pdf file of the 1998 Act but could not work out or see to whom the corporation and capital stock of the Bank was transferred.

- Where can I find the Bank's profit figures?

- To whom do any profits go?

Thanks for your help,


They replied:

Quote:
Thank you for your e-mail. The Bank of England is the central bank of the whole of the UK and was founded in 1694, nationalised on 1 March 1946, and as you quite rightly mention, gained operational independence to set interest rates in 1997 (The Bank of England Act 1998 Part II sets out the responsibilities and objectives of the Bank in relation to monetary policy). The Bank is a public sector institution wholly-owned by the government - the entire share capital of the Bank is, in fact, held by the Treasury Solicitor on behalf of HM Treasury.

Each year, the Bank is required to submit its Report and Accounts to Parliament, via the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Any profits made by the Bank in its day-to-day business [don't know if this qualification is significant...why did she not just say "any profits made by the Bank are paid over"...? - CW] are paid over to HM Treasury. The Bank's 'Annual Report and Accounts' can be found on our website at:

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/annualreport/index.htm

From 1694 to 1946 the Bank of England was a private bank with 17,000 shareholders, both individual and corporate. Under the Bank of England Act 1946, however, all such stock was transferred to the Treasury Solicitor. Former holders of stock were compensated by the allocation of an amount of stock created by HM Treasury for the purpose, known as '3% Treasury Stock, 1966 or after which would yield them the equivalent income. [I don't know what this last sentence means. Anyone else? - CW]

I hope the above answers your questions.

With Kind Regards
Wendy Galvin

Public Information and Enquiries Group


I then replied:
Quote:
Thanks for your speedy reply, Wendy.

I have a couple more questions:.

- your website states that the Bank was "granted independence" in 1997. Does that independence relate solely to the independence of the MPC? Or does it refer to a wider change in the way the bank is constituted (and, if so, what)? Can you confirm that the bank is still nationalised (ie that it is owned wholly by HM Government)?

- What is "3% Treasury Stock"? Who was it granted to? What is it stock in, the Bank or something else? Could you clarify your reference to 1966 (there may have been a word missing)?

- Finally, does the bank charge interest on money lent to the Government? If so, why given that it is state owned? In fact, why need the Government borrow money at all when it could just issue it through public works, contracts, etc?

Many thanks,


To which they replied:
Quote:
To take your questions in turn:

Does the term independence relate solely to the independence of the MPC? The term 'operational independence' relates to the setting of the Official Bank Rate by the Bank's Monetary Policy Committee independently of government. Each MPC member is individually accountable and the Committee has to explain its actions regularly to parliamentary committees, particularly the Treasury Committee. The Bank of England Act 1998 established the arrangements for the Bank's current monetary policy responsibilities and also introduced several important changes including the transfer of the Bank's supervisory functions to the Financial Services Authority. To read about this in more detail, please visit the 'About the Bank' part of our website specifically the 'History' and 'Legislation' sections at

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about/index.htm

You go on to ask if the Bank is wholly owned by HM Government - as explained in my previous email to you, the Bank is a public institution wholly-owned by the government with HM Treasury as its sole shareholder.

What is 3% Treasury Stock? This was a 'government stock' or 'gilt' . These are loans made to the Government in order to fund its spending. They compromise [I presume she means comprise - CW] most of the National Debt. A gilt is issued for a given redemption value at a fixed date in the future - hence the '3% Treasury Stock, 1966 or after' would have redeemed after 1966. (I apologise for my missing apostrophe in my previous email which may have caused some confusion.)

Does the Bank charge interest on money lent to the Government? The Bank does not loan money to HM Government as the Maastricht Treaty precludes this method of government financing. In respect of your question on government borrowing in general, you would need to approach HM Treasury for a response. Their contact details can be found on their website at www.hm-treasury.gov.uk . You may also wish to look at the website of the UK Debt Management Office who are responsible for debt and cash management for the UK government and are responsible for the issue of gilts.

Regards
Wendy Galvin

Public Information and Enquiries Group


I have just looked up gilts on Wikipedia and found this:
Quote:
The gilts market can trace its origins to the creation of the Bank of England and the British national debt in 1694. Since 1998 they have been issued by the UK Debt Management Office (DMO) on behalf of HM Treasury.

And this:
Quote:
Conventional Gilts
These are the simplest form of UK government bond and make up the largest share of UK government debt. A conventional gilt is a bond issued by the UK government which pays the holder a fixed cash payment (or coupon) every six months until maturity, at which point the holder receives their final coupon payment and principal.

Conventional gilts are denoted by their coupon rate and maturity, e.g. 4¼% Treasury Gilt 2055. The coupon paid on the gilt typically reflects the market rate of interest at the time of issue of the gilt, and indicates the cash payment per £100 that the holder will receive each year in two semi-annual payments.

Historically, gilt names referred to their purpose of issuance, or signified how a stock had been created, such as 10¼% Conversion Stock 1999. In recent years, gilts have been generally named Treasury Stocks. However, from 2005-2006, all new issues of gilts are to be called Treasury Gilts.


So "3% Treasury Stock 1966 or after" means that the previous owners of the BoE were compensated for the nationalisation by receiving 3% interest on the valuation of their shares (this would be interesting to know) until 1966 when they would receive the principal (ie the initial valuation) and the final interest payment.

To sum up, according to Ms Galvin and Wikipedia (assuming I have understood them correctly):

- the BoE is definitely nationalised and wholly owned by HM Treasury (tangent: is the "HM" an indication that the Government is not ours but the Queen's? And does this have implications for the sense in which the BoE is nationalised and/or belonging to the people in any way?)
- all "day-to-day" profits (whether her use of that term is significant I don't know) are paid to HM Treasury
- when nationalised in 1946 the Bank's previous owners (17,000 individual and corporate owners) were paid in 3% Treasury Stock (AKA gilts) that matured in 1966 (Does this mean that the Treasury no longer pays any money in lieu of the nationalisation to the previous owners?)
- the Bank's Monetary Policy Cttee was made "operationally independent" by the Bank of England Act 1998
- the Bank does not loan money to the Government as this practice was banned by the Maastrict Treaty (of all things!?). (This is potentially interesting - why did Maastricht do this and where does the Government's money come from?)


I don't know if this amounts to any sort of conspiratorial angle. Please correct me if my understanding of any of this is wrong. I am no banking expert! Cool

If anyone can suggest any further questions I would be glad to include them in a further correspondence with Ms Galvin.

_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kbo234
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you've just asked it yourself: "Where does the government's money come from?"

These labyrynthine mechanisms (.....at least they seem complicated to me because even after your correspondent has laid out the facts I still can't quite work out what is really going on)
.....maybe this is the whole point of the exercise.

Can anyone put the above in more comprehensible and transparent language?......this bit in particular:

Craig W wrote:

Conventional Gilts

These are the simplest form of UK government bond and make up the largest share of UK government debt. A conventional gilt is a bond issued by the UK government which pays the holder a fixed cash payment (or coupon) every six months until maturity, at which point the holder receives their final coupon payment and principal.


This sounds like government (i.e. we the people) paying interest on created money that could just as easily be created interest-free. However, it is not perfectly clear how this is happening nor how we can discover who is benefiting from this peculiar arrangement.

....an interesting thread that hopefully will eventually shed some light on these important issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Steven Collins
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 85
Location: ESSEX

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 2:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's no such thing as government money, or even public money for that matter. I have to laugh whenever I hear someone say 'the bank has my money' or suchlike. Its not your/our money, never has been, never will be. We just 'borrow' all our lives. When you die it all goes back to the bank anyway because its their money (& they can keep it because I don't want it, but I'm forced to need it. Is that freedom??) Its all just a BIG game & MASSIVE con.

Anyway there is no national debt because there isn't any money. Money is just an IOU. So when you slave at your work you get paid in IOU's. It says 'promise to pay the bearer on demand' on the note, but that promise is NEVER honoured is it!? Its not 'money that makes the world go round' its broken promises. So we better start demanding to be actually/properly paid. All that work that's been done & everybody has been 'paid' with IOU's & everybody's accepted it with a BIG stupid grin & gone back day after week after year for more of the same con. WAKE UP!!

So wake up people & stop playing this stupid game. Everybody is missing the point of LIFE. Did you come to Earth to worship money & line somebody else's pockets?? Or do you think that just maybe you came for a REAL PURPOSE?? 'What profit a man to gain the world but lose his soul?'

The money scam is a sick joke that isn't funny masterminded by sick anti-humans who're not funny. The faster we devalue 'money' the better. Then we can all stick up two fingers to those sicko's who've 'profited' from the slaughter of innocents through the ages. Then that will make all their efforts absolutely worthless, just like their miserable 'lives'. The sooner we treat money & their sick game with the contempt it deserves the sooner they won't have any power or control over the 'goyem'.

Peace

Steve

_________________
There's nothing wrong to adding to a conspiracy theory when there might be a conspiracy, in fact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The federal reserve system is much easier to decipher. The gov sells US stock (T-Bills - our 'Gilts') called Bonds. Bond holders are like the shareholders who are first in line. But what are these Bonds - or 'supershares' actually backed by?

All money used to be backed by gold. By stealth, much of that gold has been swindled into the hands of connected rich families. They bribed leaders into letting them control the money supply.

Before the pound was a receipt for one pound of sterling silver. Money is now backed by nothing. Money is, if you like, shares of UK PLC. If UK PLC goe bankrupt money is worthless. Bonds/Gilts are supershares (the ones that get redeemed first). Now the only collateral for UK Gilts is the UK itself. That means our land, resources, and people. Once the big bond/giltholders come knocking (after this unsustainable debt bubble bursts) they will demand possession of their collateral - ie assumemownersdhip of part or all of the UK.

It is privatisation of countries. A return to Monarchy. Or more likely Oligarchy. Since a few people will 'own' YOU and everyone else, they need to control you. This they will do by force & technology. No longer will, what Matt Johnson of The The called 'the veneer of democracy' be required. Finally you will see 'them' red in tooth an claw as the people of Russia did in the 20th century.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Insiders talk

http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=114932

What they don't tell you is this catastrophe-in-waiting (if not unfolding) is no accident. It has been designed to 'legally' allow the elite to assume total control over a despairing population and their bankrupted countries. We have a choice - organise and regain our right to life on Earth by demonstrating simultaneously and en masse that we will not be railroaded into gulags because of the sins of our so-called leaders, or succumb bit by bit to total enslavement.

Socialism end game. There never was such a thing as a free lunch.

Talking of lunch, starvation will be the tool to bring us to our knees. 45 million were starved to death in Russia. Not nice. If we are to get thru this we must get control of the food supply. In Russia Stalin & Lenin ordered the destruction of food, and lackeys actually carried out this genocidal task.

Freemasonic privilege will ensure the lackeys obey orders this time too.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cruise4
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 292

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My Head Hurts but...

big bond/giltholders - who are they in regards to Britain?

What is the language used that allow these people to take my land as payment for an UNPAID National Debt?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
There never was such a thing as a free lunch.

All lunches are and always have been free. That is how we survived for thousands of years. Nature gives us what we need and if we acted appropriately it always would have. People starve not because there is insufficient food but because other people hog it, or create the conditions that cause it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Craig W
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kbo234 wrote:
I think you've just asked it yourself: "Where does the government's money come from?"

These labyrynthine mechanisms (.....at least they seem complicated to me because even after your correspondent has laid out the facts I still can't quite work out what is really going on)
.....maybe this is the whole point of the exercise.

Can anyone put the above in more comprehensible and transparent language?......this bit in particular:

Craig W wrote:

Conventional Gilts

These are the simplest form of UK government bond and make up the largest share of UK government debt. A conventional gilt is a bond issued by the UK government which pays the holder a fixed cash payment (or coupon) every six months until maturity, at which point the holder receives their final coupon payment and principal.


This sounds like government (i.e. we the people) paying interest on created money that could just as easily be created interest-free. However, it is not perfectly clear how this is happening nor how we can discover who is benefiting from this peculiar arrangement.

....an interesting thread that hopefully will eventually shed some light on these important issues.


You may be right, kbo. I can see that it could be read that way. But I don’t know enough to be sure what it means…

It seems to suggest that the Govt borrows money from investors (banks, pension companies, private investors?) who give the Govt money in return for bonds/gilts and then pays interest on those loans?

Steven Collins wrote:
There's no such thing as government money, or even public money for that matter. I have to laugh whenever I hear someone say 'the bank has my money' or suchlike. Its not your/our money, never has been, never will be. We just 'borrow' all our lives. When you die it all goes back to the bank anyway because its their money (& they can keep it because I don't want it, but I'm forced to need it. Is that freedom??) Its all just a BIG game & MASSIVE con.

Anyway there is no national debt because there isn't any money. Money is just an IOU. So when you slave at your work you get paid in IOU's. It says 'promise to pay the bearer on demand' on the note, but that promise is NEVER honoured is it!? Its not 'money that makes the world go round' its broken promises. So we better start demanding to be actually/properly paid. All that work that's been done & everybody has been 'paid' with IOU's & everybody's accepted it with a BIG stupid grin & gone back day after week after year for more of the same con. WAKE UP!!

So wake up people & stop playing this stupid game. Everybody is missing the point of LIFE. Did you come to Earth to worship money & line somebody else's pockets?? Or do you think that just maybe you came for a REAL PURPOSE?? 'What profit a man to gain the world but lose his soul?'

The money scam is a sick joke that isn't funny masterminded by sick anti-humans who're not funny. The faster we devalue 'money' the better. Then we can all stick up two fingers to those sicko's who've 'profited' from the slaughter of innocents through the ages. Then that will make all their efforts absolutely worthless, just like their miserable 'lives'. The sooner we treat money & their sick game with the contempt it deserves the sooner they won't have any power or control over the 'goyem'.

Peace

Steve


I don’t disagree with the spirit of your post, Steve. Nor do I claim that there isn’t some form of scam being pulled. But I think your post includes a number of flaws and misconceptions.

Firstly if money (even if it is not backed by gold or some other commodity) is accepted as a universal means of payments and currency then it is worth something and not worthless. It is worth whatever the “market” decides it is worth in exchange for anything you wish to buy. If it was worthless then nobody would accept it as payment in exchange for goods and services. If you say that this is only because people don’t realise it is worthless , I would ask in what way does this differ from people’s perception of, say, gold as somehow “possessing” an objective value independent of people’s perception?

As far as I can see commodities, including money, have no real value apart from that conferred by our imaginations and agreed on tacitly by the “invisible hand of the free market” (ie the market value of anything is just the result of the non-coercive transactions agreed between any number of buyers and sellers of that commodity. Let’s say you want to sell your house. If you feel it is worth £2billion and wait for such an offer you may have to wait a long time before “the market” agrees with that valuation. On the other hand if you say it’s worth £1.50 then you will find plenty of people are happy with that valuation and willing to pay you your price.

I don’t understand when you say that when you die our money goes back to the bank. How so? I am not aware of any such wealth transfer on death.

As for the promise to pay never being fulfilled, I know what you mean. You are referring to the fact that historically the promissory note could be redeemed in precious metals. But nowadays there seems a circularity as the promise to pay note represents nothing but other promise to pay notes, so it is in effect saying you can redeem this tenner for another tenner. That said it is still worth what people agree it is worth. If you think your money is worthless, perhaps you would like to give it to me. Laughing

_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cruise4
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 292

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund."

Is this whats behind the drive to unify everyone. Otherwise they cannot collect?

I'm getting the impression 'Notes' and 'Electronic' forms of money are treated differently in terms of 'issue at face value' considerations. The term 'Cashless Society' obviously immediately comes to mind. Anyone care to elaborate?

It seems that Electronic Money IS treated differently. The Private Banks don't give anything to the BOE for this kind of 'money'. So a cashless society increases their profits and denudes the people further.

So if the people borrowed from the BOE, the interest would belong to the people... but as its done through privately owned banks instead.... they, the private bank owners earn the interest, on money we sold them at face value? This is nuts!

The Private Banks (PB) can only pay for coins and notes from money they have in their BOE account. But if we take a loan from a PB do they have to have the money in an account? Or are they actually creating money at this point? Or maybe they only have to show accounts at favourable times, from their point of view and that helps them? Or is some form of fractional banking at work here?

They ARE creating money out of nothing.

And how is Inflation working here. The BOE sets it based on what? The weather?
From BOE site:
The Bank has had a monopoly on the issue of banknotes in England and Wales since the early 20th century. But it is only since 1997 that the Bank has had statutory responsibility for setting the UK's official interest rate.

Interest rates decisions are taken by the Bank's Monetary Policy Committee. The MPC has to judge what interest rate is necessary to meet a target for overall inflation in the economy. The inflation target is set each year by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Bank implements its interest rate decisions through its financial market operations - it sets the interest rate at which the Bank lends to banks and other financial institutions. The Bank has close links with financial markets and institutions.


This is fast becoming an absolute scandal of Government robbing the people to give to the PB. If I'm getting this right, this arrangement isn't clever, its a blatant and obvious conspiracy to defraud the people and any MP should have understood the implications here.

I've read something about 'Contract law' in the US and 'Material loss' must be shown for the contract to be lawful. Is there anything like this in the UK? Could we all claim 'illegal contract'?

The original Gilts used for nationalisation have been paid off... right?

Why issue Gilts if you can print the money, as Gilts must have arisen from Government spending.... is that right?

And whats behind that time, Gordon Brown was it, who sold our Gold when the price was real low?

My brain doesn't seem to cope well with this 'financial doublespeak'. Not sure whether I'm blessed or Thick!


Last edited by Cruise4 on Mon Jun 25, 2007 6:05 am; edited 6 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

blackcat wrote:
Quote:
There never was such a thing as a free lunch.

All lunches are and always have been free. That is how we survived for thousands of years. Nature gives us what we need and if we acted appropriately it always would have. People starve not because there is insufficient food but because other people hog it, or create the conditions that cause it.


Lunches are never free. You have to fight or forage or work for them. Go into your garden and watch those birds...

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Lunches are never free. You have to fight or forage or work for them. Go into your garden and watch those birds...

I did what you said and watched the birdies. They got it for free. They had to bend down and fly occasionally and do their equivalent of chewing but none of them paid a thing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
They had to bend down and fly occasionally


ie forage

...you missed out LOCATE

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 2:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
e forage

...you missed out LOCATE


People who eat at restaurants do not pay by travelling to the venue or having to queue for a table. People who starve to death do not do so because they are lazy. I think you are confusing "work" with "pay". Food is provided by nature, and our ability to maximise it, harvest it and store it means it should be worth it for many people to make some other kind of useful contribution to our communities in exchange for others concentrating on food production. The fact that some seized all the land and hog all the food which others do the work in producing is one of the ways most people are enslaved. The ridiculous price of houses is a similar unnecessary scam. Nature provided humans with all they needed to exist for thousands of years prior to agriculture and with modern knowhow, machinery and technology nobody need ever go hungry, yet thousands starve while obesity is a problem in the west.

The expression "there is no such thing as a free lunch" is as erroneous as saying people "create wealth". It is not possible to create wealth, only to gather it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adding value is creating wealth. I take a lump of wood and carve a walking stick. I have created wealth. I pick up some stones and make a wall. I have created wealth. All of nature works for a living. I am not saying don't feed famine victims - I am saying don't believe the hype about socialism. Don't accept a system that encourages the shiftless, or you wil create more people like that. Nature abhors a vacuum.

B-C - you have not got reality in focus. Sorry. Think about what I have said.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
adding value is creating wealth.

I disagree. Adding value means it takes more wealth to buy it.

Quote:
All of nature works for a living.

Define work. The system we call work is loaded against the poor.

Quote:
Don't accept a system that encourages the shiftless, or you wil create more people like that.

It is not me that accepts a system that encourages the shiftless, it is you. Nobody is more shiftless or workshy than the immensely wealthy people who for centuries have controlled the wealth of the world and passed it down the line. If slaves had not fought for their freedom, or women for equality or many other groups fought for basic fairness then they would stay under the yoke. Socialism has played an immense role in gaining basic rights for the millions of workers who worked long hours in arduous and dangerous conditions without barely a share in the benefits of their labours. Its day may have long passed in the UK but the housing, education , healthcare and a multitude of things we take for granted were fought for by people who were massacred just protesting for the right to vote among other things. Three million people did not suddenly become workshy overnight when Thatcher came to power. It was engineered. I pity people who are by nature shiftless and lazy but they are very few in number. You blame the victim - I have never understood that mentality.

Quote:
B-C - you have not got reality in focus

I believe it is you who are out of focus. You have bought into this perverse system of "economics" where the wealthy cream off millions (Norman Tebbitt, Neil Kinnock, John Major, Tony Blair) while telling you to watch out for those feckless "single mothers" who are after all your hard earned wages. It stinks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are you an agent provocateur, or simply missing a few logic circuits?

End of dialogue

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Craig W
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My understanding is that money represents stored work/effort.

Regarding nature, afaics there is no such thing as a free lunch. Birds may not pay for their food with money but they do pay with work/effort (ie energy and time expended).

_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe disagreeing with you means I am "missing some logic circuits". Perhaps it means you haven't given this much thought. If "work" was the solution to becoming wealthy there would be no poor or destitute since no-one in their right mind would choose such a condition if they could avoid it by doing some work. Is Calcutta a city where all the workshy of the world have congregated? You avoid addressing points like this and make ad hominem attacks instead. It can't be "end of dialogue" if there has been no dialogue, though I am happy to stop responding.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig W wrote:
My understanding is that money represents stored work/effort.

Regarding nature, afaics there is no such thing as a free lunch. Birds may not pay for their food with money but they do pay with work/effort (ie energy and time expended).


Money is one of 2 things

1) A store of value
2) A means of exchange

1) Is undermined now by inflation (a stealth tax levied by THEM on savers)
2) Can evaporate rather quickly with FIAT, (think Weimar Germany and Zimbabwe today)

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blackcat wrote:
Maybe disagreeing with you means I am "missing some logic circuits". Perhaps it means you haven't given this much thought. If "work" was the solution to becoming wealthy there would be no poor or destitute since no-one in their right mind would choose such a condition if they could avoid it by doing some work. Is Calcutta a city where all the workshy of the world have congregated? You avoid addressing points like this and make ad hominem attacks instead. It can't be "end of dialogue" if there has been no dialogue, though I am happy to stop responding.


OK one last chance.

You are not thinking logically. You are looking at a picture (Calcutta, say) and asking if these people are workshy. I presume you mean street beggars. Who knows? Some may be, most are probably driven there by the dastardly Mosanto taking over their lands or something.

What do you want to do about the beggars? Give them food and money to raise their living standard? What would that do? Word would get out into the fields and subsistence farmers would come in for easy pickings. You cannot fix a problem like that. You just create more. You need to allow a system to become self-regulating. In order for this to work you must root out corruption. In order to root out corruption the system must deny it to its members. Handouts encourage corruption.

Wealth is not just the raw Earth. Wealth includes additional and desirable order imposed on the natural world. The bird builds a nest from random twigs, Work is done. The bird is more wealthy than before - it has a home, no mortgage.

Do you know Sim City? I have a Labour-loving acquaintance. He gave me a shot at managing a city. I shut down all (yes all) public services including even the underground transport system. I slashed taxes to the lowest I could (maybe even zero). He thought I was mad. Of course it was only a computer model. He almost didn't let me input the parameters I wanted, so affronted was he with my lack of care for fellow man as he perceived it.

The program chundered on. By the endof our first course the city was in a shambles and GDP had collapsed by 50%. Boy did he look smug.

Not so smug later. The city bottomed out then started to prosper. The GDP just kept on rising and rising. It was still rising as I left. I am sure as soon as I was out the door the program was switched off and the (annoying) results flushed down his memory hole...

Libertarian is where I am at. Or something like it anyway. It is people like you we libertarians need to wake up. We need you to help us overturn this monster. And BTW I am NOT rich. By any stretch.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
On September 16th Britain’s pound collapses when currency speculators led by Rothschild agent, Ashkenazi Jew, George Soros, borrow pounds and sell them for Deutsche Marks, in the expectation of being able to repay the loan in devalued currency and to pocket the difference.

This results in the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Norman Lamont, announcing a rise in interest rates of 5% in one day and as a result drives Britain into a recession which lasts many years as large numbers of businesses fail and the housing market crashes.

This is right on cue for the Rothschilds, after they had privatised Britain’s state owned assets during the 1980’s, driven the share price up, and then collapsed the markets so they could buy them up for pennies on the pound, a carbon copy of what Nathan Mayer Rothschild did to the British economy 180 years before, in 1812.

It cannot be overstated that the Chancellor of the Exchequer at that time, Norman Lamont, prior to becoming a MP, was a Merchant Banker with N. M. Rothschild and Sons, who he joined after reading Economics at Cambridge.

1993: Norman Lamont leaves the British government to return to N. M. Rothschild and Sons as a director, after his mission to collapse the British economy to profit the Rothschilds is accomplished.


http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Rothschild.htm

A by-product of this was the undermining of Thatcher. They always like synergy - look @ 911 - war in ME, Silverstein pay-off, Homeland Security, Rebuilding contracts (no-bid) etc etc etc

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brian
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Scotland

PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chutzpah -


BIS warns of Great Depression dangers from credit spree

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Last Updated: 9:02am BST 25/06/2007



The Bank for International Settlements, the world's most prestigious financial body, has warned that years of loose monetary policy has fuelled a dangerous credit bubble, leaving the global economy more vulnerable to another 1930s-style slump than generally understood.....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/06/25/cncr edit125.xml
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kbo234
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wrote an email to James Robertson a onetime senior civil servant who recognises the huge systemic problems posed by our money systems and has been busy for some years proposing an alternative.
I asked him for some enlightenment to help people on this forum understand some of the basic mechanisms of money creation in the UK.

Here is his reply:

Dear Kevin,

I would like to help, if I can. As your website reference indicates, a forest of disparate complexities about various aspects of the malfunctioning of the money system make it even more difficult than it need be to get a handle on what the whole thing is basically about.

Personally, I think it helps to start by trying to understand the big picture in fairly simple terms. It is that today’s national money systems are due to piecemeal historical developments over many years, not designed to serve the interests and needs of democratic peoples or a democratic world, but of rulers, bankers, aristocrats, powerful businesses and rich individuals; and that the international money system reflects all the resulting faults at an even less developed stage.

Starting Point
My suggestion is that you and your colleagues might start by taking a look at my paper on The Future of Money: If We Want a Better Game of Economic Life, We'll Have to Change the Scoring System. It is the third item, freely downloadable, listed at
http://www.jamesrobertson.com/articles.htm#articles

I think it offers a not too complicated introduction. From its fourth page, starting with the section headed The Monetary and Financial Responsibilities of the National State, it explains fairly straightforwardly the effects of

(1) how the way the money supply is now created and put into circulation,
(2) how public revenue is now raised (what is taxed and what is not taxed) , and
(3) what things public revenue is now spent on and not spent on.

The point is that all create incentives for everyone to behave in ways contrary to economic efficiency, social justice, and environmental sustainability.


The Effects of Governments’ Dealings with Money
Those government operational dealings with money play such a big part in economic life today that in combination their impact is bound to affect the relative prices and costs of everything. That does not mean that a free market economy would be better – or indeed possible. It simply means that the scoring system (and the rules ) of the game of economic life must be more intelligently designed. Whatever they are, they will inevitably encourage people to act in some ways rather than in others; it is nonsense to think that there could be “a level playing field”, or that money values possess some kind of objective status beyond human manipulation, as data in the physical sciences are supposed to do.

The fact that governments’ monetary and financial functions are carried out today in a way that makes money values conflict perversely with human values means that changes are needed. The aim must be to create a structure of prices and costs that provides incentives to everyone to meet their own needs in ways that will simultaneously help others to meet theirs, and will also help to conserve – not destroy – environmental resources.

More Detailed Solutions that that Implies
On what to do about the money supply, there is more in the first two chapters of Monetary Reform : Making it Happen, downloadable from the first item on
http://www.jamesrobertson.com/books.htm.
They give a shorter and simpler account than Creating New Money does.

On the need to reconstruct taxation and the collection of public revenue, you will find a lot of other material on my website if you Search it on “taxes”, “taxation”, “green taxes”, “land value tax” and similar terms.

Similarly, there is a lot on the website on reconstructing public expenditure. The key will be to stop paying

perverse subsidies and much of the money now paid to big organisations of business and government to deliver services to dependent citizens,

and to use the money instead to pay

a basic (Citizens) income to all citizens.


An Underlying Political Philosophy

(1) People and organisations should not profit privately from the value of common resources. Those are many. The value of land is one; it is determined almost wholly by the demands and activities of society, including publlc planning policy and public expenditure on social and economic infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, railways and roads. Also the value of environmental resources, including the environment’s value as a sink for wastes/pollution (such as carbon emissions). Also the value enjoyed by whoever creates the public money supply.

Private landowners and business corporations (including commercial banks) should not profit – get “free lunches” - from the value of those common resources. Everyone should pay for the value they take from the common pot, and by so doing provide the main source of public revenue.

(2) People and organisations should not be taxed on the incomes, earnings and profits they get from useful work and business activities – which add value. Those should be treated as their rewards for contributing to the “common wealth”. Taxes on those should be replaced by making people pay as at (1) above.

(3) The value of common resources would then provide a main source of public revenue, to be used for public purposes. A considerable proportion should be distributed to all citizens as a significant Citizens’ Income that will make them less dependent on big government and big business to provide them with jobs and money and goods and services. The remainder should be spent on the public services that will still be needed.

Need for a Phased Programme of Monetary and Financial Reconstruction
See the 1994 Item at http://www.jamesrobertson.com/toes-nef.htm - detailed proposals for three years of preparation and then a ten-year programme for the introduction of a Citizen's Income (basic income), combined with a shift to taxing land values and energy instead of taxing incomes, profits and value added. (I now propose that changing the way new money is created should be added to the mix.)

International and Local Monetary and Financial Implications
National reconstruction on the above lines will provide a democratic model for the international money system, which is now underdeveloped and undemocratic.

By facilitating greater independence in the economic lives of people and localities, it will also enable people to develop local currencies and local banking and financial services of all kinds for which they experience the need, but which the present money system suppresses.

Finally, it occurs to me that you might find the first two items on

http://www.jamesrobertson.com/newsletter.htm

interesting and useful.

Hope all this helps a bit. I’m afraid it does require a fair bit of reading and figuring out how you see the different parts of the whole system fitting together, what their impacts are, and how they need to be reconstructed. By all means circulate it to other people in your forum if you think they may find it useful.

Best wishes

James


e-mail: james@jamesrobertson.com
www.jamesrobertson.com


Last edited by kbo234 on Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Craig W
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485

PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great stuff, Kevin. Thanks for posting that very helpful contribution from James Robertson. I will try and get my head round the linked info soonish...

Just a quick thought, did you check that he is OK having his address and phone number included? If not, it may be best to remove it before the nutters on here start pestering him.

_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Pre-Planned Economic 9/11 - Global Financial Conspiracy All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19  Next
Page 1 of 19

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group