“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” --Buckminster Fuller
Most legislation is formed in advance by “think tanks” funded by special interests, but nobody funds experts to think about how to reform the money system itself. Now, however, we have the Internet, where we can banter ideas about in “virtual” think tanks without funding. Getting anyone to pay attention, of course, is another matter; but before we even get to that stage, we need to agree on a plan. I’ve gotten a great deal of feedback on this subject by email, so am opening it up to blog comments. What should our money system look like and how should it work? Give your feedback here. Comments on the book “Web of Debt” and articles are also welcome!
Note: This page has gotten a bit long and unwieldy. Please keep entries short and to the point! Better still, please continue the debates using our new forum.
A web site of merit is found below. When you get there please scroll to the bottom and begin reading.
http://moneyaswealth.blogspot.com/
Ellen,
I have read several of your articles on globalresearch.ca. It appears that your monetary theory is similar to that of Richard C. Cook, but I have many concerns that much of your solutions are offering more Keynesianism as a solution to a society already burdened with too much Keynesianism.
The idea that an infinitely depreciating currency can save humanity is downright absurd. Under the constitution, only gold and silver are legal tender. The US Dollar is defined as having “between 371 and 416 grains (27.0 g) of silver” under the Coinage Act of 1792. The reason for this is simple. You cant print gold or silver on a printing press, which prevents the government from attempting to issue money that it does not have. Paper money always returns to its intrinsic value.
“In a fiat monetary system, there is no restrain on the amount of money that can be created. This allows unlimited credit creation. Initially, a rapid growth in the availability of credit is often mistaken for economic growth, as spending and business profits grow and frequently there is a rapid growth in equity prices. In the long run, however, the economy tends to suffer much more by the following contraction than it gained from the expansion in credit. This expansion in credit can be seen in the Debt/GDP ratio.” -http://www.kwaves.com/fiat.htm
The costs of creating fiat money out of nothing didn’t work out too well for Nazi-era Germany. Keep in mind that Germany eventually removed all silver from circulation after the war accelerated. Let us not forget Executive order 6102 issued by FDR, which ordered “U.S. citizens to deliver on or before May 1, 1933 all but a small amount gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates owned by them to the Federal Reserve, in exchange for $20.67 per troy ounce.” If gold isn’t money, why was the government so perniciously intent on taking it from the public? Because it was not under the direct control of the Federal reserve System. Union Banking Corporation, operating through its handler in the Third Reich Fritz Theissen, was shut down under the Trading with the Enemy Act by J. Edgar Hoover. Who was the benefactor? Prescott Bush, George W.’s grandfather.
Giving hijacked governments, whether they be state or local, the ability to create unlimited money under the pretext of “creating goods and services” out of thin air fails the Hegelian litmus test. Problem: Society is plagued with devalued debt-based money issued by a private cabal. Reaction: Society demands sound money. Solution: Government crashes the currency and replaces it direct government fiat under the guise that it will “create jobs” out of thin air.
“The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.” – John Maynard Keynes
Dear Fake User Account/Dissident Voice, I have to disagree. Printing money worked out extremely well for Nazi Germany. I’ve written a couple of articles on that. It took the whole force of the Allied Armies to stop them. How do you think Germany pulled itself up from being utterly bankrupt, crushed and defeated to being able to challenge the rest of the world in another world war? They printed money, paid their workers and suppliers with it, and built infrastructure and heavy equipment. “Money” is just a medium of exchange. It is not something you dig out of the ground. If you’ve got the workers and materials, it makes perfect sense to print receipts acknowledging value received from them, goods and services delivered to the government, which receipts can then be exchanged in the community for other things of equivalent value. Limiting money to gold throws you back to the golden rule: those with the gold (generally the bankers) rule.
There is another side to this story, Ellen. In the year 2009, you appear to have fallen for Nazi propaganda, hook, line and sinker. According to a book review published by Reason Online
http://www.reason.com/news/show/31084.html
“Hitler’s economic policies were systematically wrecking the German economy and were rapidly painting him into a corner were his only choices were war or a loss of power.”
Silas
That’s interesting, but the article you cite blames Hitler’s policy of eliminating food imports yet keeping price controls on foodstuffs, which discouraged farmers from growing more. The predictable result: food shortages, so Hitler felt compelled to expand his terrritory. The program of public works with government-issued money is not challenged, and the article cites a number of other sources lauding it. Price controls obviously don’t work. In any case Hitler is a bad example because he is so controversial for other reasons, and I’m usually hesitant to bring it up, except that the Weimar inflation is cited so often as the downside of government-issued money that it seemed to need addressing. A better example is the non-controversial island state of Guernsey. The government printed money to build infrastructure and refused to go into debt. This policy allowed the state to thrive for 200 years, until private banking interests managed to get back into control of the money supply.
“A better example is the non-controversial island state of Guernsey. The government printed money to build infrastructure and refused to go into debt. This policy allowed the state to thrive for 200 years, until private banking interests managed to get back into control of the money supply.”
—————————————————-
—————————————————–
But Ellen, the Guernsey story is quite controversial. It appears that the Guernsey “magic money” story was a Greenbacker concoction, concocted decades after the alleged events. There was an extensive discussion about the matter on the Social Credit list about four years ago. There are dozens of messages on the subject in that list’s archives.
It seems that no contemporary documents mention the story. The market notes are mentioned, but always as instruments of debt that were redeemed at full face value in sterling.
Banking in Guernsey has been conventional for perhaps longer than here, where it is mostly a post Civil War phenomenon.
Today “financial services” is the island’s major industry. Guernsey has become an “offshore” banking haven, where tax cheats and criminals can hide their money.
Silas
Guernsey and Jersey had the same money system. A man at the Bromsgrove Money Reform Conference in England a couple of years ago, whose name now escapes me but I could find out, grew up in Jersey and says that the island state did indeed issue its own currency, and it was prosperous and life was good. I suspect the reverse — that anti-money reformers concocted the no-evidence story. What evidence do you have for your position? I’m really rather shocked that the “social credit” people are so much against social credit! I saw an article recently on Guernsey that was compelling, but I don’t have the site at my fingertips. I could find it if need be.
His name is Ken Palmerton (sorry I forgot, Ken!), and this is what he replied to Silas on the Social Credit website:
The “Guernsey story” you refer to is NOT a concoction of any sort,
Greenbacker or otherwise.
The British Channel islands are independent administrations within the
United Kingdom. The legalese used is “Crown Peculiar”. A system harking
back to the last invasion of the mainland by William of Normandy in 1066, the islands, Jersey and Guernsey, are independent administrations, each with its own Parliament, the States. They are the last remaining parts of the Duchy of Normandy.
At least since the Sixteenth century to my knowledge each has created and issued its own medium of exchange, and created and issued funds for the building of infrastructure, interest free, and without debt.
What you describe as private banking activity is quite correct. The struggle to achieve monopoly of money issue by private interests has been constant, with actions in the Privy Council, the highest court in the Kingdom, always favouring the States
As for the current efforts to achieve tax haven status, this is a cause
for much concern, for it brings a very long standing system of absent
debt, which in turn allows very low taxation, into disrepute, not least by people like you who wish to misunderstand for your own political ends.
Ken.
Ellen et al, great site. Rebecca Tobias referred it to me. Per your request, I have shortened my commnet and provided a link to the radio interview and article.
Much of the discussion here centers around how can we open up the debate and broaden awareness of little known aspects of the banking system, economy and Wall Street / Washington collusion.
It concerns a little known remedy to take back control from centralized corruption — check it out, it is real, has hit the Supreme Court and the more people that become aware of it, the larger the chances of making it into a reality.
In your service,
Byron DeLear
Is America Too Top Heavy?
Why Regulating Wall Street Isn’t Enough
by Byron DeLear
Our Founding Fathers were all about preventing tyranny as they were throwing off the yoke of the British Empire; the despotism of Crown and Church, they could see it a million miles away and designed our government to prevent it.
Their remedy? Checks-and-balances, compartments of government self-regulated through inter-agency skepticism and scrutiny.
Given the recent Wall Street bailouts in the amount of trillions upon trillions, deficit spending and skyrocketing debt, it seems as if an important protection to help Washington be more accountable is missing from the Founder’s design. But it isn’t. It just hasn’t been used.
READ MORE HERE: http://blog.showmeprogress.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2931
It amazes me after spending hours on this site reading, just how much I still dont know about history and the present as well. I always had a feeling, like Neo in the movie, The Matrix, that something just didnt seem right about alot of what we are told through official channels. I am no Nazi, but to hear that maybe the Germans felt like they were under attack and maybe had some fair reasons for trying to take the power back from international banking and finance, really amazed me. From that standpoint I could see why the powers that be wanted them stopped. It was the same with the spread of Communism, the domino theory, the threat of a good example. But, like they say, power has a tendency to corrupt all. Heck, I see that in the workplace with people in management. They abuse their position with the attitude that, what is the use of having power if you cant use it. I must say it is really nice to see a comments section where people are not bashing one another, name calling and foul language. May we be the shining light in what is looking like a dark future.
has any one heard of this book titled Babylons Bankers
If we wanted to create a movement and a plan, (to turn the wisdom spread out on all the pages and comments, associated with the WOD site, into something more coherent and persistent,) we would a place to do it.
Suggestions?
I’m all for that! Definitely a top agenda item. Here are some possibilities I’ve considered:
1. A lobby with financial clout — e.g., a huge group of subprime borrowers alerted to the “produce the note” defense and prepared to act.
2. A Political Action Committee to bring an initiative or referendum to get state-owned banks going. (The problem with an initiative is that you have to have professional signature-collectors to get enough signatures within the deadline, which costs quite a bit of money.)
3. Form our own bank. (Problem — how would we be better than any other private bank? I think it has to be a publicly-owned bank to work.)
4. Brainstorming on the President’s website. Supposedly the top ideas will get considered . . .
That’s where I am now. Other suggestions totally welcome and appreciated! Meanwhile, there are so many interesting and worrisome things going on, I feel compelled to try to get an article out every week or so. Basically, I never leave this computer. Just me and Mama in the senior village. Cyberspace is my great escape.
TO — Ellen and all who have read or written to the WOD blog or forum ~
o . We need a place to plan and brain-storm that offers (for free) PERSISTENCE and infinite update-editing capability for its persistent PLAN, THOUGHTS and DOCTRINE, etc.
o . The best software-hosting system I know of is Amazon’s near-infinite forums. Amazon has (or offers) a very flexible for Web of Debt, the book.
o . I’m going to tey to use it now.
o . If it fails my hopes for collaboration, I may suggest my own website offering of private pages to be under Ellen’s direction– democratically shared.
o . Although Amazon’s space would be open to unwanted pages — these could be ignored, as wanted pages were managed by a WOD team. My own sites pages would not be open to such unwanted pages– but they would be labor intensive compared to Amazon’s.
The promised use of Amazon is here. It allows for corrections and for permalinks. Permalink is as follows:
http://www.amazon.com/Debt-seeds-pragmatic-path-recovery/forum/Fx2VXC3TJOG8NA0/Tx2EJETRO7R5M6I/1/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=1&asin=0979560829&store=books&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx8P1DY4JYTEKH#Mx8P1DY4JYTEKH
I just posted a comment there (below), then realized it hadn’t gone to my usual email address but to one I used to use; so I redid it on my current email address, which is this link:
http://www.amazon.com/Debt-seeds-pragmatic-path-recovery/forum/Fx2VXC3TJOG8NA0/Tx2EJETRO7R5M6I/1/ref=cm_cd_ef_tft_tp?%5Fencoding=UTF8&asin=0979560829
Sure, looks like a promising forum! I submitted a proposal on the President’s brainstorming website for retrieving the power to create money from the private banking system, which has generated a great deal of discussion. Maybe we could get the same sort of thing going here. It’s at this link:
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/3648-4049
The amazon discussion has been removed. No idea why, except the obvious ones. That was one reservation I had about the Amazon idea.
I wonder if this forum is up to the tasks of collaboration?
Dear Web Administrator
Why did two posts dated June 1 appear ahead of two posts dated May 16?
Just curious
Jim Johnston, Ellen Brown, Jere Hough, many others, make great sense in these many comments.
BUT
I am unable to create a map in my mind of all the forum activity connected to Web of Debt.
Can we get it together?
YOU KNOW
Gelles thinks spending the money we have is good enough for the moment. Before the current crises all our opinions about debt-free money were valid — but there was no crises to birth a money reform movement.
Now the crises are upon us and we are spending — but not enough to reach full employment overnight. Still we are spending and the money is nearly debt-free because the Fed has the power to make it so.
We definitely need to pow wow the role of tax reform, lobby activity and reform, and the goals of the Obama team.
The means by which to pow wow, (as distinguished from making a current living by running the AMI or selling books etc., ) appears to be a current problem.
Rodney King asked — Can’t we all get along?
We must ask — Can’t we all get connected — starting with just a few of us. WHAT IS THE SOFTWARE THAT BEST CONNECTS JUST A FEW– BUT SCALES UP TO THE VERY MANY?
Ms. Brown,
Great work, and particularly congratulations on energizing discussion on this most critical force in our society.
In contrast to some of the comments, I believe that the current President, just as the last, has no grasp of the complexities that are the financial and economic system of the nation he leads. He appears not to have had the temerity to educate himself enough to ask the right questions, as any CEO should. As a result, he is being played, IMHO, and evidently does not know it. The further concentration of banking power and influence continues unabated. …. Some more thoughts, …. http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009/05/obamas-not-so-private-economic.html
All the best with shifting awareness to where there might be broad enough movement toward actual change.
200,000 people who have read and understand Web of Debt and The Lost Secret of Money can learn how to become county precinct leaders in their county. Unless they are shot one by one those 200,000 people can rule America and institute a money system that will point the way for free people around the world.
“How is America so prosperous” was a question asked of Ben Franklin. “We print our own money” was his answer.
Jim Johnston ~
Ben Franklin and YOU, joined to Abba Lerner and ME, and Ellen and Jere (of course), have said enough to make the global economy prosperous– if we had the powers that be behind us.
I like Lerner’s formulation: “taxes and borrowing are not the only way to fund prosperity: creating money on purpose (debt-free and tax-free when it’s created) can motivate production, distribution and consumption, to start an economy on the path to prosperity, provided that necessities remain affordable and the original purpose of ‘more money’ remains our guiding light.”
BUT, your formulations may be better. WHAT MATTERS is that we find the right software to collaborate and produce a KISS library of thought that births change: from the top down if Obama’s team is reachable, or from the bottom up if they are not.
So far — we are not building on our own thoughts: we are shooting blanks and they are mired down in the system as it is– contradictions known to Franklin, Lincoln, Marx, Douglas, Keynes, Lerner, etc., not withstanding.
Changing or patching the monetary will not really change much at all. Because money equals power and power always corrupts. No matter what standard, rules and regulation will be put in place. History has shown that those rules and regulations are easy to overcome and broken by those who have the power in the first place. I have recently joined a movement called “Zeitgeist” which suggested to transcend the monetary economic to a resource based economic system. This looks by far more promising than what we have now. Monetary economics has truly separated us from Nature and has caused so much lives it should be obvious the needed change. Money has become the greatest obsticale in human progress because everything has a price tag attached. The monetary system has brought the worst out of us. It is a outdated system and it should go.
CarstenIQ.
Good one. This is about as insightful as anything else said here.
Human beings will always be human beings, and act accordingly. A majority will unfortunately succumb to the siren song of power, then, when greed sets in, the brain just rots.
Hello,
A question about HR1207 – Bill to Audit the Fed, introduced by Ron Paul.
You must excuse me. I don’t agree with most of the views here but I have read a little about what the author is saying, and I’ve browsed through some of the comments here. I couldn’t help to notice the positive approval of President Obama. So I would simply like to hear your views on the following.
How in the world do you excuse the fact that HR1207 is currently NOT supported by most Democrats, and certainly not by the President. I can’t help to have noticed the many here approve of Obama, yet he has, thus far, not supported this bill. He is extremely vocal and explicit in many of the things that he supports. He is talking about regulating this and regulating that, yet he is completely ignoring HR1207, obviously in hope that it would just go away. How do you excuse this behavior? In fact, he seems to be inclining towards giving the FED even more monopolistic power over the economy.
HR1207 seems to be exactly the 1st step in exposing the FED for what it is, and getting the transparency that you are all calling for. This is more of a libertarian/free market advocates initiative at its core, but the pathetic Conservatives are obviously capitalizing on it for political reasons. Nevertheless, it is what it is, and it is obviously what many of you here are have been calling for. Yet, the President seems to be taking the position of the former President Bill Clinton, who also rejected an Audit of the Fed. I find this behavior inconsistent with your views of the President, and I would simply like to hear what your thoughts are regarding this issue.
Thanks,
Thanks for playing. Clinton allegedly said after he got elected, “Gee, I thought when I got to be President, I’d be making the decisions!” I think Obama is maneuvering as best he can against some very powerful forces. Developments have been disappointing to date, true; but Kennedy took the bull by the horns and it ended badly. Obama may just be being cautious. Dennis Kucinich has a Democratic version of a Fed bill, but I haven’t seen any reports on Obama’s reaction to it.
It is interesting to see here reference to computer-based system of monitoring derivatives.
In Transfinancial Economics the use of electronic information plays a very important part BUT IN A WAY OFCOURSE THAT ALLOWS FOR FREE MARKET CAPITALISM TO FLOURISH.
Obama wades into regulation of derivatives
Douglas McIntyre
May 13th 2009 at 6:15PM
Text SizeAAA
Filed under: Investing
Congress and the Obama administration are in the process of regulating everything that walks, talks,eats, and sleeps on Wall Street. The most recent uproar came earlier today when news began to leak out that the government may set up guidelines for compensation across a wide array of financial firms.
Now, Washington wants to regulate the derivatives market, which makes some sense. The trading in mortgage-backed securities and other exotic instruments has been blamed for everything from the collapse of the banks to the Johnstown Flood of 1889. Financial quants have developed hundreds of ways to bet on a range of instruments based on everything from equities to commodities to bonds.
According to the AP, “In a draft two-page letter to congressional leaders, the Treasury Department says it wants to create a central electronic-based system that would track the buying and selling of derivatives.” Treasury also wants to monitor the liquidity of the firms trading the instruments. That value of derivatives holdings worldwide has been estimated to be in the hundreds of trillions of dollars.
As often is the case, the government is stepping in after most of the damage to companies like AIG (AIG) has been done. But, new vigilance may keep the problem from repeating itself. If the local savings bank is going to be regulated, trading in several trillions of dollars in derivatives should be, too.
Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 24/7 Wall St.
The current crisis is getting people talking and thinking outside the box. No clear thinker is listening to the bankers or politicians anymore. Obama announcing our debt is unsustainable was laughable. Like he’s going to do something about it. The worse this gets — the better for people like us, and that’s how we should view it.
I am working with my state reps, and I can tell you we are seriously planning for the worst. Read the MN Transportation Act — currently in their legislature. We’re talking about something like that in my state, and you should encourage your politicians to do the same. This is a real concrete idea you can get behind and support, and the legislation is already written. I have found my state reps to be smart, responsive, and very concerned about the future.
This forum is great, but let’s move from talk to action.
Brook, on May 11th, 2009 at 3:49 pm Said:
“Jere, the plan i’ve seen would inflate the price of gold on the COMEX to $ 10,000 an ounce — and this would get every government out of debt overnight. FDR did something similar to this in the Depression but not to the global extreme. There are several EU governments in worse shape than we are, so even the Euro is threatened by the crisis. It’s a bad idea and has NWO written all over it.”
_________________
Brook: Inflating (raising) the price of gold to $10,000 per ounce would NOT get any government out of debt overnight, except governments that own huge amounts of gold, and I am not aware of any such governments, except perhaps Switzerland, China, and a few other nations that have nationalized and now own their central banking systems.
But your statement is so fantastic, so wrong, for so many reasons, including false assumptions and a total misunderstanding about gold, silver, and commodity distribution and ownership, that even attempting to correct such massive misunderstandings is an overwhelming task. Once again, I have to repeat what I have said above: Please! Read Web of Debt.
I will only bullet some of the reasons your statement is false, or would not work:
· Raising the price of gold would only enrich those who are already owners of gold.
· Few governments own much or any gold.
· The price of gold is determined by commodities markets, like Comex.
· The price of gold has nothing at all to do with modern currencies or computerized, electronic money.
· FDR carried out the plan of the central bankers to transfer the wealth of the US citizens to the international central bankers.
· FDR collected the nations gold by making owning it illegal, and paying a low fixed price for it. Then almost doubled the price, thereby doubling the value of the gold being held in the US vaults (Fort Knox was built for this purpose).
· After FDR collected the nation’s gold, it was systematically transferred to the Federal Reserve System in part payment of the interest on bonds and FRNs.
· This (Federal Reserve Act enabled confiscation) was probably the most massive transfer (theft) of wealth in the history of the world – up to that time.
· Nearly all of the vaulted gold bullion that exists today is owned by private international central bankers and financiers. They would gain from gold price increases, NOT the citizens or the nation.
· Putting private central bankers in charge of a nation’s money is like turning over your vote, checkbook, cash and credit cards to Bernie Madoff, for safekeeping.
· Please watch the video Money as Debt to gain a basic education about gold, money and banking.
· Please finish reading Web of Debt.
Jere, I think you missed the part where I said I thought the gold inflation was a bad idea. I’ve heard we have 8000 tons of gold at Ft Knox and other places, but who really knows. That would certainly be enough at 10K to equal our debt.
Central banks have been quietly buying up gold for the past 2 years, so they do have a lot accumulated. Nobody has more than the Rothschilds, of course, who would love a gold inflation scenario.
Not only is China buying up gold, they are buying the gold mines all over the world, and they are buying all the mines with minerals used to make computer chips around the world. That is an ominous sign. They are setting themselves up to be the US circa 1945 — the world’s dominant player.
Brook, on May 16th, 2009 at 2:05 am Said:
“…I’ve heard we have 8000 tons of gold at Ft Knox and other places, but who really knows. That would certainly be enough at 10K to equal our debt.”
Brook, You seem to have difficulty understanding that the gold that is held in central banks IS NOT PUBLICLY OWNED GOLD. It belongs to the various (privately owned) banks in the Federal Reserve System. That is a main point of Ellen’s book, Web of Debt.
Let me put is another way. The gold in Fort Knox that once belonged to the US Govt now belongs to private central bankers. It no longer belongs to the govt, or its citizens.
Let me try it another way. IF… there is really 8133 tons of gold in Fort Knox, it is probable that very little, if any, of it still belongs to the US Government or its citizens.
These are key points in Web of Debt, The Lost Science of Money, The Creature from Jekyll Island, The Naked Capitalist, The Case Against the Fed, Secrets of the Temple, and numerous other exposes of the duplicity perpetuated by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.
It is difficult to understand because people don’t understand money, and the effect of using privately created money (as we are now doing) over publicly created currency (which is the sole answer). We must realize that we can create the money we now borrow at interest. We can create money the same way we create T-notes or T-bills, only we need not pay the private bankers usury fees on the money we create.
Let me try this yet another way. The 4000 tons of gold that is reportedly held in the New York Central Bank is NOT US Government gold. It belongs to the private central bankers that belong to the Federal Reserve System.
This is not just a technicality. The Federal Reserve System IS NOT federal. It is deliberately misnamed so as to be misleading. It was passed though congress by the vilest imaginable trickery and deception.
So… the point is this: Raising the value of gold to 10x current value, or 20x, or 100x, would not do one thing to reduce the US National Debt. What it certainly WOULD do is make those who now hold gold richer, by 10x, 20x, or 100x. Without getting into detail, it would also devalue all of the money now in circulation, and would precipitate economic and monetary chaos.
The bottom line, once again, is that there is only one way that raising (and fixing) the price of gold would work to pay down the debt, and that is for the government, (all government) to confiscate all of the world’s refined gold bullion, and THEN raise the price on it. That “solution” isn’t really very much of one at all, as it has its own set of thorny problems.
No, the answers are basically all in Ellen’s book, “Web of Debt“, or Zarlenga’s “The Lost Science of Money”
Regards,
I have a question for Jere? or anybody else that cares to field it. Would I be off in saying the following and if so why, or would I be correct in this line of thought.
Obama is running up the deficit like there is no tomorrow, and from all I am hearing and understand as well, is that in doing so high inflation will follow. Could it be hypothesized that if the government is moving towards a global currency, and if doing so in effect will devalue the dollar, if in fact it even would stay the dollar.
Would that not be a good move strategically? In other words all this debt that this country is running up would be essentially erased by the devaluation if at some key moment in time we were to go with a global currency?
thank you
Ken, Some “off” and some “on” would be my assessment, as well as being way too simplistic, as phrased. It is really too big an issue to deal with here. But here is a brief attempt to address your questions.
I do not agree with your opening characterization of “Obama is running up the deficit”. The US Govt is running up a deficit, and a national debt, and has been doing so under every administration since Andrew Jackson was President, circa 1820. Only congress can pass or approve of budgets. Presidents can only propose and use their “bully-pulpits”. However, Wall Street interests (and those of the international central bankers) control congress far more than most people realize. There really is a “shadow government” of financiers and money-manipulators that is far more powerful than the visible elected government. (I should say “shadow governments”, as there is a world wide network of them, acting in accord.) (Google and watch the “Adrian Salbuchi” videos. Among the best I’ve seen.)
Inflation will follow, as it always has when there is government borrowing at interest without sufficient matching useful production and real wealth-creation with the money spent.
However, the degree of inflation is the real question. And that depends, again, on how the money is spent – whether on real infrastructure – schools, roads, transportation, job and wealth creation and so on. Wasteful spending, as on war materials destined to get blown up or otherwise used in non-productive, non-wealth-creating ways, is the real driver of inflation, and the devaluation of your money and savings.
I hope you (and anyone else trying to understand this issue) read the above several times, and allow it to really sink in, because it is at the very heart of all of our problems – along with the fact that we now borrow our money from the money-magicians that “invent” it from nothing, and charge usury on it.
Usury is another term that has been driven from our language, or perverted in meaning until it has none. We will not solve our problem until people comprehend the difference between usury and legitimate and justifiable interest.
The world money powers are moving us toward a global currency controlled by them (from the BIS in Basel), because they know that controlling the global currency means controlling the global governments, or government. The money-masters know that without money and economic sovereignty, political sovereignty is meaningless. Put another way, political democracy is meaningless without economic democracy.
The last parts of your question should have been at least partially answered by the above, or should show how they aren’t really the right questions to be asking. What is, or is not a “good move strategically” involves far more definition about not only what moves you might be asking about, but whose POV you might be seeking to advance.
Ultimately the world will have a global government and perhaps a currency too. That has never been the issue. The issue has always been the nature, make-up and “control” of that government, and how that control is apportioned among the member nations of any global governmental authority – whether that control is a top-down authoritarian one, or a bottom-up democratic one.
Our world is going to have to solve the thorny problems of “federalism”, and what constitutes the proper balances and relationships between local, state, national, continental, and intercontinental federations of governments.
But first it is going to have to solve the money questions. Until that issue is resolved, at least partially, none of the others can be resolved.
I hope this discussion helps, at least to some degree.
The roots of our problems lie deeper than just our monetary system. Our monetary system is just a tool to help the Capitalists achieve their goals. It is their goals, however, that are the real problems. Greed, profit and the desire for domination & control will corrupt any monetary system if given the chance. To build a better world, we need to create better people. We have been brainwashed into accepting a life of competitive savagery.
There is a better way…
http://www.monetaryreform.com/MR/betterWay.htm
Realize Utopian that your local florist is a capitalist, as is your family physician. They are pursuing their individual dreams, and money is the means of exchange we have agreed on to reward their labor.
The Uber-capitalists — the ones that want to control everything — yes, they are a problem. In fact, they control the socialist movements as well, and laugh all the way to the bank. Trotsky plotted the Russian revolution from NYC.
Maybe we need to move beyond classic capitalism and socialism to a third way no one has yet articulated.
If money was merely rewarding labor, then the world wouldn’t be in the financial mess that it is today. Profits, capital gains and financial speculation harvest far more of the fruits of our collective productivity than labor incomes. In western societies, labor costs now account for only about 15-20% of prices. In third world production sweat shops, labor costs represent less than 1% of prices. This anti-social distortion of money, away from being a equitable means of exchanging labor, has reached ridiculous proportions and has necessitated the unsustainable growth of debt that now threatens to swallow us all.
I agree we do need an entirely new ism that recognizes that ultimately the only real cost of production for everything on Earth is labor. Tools and machines are simply forms of stored human labor. To produce raw materials and energy we need only labor and machines. Since we don’t pay mother nature for the resources we take, everything else in the chain of production and distribution is simply labor in one form or another (either new or stored).
Credit, or capital, should be provided as a non-profit public utility. Profits, capital gains and financial speculation need to be recognized as destructive, anti-social acts and criminalized exactly like theft and extortion.
Good comments, Utopian. There are a few things there we could discuss or debate in that last paragraph.
From the sound of it, you have probably read Henry George, and his great book, Progress and Poverty. It goes into much depth and discussion of the points you have written about, and are on your very good website. It especially stakes the claim that the earth and its resources should belong to all its inhabitants, as no man or ruler should be able to lay exclusive claim on what God has created. This book, written in the late Nineteenth Century, was once the second most widely read book in the world, behind only the Bible. The money-masters have nearly buried it beneath the towers of babble they have erected as monuments to their lies.
There are many great thinkers and philosophers of the 18th and 19th Centuries waiting to be rediscovered. Progress and Poverty is one of them.
Good comments!
Thanks for your kind words. I guess I’m in for a treat, for I have never read Progress and Poverty. My soul is thirsty for fresh ideas and you are right, we need to rediscover and learn from the wisdom of our elders. I will lunge into my library tomorrow. Thanks again.
Brook, Words like “capitalism” and socialism” have been so poisoned and perverted by the money-powers that they have lost their usefulness as meaningful terms. The economic doublespeak that has grown up around these terms relegates them into some surreal Orwellian realm, and leave them totally unsuitable for clarifying the economic realities of today’s world.
I’m not at all sure it would be accurate to describe a physician or florist as a “capitalist”. People have been free to sell their labor and services long before there was a word such as “capitalism”, or socialism, for that matter.
But your conclusion is correct. We do need to find consensus on “a better, or third way”. I think many people and groups have articulated them, but their voices have been drowned out by the money powers, who control the media and educational institutions, and schools of economics.
What really needs to happen is for there to be a massive rethinking of what should be considered “private enterprise” and what should properly be considered “public business”. We also need to figure out what the proper relationships are between various levels of government, and how they should fairly regulate commerce, trade, money and banking within their spheres of influence. What those spheres of influence should be also need much new discussion.
What really makes for a “free market”? Can free markets exist where monopolies, syndicates and cartels can “corner” them? How do we level the playing field, and insure the markets are really free? How do we regain the control over our governments on all levels from those monopolies mentioned above? How do we best keep our governments from becoming “monopolies” that are beyond public or private democratic control?
These are the kinds of discussions we will need to carry us through the next century or three. Lots of adjustments and concessions will have to be made.
Some food for thought….
When I was growing up (in the 1950s & 60s) I remember my father telling me that one of the most important functions of governments was to protect citizens and families from the cruel winds of market forces. Now that governments, corporations and the financial elite have joined forces and sing from the same song book, that buffer, or social safety net, lies in ruins.
“The government is broke, we’ve hit the debt wall, we can’t afford social programs any more” …remember these songs from the 70s & 80s. I just don’t think the distinction between private enterprise and public business matters all that much anymore. Governments think and act exactly like businesses now. The public good is always interpreted as a by-product of what’s good for business. What is possible for society is always reigned in by what we are told we can afford under our absurd monetary system.
Once credit, or capital, is provided as a public utility, and all profits, capital gains and financial speculation have been eliminated, then whether or not something is produced by a private or public enterprise becomes more of a moot point. If labor costs alone determine prices, then who organizes the labor pool becomes far less important. I believe the proper role for governments is solely to set and enforce standards for the common good. Everything else should be organized and run by like-minded individuals working together to produce top quality, durable products that minimize our environmental footprint. Labor efficiency and environmental sustainability should be the basis by which we compete.
A “free market” is a glorious concept but I seriously doubt that it ever existed in anything even close to a pure form. A free market cannot possibly exist unless a majority of the players in the market have an equal access to the capital needed to compete on a level playing field.
Ellen,
Why is the interest on the debt listed with supposedly we don’t have to pay most of what is owed to the Federal Reserve? Is it because we’re borrowing from China? Is it there to maintain the illusion that we “need” to borrow money?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget
Thanks,
Ann
Sorry, I don’t understand the question.
A good question, Ann, although a complex one, tied up in the obscurities of our money and banking system, and the terminologies of the international bond markets.
We (the USA) do have to pay the interest on all debt obligations. It is not excused, or written off. However, some of that interest, or the earnings of the Federal Reserve Board (Fed) is supposedly “returned” to the US Treasury. I do not understand the mechanics of this process, and I doubt that many people do. I further doubt that the amounts of money claimed are any where near accurate, and since the Federal Reserve operates in total obscurity, and without any outside or independent audit, it is probably that only some future history will reveal something close to the truth of the matter.
Of course the “illusion” that the US gov must borrow the money it needs (that which congress authorizes) indeed must be kept intact. Otherwise the money-masters could not maintain their growing control over the world, our governments, and its citizens.
That might lead to (gulp) democracy! Perish the thought!
Ellen,
It seems that Obama is making a small step in the right direction with respect to direct student loans and the banks. (From Feb 26, 2009)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/washington/27web-edu.html?scp=4&sq=student%20loans%20obama&st=cse
http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/26/news/economy/obama_loans.reut/index.htm
“In a major shift that severely undercut shares in top student lender Sallie Mae, Obama’s budget outline called for moving most student lending into the direct-loan program run by the U.S. Education Department.
“The proposal is subject to review by Congress and possible changes. If adopted, the White House said it would save taxpayers more than $4 billion a year and end “entitlements for financial institutions that lend to students.”
AnnT
I am beginning to suspect that Obama may actually “get it” about our money system, and is doing his best to create new alternatives, just as FDR did in the early 1930’s.
What I see more and more of, is that people who want more action on money reforms may not “get it” about the degree to which the international central bankers have their tentacles into so many areas of our worldwide economic life that it is beyond any one man, even a US President, to make changes, other than small incremental ones.
Sweeping revolutionary radical social changes are always disastrous for those engulfed in them. Any informed reading of history tells us that. The violent overthrow of the Czars in Russia gave us Stalinism a centralized dictatorship disguised as world communism.
The French Revolution led to a series of disasters for France, including Napoleon and his gory wars of conquest in pursuit of Empire.
I think only alternative monetary systems and/or policies are going to have much change for any real success, given the realities of today’s world. If there are alternative working models existing and operative when the current system finally and totally collapses, then we may have some chance of escaping generations of debt slavery. Otherwise I fear we will end up with the privately owned one-world currency and central government that the “Money-Masters” now have planned for us.
I think what Obama needs is public support for the “small steps” and incremental changes he is working to bring us. We need massive public education about the real money issues.
Well said, Jere!
Yes, I saw that and agree. Good move!
Ann, I do not agree that centralizing loans is a good thing. This means the government has control of who gets and who does not, and if you think they are not going to discriminate — think again. Upper middle-class kids will not get the same treatment as kids from Yonkers. Class warfare!
College tuition is a bubble that needs to burst, and propping it up with more federal dollars only prolongs the inevitable. There are more colleges/univ’s in Alabama than the entire country of Japan. That is a staggering statistic, and you start to understand that all of these are not going to keep the doors open.
When you’ve got tenured professors writing books on the modern relevance of ancient Olmec statues, you understand how badly reform is needed.
If you have the time it is best to read the last sections of the p2pfoundation entry on TFE.
Robert, With all due respect, I would be embarrassed to say how many hours I have invested trying to make even the smallest beginnings of sense out of the impenetrable econospeak you call “transfinancial economics”. It reminds me of the opening line Alan Greenspan once gave to the US Congress:
“I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you’ve probably misunderstood what I’ve said.”
In other words:
“I know that you believe you understand what you think I wrote, but I’m not sure you realize that what you read is not what I meant to write.”
All I want to know about this “TFE” is this:
“Who creates the money? How does it get into circulation? How is the volume and velocity of the money determined? Who benefits?
I’d like that explained in a page, or no more than about 500 words.
If you can’t do that, the TFE has about as much chance of ever gaining traction as the idea of interstellar dirigible flight.
Please help me understand what in the world you are talking about with “Transfinancial Economics”.
I will make the following points.
i) The mechanics of TFE are still in development but the p2p entry gives some idea of how it would all work.Thus, there are still a few “fuzzy” areas to be sorted.
ii) Econspeak is rather important if economists, and other academics are going to take the subject seriously at all.
ii) In TFE banks can be private, or semi-private companies. They would have powers to create money electronically as interest free loans, and as commercial grants (non-repayable ofcourse). The interest on the latter would be created by an independent public authority.
Governments could also have new non-repayable money created for them by a private, semi-private, or independent public body. This would replace taxation.
iii) There are two types of money which enter into circulation. One is earned, and is simply recycled, or saved in the normal fashion via work, and/or profits from a business. The second type of money is newly created as something which is non-repayable. This replaces taxes, and ofcourse, most forms of fundraising for NGOs.
iv) The volume, and velocity of money is determined by normal market forces.
v) Everyone benefits in TFE including the rich…and the poor.
However, the banks themselves could also benefit more than before and TFE should be of great interest to them along with the corporations who will hopefully bring about the advanced bank technology. This would obviously involve experts.
I am not going to further expand on this. So, it is best to conclude it here. If the time being you do not understand it still that is your problem, and that of other readers.
Moreover, I should add that the more technical aspects of the subject are really targetted at relevant academics rather than the general populace per se.
Working with the super-rich, and the banking system in a clever is the best way forward. This is briefly explained in the p2pfoundation entry on TFE. I suspect a grassroots movement is unlikely to get far unfortunately.
And if a grassroots movement “is unlikely to get far”, pray tell what will? You think “working with the super-rich and the banking system” is the way to go?
Where? Certainly not to a more democratically controlled monetary system!
“Working with the super-rich and the banking system” is the way to get rich, and satisfy ones selfish interests.
And too much of that is what got us here in the first place.
Really wondering …
BTW, Our new forum is much easier to navigate, and conducive to discussion and exchanges of ideas and information. A name and valid email address is all it takes to sign up and post. Anyone can read. All who are interested in money reforms are welcome.
http://forum.webofdebt.com/
Ellen, you are brilliant. These ideas are great, and it penetrated my brainwashing to realize, we need to rethink here.
RE: Guernsey — yes they are a success story, but they are a tiny island with absolute control of their borders. They probably also have honest politicians running their nation.
If we started state-wide infrastructure interest-free, one can see where they would want to fund all kinds of stuff — like health care with interest-free money, and then you would certainly run up inflation. Health care is open-ended and certainly not a fixed cost. The possibility of corruption is high as well, especially in rigged contract bidding.
I’m just wondering if you’ve considered these possible land mines, if you tried rolling out an idea like this in a sprawling nation like ours.
Thanks Brook! I have thought about those land mines, but I think they could be avoided. On non-producing social investments creating inflation, I don’t think that’s necessarily true. The GI Bill is considered the best investment the government ever made, even though there were no direct returns. Raising the educational level of the servicemen allowed them to get higher paying jobs, so they paid more taxes, which over a lifetime repaid far more than the cost of the education. Likewise a healthy population will earn more, and if the government invests in health care and pensions, we remove that burden from corporations, making them more competitive with foreign corporations that have those things covered by the state. On health care, what we need is a different standard for evaluating what’s covered. Right now the standard for drug approval is that they’re safe and effective for their intended purpose, but the “intended purpose” may actually reduce longevity in the long run. For example, drugs that suppress diarrhea are holding toxins in the body; likewise drugs that suppress coughing, sneezing and the like. The standard should be, whether they extend life or improve it’s quality. On that standard, I think 95% of what’s covered today would be dropped off the list. Drugs by definition inhibit what the body itself is trying to do and are all toxic in the long run. I’ve written 10 books on this subject and am itching to get to those issues, but the banking issue is controlling at the moment. You’ll never break the pharmaceutical cartel until you break the banking cartel. A head to head won’t work either; they’ll prevail. I think the solution is just to set up a better model. When everyone sees how well it works, the old will just wither away naturally.
Ellen, I generally agree with most of your ideas, and lines of thinking. But I have a reservation about this statement:
“I think the solution is just to set up a better model. When everyone sees how well it works, the old will just wither away naturally.”
I doubt it will be that easy. The money-masters will try to sabotage any new money system that comes along. They always have, and they have many ways to do so that the average person cannot diagnose or detect.
You know the “money powers” did it to the US “Continental” and the “Greenbacks” Lincoln issued. They have done it to modern nations and currencies that don’t play ball with them.
Why would you not think they would do it with a local or state money creation system that was under democratic-republican control?
I think any money system that is created will have to have built-in protections against sabotage by the international central bankers, or even our government, as it is largely controlled by the bankers now, rather than the people.
Hi Jere, I agree with that; in fact that’s what I’m saying — you can’t go head to head with them or announce that you’re taking them on. You’re liable to get shot, or at least get destroyed in the media. You have to just quietly do something else, get something else going without announcing it; call it something inscrutable, like “quantitative easing” . . . I think state-owned banks are the place to start. Who is going to object to getting the state’s economy going again? Once one state does it, it will be obvious and they’ll all jump in.
One strategy used is to get NWO types on boards of banks they want to control, and they work for years on this. We have no such multi-generational strategy, but we could use the same approach. Get successful business leaders who believe in this idea appointed to boards of state banks, and then you have a tamper-proof bank to work with.
There is a backlash over the acceleration of the NWO agenda is coming. It’s being pushed too far too fast, but i can’t say what form the backlash will take.
Hi Ellen, Yes, I think state and local banks of issue (money creation) are probably the best hope. I like the “Ithica Hours” urs” model as a starting place, or the Common Good Banks.
When all is said and done we still need massive public education, and I just think that is going to be really tough to achieve. The bankers and their boys have all the media and educational channels, and we have some internet and one on one contacts. Oh yes, and we are in the right.
A waterfall begins with a single drop . . . (That’s from a South African film, The Power of One.)
Yes, and the drop we started with cap and trade is growing. We have a bill to nullify cap and trade in my state, and a few phone calls to other states has netted at least 3 that are working on the same.
Nullification is going to be the new buzz word with this administration that is over-reaching it’s Constitutional authority. State sovereignty resolutions don’t seem to be having the desired effect.
Ellen Brown~
Your site, blog, forum, wiki, and AMI proposal, have enough wisdom to start a library.
What’s missing is a movement from the top (Obama) or a movement from the bottom up (Brown).
A movement requires a plan to start it, and another or follow up plan to scale it up.
I know book sales and a book series and its sales are not to be sneezed at.
But a collaborative effort to Keep It Simple and Get it Started can’t hurt.
WOD and Web of Derivatives (its sequel) are not simple. They have not memed or scaled up. Who’s on first? What’s the game? I heard all of Sperling. I know Sunstein believes in FDR’s economic rights. Lerner said we had to have a purpose. Do we need a plan with a purpose, milestones, etc.? Is there any software that works well — assuming we want to change the world first, and if we can’t, we want to become as popular as Harry Potter.
John Gelles,
Movement from the top… Obama? On any of this?
John, The starting of a plan and a movement is the purpose behind the forum, where we have a place already set out for discussions on the problems, proposed solutions, and methods of implementations.
The problem, in the first months of its operation is a lack of sincere and knowledgeable participation. The Forum can be found by clicking on the links above, or here:
http://www.forum.webofdebt.com
The problem I see with using Amazon is that it is open to anyone, and as soon as the thing gets going it will be “poisoned” by the banking forces and their myriads of minions.
You MUST have a closed forum of leaders who have studied this problem in depth, who know history, who understand the constitution and the philosophy it sprang from, and have outstanding ethical and moral perspectives on where we should be going, and the steps it will require to get there. We also need people who understand the current world, and its channels of power, an how to best utilize those channels for positive change.
Any volunteers?
http://www.forum.webofdebt.com
Another reply to Dave Redick,
Where do I begin? Have you read Web of Debt by Ellen Brown? Have read The Lost Science of Money by Stephen Zarlenga?
Upon reading your Fake Money:How It Funds…it appears you are suggesting real gold (Au, periodic table), rather than some sort of computer gold, or some sort of e-gold (just before f-gold ?).
In that case, where will you get the Au gold? You say that the US Govt has enough to carry out your plan) For future growth, where will you get more gold? Who will you buy it from. What will you use to buy it? How will you nominate its value? Foreign governments and foreign citizens (India for example) own most of the gold that has ever been mined.
Your “Fake Money” does not disclose the answer to these questions.
All good points Jim. Of course Dave Redick is one of those people who have thought partially through the problem of our modern “funny-money” scheme, but not far enough through it to identify the proper and workable solutions. They could hardly see the proper remedies, since they cannot even accurately diagnose the problem. Among those people who think a return to the gold standard is all that is needed are: 1) Those who follow the “Austrian School”; 2) Those who identify with the Investor or Business Classes, or primarily derive their incomes and fortunes from investment capital rather than productive work; 3) Those who own lots of Gold, gold mines, land and resources and slaves or slave-wage laborers with which to work their mines. This latter would include the international central bankers and the artificial entities they have created to buffer themselves of the responsibility for their criminal enterprises and fraudulent Ponzi schemes.
The central bankers own most of the world’s gold bullion, and other precious metals and resources in raw or refined form. Most of the governments that once may have owned some of it have long since transferred ownership of it to the bankers in part payment on the money they “borrowed” at interest from the central bankers. That would include the USA, and Great Britain. Not sure about China, Russia, or India. China may be in the best shape vis a vis the bankers, as they have a nationalized banking system that also allows private banking and investment.
The point is that the world is on the brink of financial and economic collapse solely because of a corrupt and fraudulent money system orchestrated by a cabal of private international central bankers who used a gold-based fractional reserve scheme (scam) to take us to where we are now.
The gold-based system was the linchpin of our current predicament, so it would be insane to think of returning to it.
Solutions can never come from the same lavel of thinking that produced the problem. We must look higher.
Jim, I know you fully understand all of this, but I just wanted to spell it out to the Dave Redick’s of our world: Gold (and all commodity-based money) is the problem; it can never be the solution.
Commodity based money is the road to serfdom or debt slavery at the hands of the Money-Masters.
Ellen’s book has all the answers we need.
Go to #1 Fake Money in the left margin of my web site
http://www.Forward-usa.org. See ‘Redick’s Four Rules’ for a gold-backed money system. get the gov’t out of it !!
Dave
Reply to Dave Reddick:
Their has never been a widely used “gold backed money system” in modern times. What we have had is the illusion of gold backed money. There have been lots of smoke and mirror claims of such systems, but they are claims without substance, and always will be in ANY privately owned and controlled banking system built on the fractional reserve Ponzi scheme.
More significantly, no one… and I mean NO ONE.. has ever been able to logically and sensibly explain how we could convert from our current money system to a genuinely gold-backed system without selling the people of the world into debt slavery and serfdom. It simply cannot be done without making a speck of gold dust ridiculously expensive.
Besides, converting back to a gold system would mean that the only people who would then have money would be those who have all the gold – the same bankers who have always had all the gold, and who stole that gold the American people once had with their Federal Reserve Ponzi Scheme from 1913 on to the present.
Do yourself a favor and read Ellen’s book. You might learn something about money.
Jere, to answer your question — yes, if you inflate gold to $ 10,000 an ounce, we would have the equivalent in gold of our nat’l debt — but we would then have to empty the gold vault and start over.
There is actually a plan like this being bandied about — a plan to let every nation reset their debt — but even with this plan — the bankers wind up with all the gold in the end.
Hi Brook, Sorry, but your reply to me makes no sense. I have no idea what “question” of mine you may be addressing. I didn’t ask one. If your reply meant to address my statement that:
“More significantly, no one… and I mean NO ONE.. has ever been able to logically and sensibly explain how we could convert from our current money system to a genuinely gold-backed system without selling the people of the world into debt slavery and serfdom.”
… then it reflects a severe confusion of thinking, or of expression. Who is this “we” you are talking about? Whose gold are you referring to increasing in value to $10,000/oz? How would such an increase in gold that belongs mostly to international central bankers do anything to alleviate the US National Debt? (Even if your math proved correct, and I don’t think it is – and even if the US Gov actually had any substantial quantity of gold, which I very much doubt.)
And exactly whose gold vault are you talking about “emptying”, and what would we have to “start over”? Your nebulous use of this term “we” leaves me totally confused.
Again, there has never been a viable, workable gold-based money plan advanced that would leave money-creation in the hands of private bankers (as it now is) that would benefit the people of our world, rather than the bankers.
But your conclusion is accurate. The bankers do wind up with all the gold in the end, always and ever, as long as the current privately created money systems are intact.
In addition to Ellen’s book, I would also recommend Steve Zarlenga’s excellent text: “The Lost Science of Money”. It is an “unwashed”. “unsanitized” history of money and banking that is far less flattering to bankers than their official version that they would like the public to consume. It lacks the clarity and entertainment value of “Web of Debt”, but it contains valuable insights into how we arrived at the mess we are in today.
Jere, the plan i’ve seen would inflate the price of gold on the COMEX to $ 10,000 an ounce — and this would get every government out of debt overnight. FDR did something similar to this in the Depression but not to the global extreme. There are several EU governments in worse shape than we are, so even the Euro is threatened by the crisis.
It’s a bad idea and has NWO written all over it.
Pardon but your ignorance of history is showing.
You wrote: “The objection invariably raised to government-issued currency or credit is that it would create dangerous hyperinflation. However, in none of these models has that proven to be true.”
WRONG!
You wrote about the colonial war and it’s success. Yes, they won the war but couldn’t pay for it. They only had paper Continental Dollars. The Continental Dollar, which preceded the US dollar was hyperinflated to worthessness in the 1780’s. This resulted in the end of the first gov’t of the United States. Our present constitution came out of the failure of the Continental Congress formed in 1776.
Earlier in history the New England colonies also had problems with paper currency, bills of credit, largely issued to finance war. (just like today?) During the depression of the 1780’s all specie disappeared and the fiat paper currency became worthless. Hard times indeed.
What you suggest is a recipe for failure of the United States gov’t and the loss of all value of the current US dollar. It has happened here and else where through out history. History repeats and those who don’t learn history, as you evidently haven’t, are doomed to repeat the failures of the past.
And if you do know this history, why suggest a course that history predicts will result in failure? What is your agenda?
Regards, Audigger
Politeness and diplomacy are required to participate in this blog. Rudeness will be blocked. However, I will respond to your comment. The Continental did not hyperinflate because the government over-printed it. The Continental Congress voted to print only a certain amount and that’s all they did print. It hyperinflated because it was easily counterfeited. The British were sitting on ships in the harbor armed with printing presses, madly printing it and giving it to anyone who would take it. They did this as a matter of war policy, just as Napoleon did it in Europe. The Continental also got devalued because it had to compete with other currencies. Gold and the paper currencies of the established state governments were preferred over the paper money of an army that might not win. In the end, speculators killed the Continental by buying it up for pennies on the dollar, after telling the farmers and soldiers who had earned it that it wasn’t going to be worth anything after the war. None of this was caused by the government irresponsibly printing money. The counterfeiting problem has now been overcome with modern printing techniques.
There seems to be one overarching awareness missing from most of the debate on debt, and that is the exact nature of debt – what it is that generates debt. It is really quite simple yet it involves and evolves a plethora of “man-age-ment” permutations – or; “sin lies at the door and its desire shall be for you and you shall rule over it.”
The fundamental issue of all debt is unforgiveness – and as a check measure of spiritual (im)maturity, it stands alone. Why is it that the most Christianized nation on earth is burdened with the greatest debt, when Jesus said, “All debt is mine”? You have not yet understood what was meant by, “The recompense (vengeance) is MINE, I SHALL REPAY!”
The inescapable conclusion is that until there is a mass revelation/realization that one must forgive in order to be forgiven, the sham christianity of “the greatest nation on earth” will ensure that the blind continue to lead the blind and they both will fall into the ditch.
Until then, many will continue to dung the fig tree, hoping in vain that it will become fruitful, not realizing that the very liberty which they proclaim and defend is the outworking of the Beast they try to contain, which shall heal itself (Rev 13) and which will rule for a season.
Such is the nature of the Tree of knowledge of Good AND Evil, and if one cannot differentiate between this tree and the TREE OF LIFE which is in THE MIDST OF THE GARDEN, then one will be constrained to pursue their own delusion (Isaiah 66:4) to its conclusion.
The enabler of true financial freedom is forgiveness, and the reason why the world is mired in debt is simply that it has not yet, except for a few who have found the narrow way, encompassed the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and hence, broad is the way which leads to destruction, and many are they who enter IN thereby, but the good news is that they still enter in!
As a nation, you have institutionalized unforgiveness on a scale never before manifest, hence YOUR DEBT, and no amount of MAN-AGE-MENT will rescue you. As long as you try to divide between GOOD AND EVIL, you will be of the same family tree as those whom you contend with, and when you fight with sin, sin will always win.
The division is between FLESH & SPIRIT. Get it?
Until you realise en masse that the real gold standard is “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, then you and the rest of the world will be drawn inexorably toward Armageddon – drawn out by a hook .
The bowls of God’s passion are full to overflowing – and it is going to get very messy before it gets better. The more you dicker over trying to heal the Beast, the more you will be enslaved by it – it is God or Mammon – life or death – blessing or cursing – you choose!
Prologue
I was asked by Senator Betsy Johnson (D) District 16, to present verbal testimony regarding SB 628, the Foreclosure Mediation Bill. The hearing room was filled to capacity with people ready to comment on this legislation. The hearing began with a bureaucratic group explaining the amendments to SB 628 because they were completed at the last minute before the hearing and the citizens were not able to have copies of them. The purpose of the hearing was to hear citizen comment on amendments the citizens did not have!
The next group that spoke was also given an uninterrupted amount of time to address the amendments.
I spoke next and was interrupted after approximately a minute and a half with a curt question from Senator Bonamici asking if I had anything pertinent to the amendments. I was invited to speak regarding written testimony that I submitted to the committee a week earlier by Senator Bonamici on March 31, 2009, even though the agenda was regarding the amendments to SB628.
I was allowed to speak for another minute and a half and no questions were questions were asked. Since I was cut off and not allowed to finish the testimony I was invited by the Senate Committee for Consumer Protection and Public Affairs to give, I present it here below.
Testimony Interrupted- SB 628 March 31, 2009
Chairwoman Bonamici, members of the committee, my name is Kenneth William Dost, I reside in Scappoose, Oregon, which is located in Columbia County. I am here today upon invitation from Senator Betsy Johnson and I speak on behalf of not only myself but others who face the difficult realities of foreclosure. I could not express more gratitude to this committee. To be able to address this committee regarding an injustice destroying many.
I can tell you that the stress of foreclosure is not one I would wish upon anybody. Yesterday, for the seventh month in a row, we came within 30 minutes of auction commencement. It is terrible stressor and it changes a person. Tragically there are those whose shame and embarrassment was too great for them resulting in suicide. You know the default notice is coming and it does so by courier and than a couple of days later you come home from work and a notice of foreclosure is posted on your front door, and for the next couple of weeks the same notice keeps coming again and again and again. What did these people not get the office memo ongoing paperless, or what? Like you really need to be repeatedly reminded of your failure, the media does that for you, and because you cannot bear to say anything because your friends regurgitate the same rhetoric as the media.
Eventually, you have come to a point where you have succumbed to the reality and the decisions that need to be made as to what are you going to do. Either you wither away or you suck it up and do something about it. Our story began, not in subprime, but 8 years ago with US Bank and discovery of fraud, in which we were taught a hard lesson not to go against a bank, and they set us up to fail, subsequently condemning us to the fires of subprime. I vowed a long time ago, I will not allow this happen to me.
Certainly there are those that did take advantage, and kept piling it on, as well as those that took mortgages who could not even afford the first month’s payment, however, that is a representational few compared to the masses. The media would have us all believe we are unintelligent and unsophisticated, foolish and deserving of losing our homes. Just a few years back, the same media were touting how wonderfully expansive our economy was and how great it was that those previously disenfranchised from home ownership were now suddenly inclusive. Dodd, Franks, Bush, and Greenspan pushed the idea while others only a mere mention was necessary. Well, the media was wrong then and they are now.
The truth is that we in subprime have been used to generate a mass of wealth and now we are the scapegoats, someone to blame other than the Wall Street boys. We are the weak ones, we always have been, and are the ones that slipped in the underbelly of bad credit, whether it is from unemployment, medical bills, or making a mistake with credit privileges. Yes, we have become the clearing house to dispose of those who have challenged the banking and financing systems with their abusive manner. They make a fortune off us with higher interest payments and insurance rates. We are the cash cow. So, when Congress did some deregulating, those that preyed upon us jumped right into the fray, and Congress themselves made the same play.
Of course 5.1 billion dollars went into the coffers of big business in the 10 years between 1998 and 2008 and pretty much buys anything, and certainly did in this case.
Brokers ran unregulated and dangled on the strings of lenders who incentivized them until more money, self-interest and greed took over breaking that trust between broker and borrower. The studies are all coming out, the brokers doctored incomes and forged documents and steered people into high risk loans that did not need to be. 35% that qualified as prime were sent to hell by brokers. 70% of all defaulting loans are broker generated. They try to blame the borrowers as the authors of liar loans. Even still, whatever happened to the buck stops here? I am curious to ask a national associations of brokers what does 75% increase in lobbying expenses in 2008 buy them, because it is awfully darn quiet.
(Interrupted by Senator Bonamici at this point…)
From the brokers to the loan originators, the middle men between the brokers and Wall Street, they wash their hands of blaming the brokers, but their hands are filthier hands. Their dirty little secret are those 4506t, the IRS income verification forms that are required by 90% of legitimate lenders, however, they never used them.
For those in foreclosures, please look on your default notice and find your trust series, and go into the SEC filings, to the prospectus and pooling and service agreements. Notice the step by step instructions to the servicers. To us in subprime, it sounds all too familiar, it is not your fault and you are not a failure, a cheap scam has been engineered with traps and pitfalls to bleed the equity dry and your home with it. When you are done laughing at the insanity and you have had your cry, get off your rear end and participate in saving your home.
We were given no say in the matter of who would service our mortgage. It is whoever wins the bid and then we are stuck with them and they know that. I cannot even begin to tell you the horror stories of servicers. Every one of them has really stupid people working for them or they are playing the game with us as well, why should they be an exception? Servicers make their profits from the fees they charge, so it bodes well for them to post late payments and pull other shenanigans. There are plenty of lawsuits that prove this.
If I could craft the bill of my choice, Ken’s Bill 628, it would vary greatly from what is currently being proposed. This is not my area of expertise, but I have had more than my fair share of bucking up against it. The language you are using (trustees/grantors) is another thinly disguised term for MERS and you will run into a legal brick wall, and frankly we do not have time for that. We need to get people’s live restored and back to normal.
MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems) is becoming legally entrenched in lawsuits across the country. This goes to the ‘holder of the note” defense as it has been coined, and makes them come to court with note in hand. The problem is they cannot produce a note, because there is no note. Apparently, they neglected to cover this little item and the Ohio Supreme court upheld a ruling denying rights to foreclose. Now the flood gates are opening across the country, but to be effective in Oregon means that we need to go back to the judicial way of life.
Secondly, I would rather give them my house as opposed to have anything to with mediators or arbitrators, no thank you.
Thirdly, what happens in the case of the trustee being out of state, as MERS is in my case?
Mediation/arbitration throws the word mandatory in, forget it. I have been that route, and no thank you I would rather have them take the house. It will be the same as it is with credit card proceedings which are going to be slanted in their favor even if you’re right you still lose, because in arbitration you walk in the door that way. In mediation, you rely on people’s judgments that I would not trust, because their judgments’ are already tainted out there.
This is what I would like to see, nice and simple:
1) Mandatory servicer or lender modification to the Obama plan. Period. Make the servicer retain the services of an outside source as they did with titanium solutions, which came to a person’s house if they did not respond, and yes a lot people do ignore it all, not that is at all right but they are scared to death, and the media does not make it any better. Leave the trustees out it.
2) If agreement is found than let it go to some sort of mediation phase.
3) You have to take into account unemployment, there has to be a window of time that takes that into account. A family should never have to lose their house for cyclical swings in the economy. If it is the cycle more often than not those jobs are gone because of the economy, and not because of plant closings.
Reduce mortgage payments from 1400 a month to 1000 a month for a period of 2 years and then spread that loss in payments back over the life of the loan after those two years are expired.
4) If the servicers are resistant to coming to the table then allow the foreclosure to take place, but make it judicial and make the servicer have to produce the note. That will bring them to the table.
One of the most important issues is credit reporting. Credit scores are decimated by The next group that spoke was also given an uninterrupted amount of time to address the amendments.
5) foreclosures. If I had my way I would completely eliminate credit reporting, it is oppressive and abusive, and hopefully there will be another committee hearing one day to discuss that issue. If after 6 months all payments have been made on time the credit
Ellen Brown, your recent article “letter to Obama” is excellent. History is so important in getting people to see the scope of this fight we are in to regain our national sovereignty. Wasn’t it lucky that Rothschild & Co. got so greedy when Lincoln went to them first? Had they offered a reasonable rate, we would probably never have gotten the Greenback example which you describe so well.
I am currently on my second reading of Richard Cook’s “We Hold These Truths” The Hope of Monetary Reform” (highly recommended) and I very much appreciate your reference to Mr. Cook at the end of your article. Most recently, Mr. Cook has made available his six-part video: “Credit As A Public Utility: The Solution to the Economic Crisis” which is outstanding as well.
After reading Mr. Cook, it occurs to me there is an unfortunate misunderstanding among critics of the Fed. Led by Ron Paul and others. They constantly attack fiat money and call for a gold standard.
This plays right into the hands of the banksters who control most of the world’s gold. The peoples money must be controlled by the people and issued by the people’s government in the form of debt-free credit in amounts appropriate to the GDP of the nation as proposed by Mr. Cook.
I wish to encourage you to keep pressing on about North Dakota’s State Banking example. Certainly we cannot depend on your powers of persuasion in causing Mr. Obama to suddenly fire his entire cabinet and pursue an agenda to save America. We must look to the States, Cities and Counties to stand up for the Constitution which has been shredded by Washington’s District of Criminals.
Thank you so much for all of your books and your dedication to our country which I believe still has a fighting chance.
Bob Walton
Portal, Arizona
Thanks! Yes I agree we need to act locally. There are groups forming in several states to try to get legislation passed for state-owned banks. States have progressively lost their rights and their power. The States agreed to give up the power to issue their own money (Art I Sec 10) only because they had delegated that power to Congress (Art I Sec 8 Cl 5). Congress has now abdicated and the States need to step in.
“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” – Albert Einstein
Web of Debt Forum: http://www.forum.webofdebt.com/
Ellen,
I read your “Letter to Obama” on Phil Davis’ Stock World site. It is on point and correct. The video “Debt as Money” which is available on the web and You Tube provides a clear history of how debt and banks evolved.
There is no reason whatsoever for the world to be held in debt slavery for life by the usury agents know as bankers. These Masters of Business Arrogance replace hard work, innovation, and supply of goods and services with spreadsheets, pieces of often worthless paper and views that their “job” is to oversee everyone and everything because they had issued some numbers on the computer or ran them off with a printing press.
These middle people between the issuance of money, and the people who actually use it to produce the society we live in are counterproductive and rather evil. As pointed out in the Lincoln article, their greed is unmatched, and probably “bred in the bone” as a old politician would say.
Let’s make a national movement to end usury once and for all. Make issuers of loans government employees, companies responsible to pay out dividends, and not interest, and people able to borrow at no interest.
Why should a middle man borrow money at .25% from the Fed and scalp people for 25% or more on a credit card and 5% on a mortagage? Oh, yes, so that they can live the lives of kings! Good that Madoff got caught, but why haven’t we caught these other unconstitutional evildoers??
Thanks! Yes, it’s been fixed.
The Web pf Debt Forum is now open.
We are pleased to announce the opening of our Web of Debt Forum at http://www.forum.webofdebt.com. Here is a place where those who have an interest in our Coalition for Justice in Banking and Money Reform Think Tank discussions can continue these discussions in orderly sub-forums, topics, and threads without wading through huge distracting off-topic posts. Registration is as quick and simple as you desire to make it. Any registered user can start new topics; so current events can be discussed as well. Books, videos, or articles of interest by anyone may be discussed, including those by Ellen H Brown. Many articles can be found on EHB’s blogsite, http://webofdebt.wordpress.com . along with other valuable information on money and monetary reform issues.
There are sections for discussing problems with our current economic and monetary system, proposals for reforms or alternative systems, and methods of implementing them, or bringing them into being. Various contingencies can be discussed, along with local, state and national solutions, or even international and global ones.
So bring your best ideas on money reform and lets start turning them into reality. Join in the discussions at the Web of Debt Forums. http://www.forum.webofdebt.com/
Jlh/EHB
The book is tremendous. I can’t say enough about about the information. As far as what our system should look like, I don’t think anyone need go father than the Venus Project via Zeitgeist Movement. Jacques Fresco is dead on. A money system which provokes differential advantage will always become a breeding ground for power, control and greed. There is no getting away from this. We need to start looking into a resource based economy. All monetary (fiat) based systems with usuary, inflation and the likes are designed without including a true cost (at times on purpose) of human life, depletion of resources and the second law of thermodynamics. Simply said, thank you for the information, we have been provided with the err in our ways, and we need to evolve. A resource based economy is just that. peace love respect
Hello people,
Restore the Greenback plan of “Tricky Dick Nixon.” Open 4950 “main street” national banks across the USA. Use the headoffice building built for same in 1976. (The 200th anniversary of the republic… GET IT) REPUDIATE the Federal reserve note as legal tender. Establish a “Greenback”, with no debt, no interest, no government borrowing. Anyone with Federal Reserve note debt can renegotiate with their lender in Greenback terms if they wish.
Anyone needing money can immediately go to their “main street” bank and get $5,000.00 for a flat fee of $50.00. Pay back not more than $100.00 per week. no more money for those who dont pay.
No more 401k swindle. Stock paper that cannot pay a dividend has no status anywhere, anyhow, anytime. Universal health care will require the extermination of Insurance companies and the legons of “pedlars” of same. Therefore, a national minimum for U/E will be $1000.00/mo. Must be a US citizen to qualify. Thanks RDuane Willing.
Is there a link to the forum from the Web of Debt home page? So far I can’t seem to find one – ideally it should be right at the top.
Good luck with the forums hope they will take off and then maybe this giant thread will have had its day…
ANNOUNCEMENT! The Web of Debt Money Reform Think Tank (Coalition for Justice in Banking) is now open for posting and discussion. The correct link is:
http://www.forum.webofdebt.com/index.php
Please be sure to choose the most appropriate forum or category for your posts. The three main ones are for discussion about monetary 1) problems 2) solutions and 3) implementation. These forums are for those who are seeking serious dialogue about money reforms.
Enjoy.
http://www.forum.webofdebt.com/index.php
Hi Dennis, Great comment. I think that very well sums up what a lot of us would like to see happen. It seems to me that Ellen Brown and Steve Zarlenga have written similar outlines. Maybe you should post that in the new Money Reform Think Tank Forum. The forum is now open for posting.
Let the discussions commence!
Jere
Brilliant Dennis… I am working on an article with those exact concepts.
American Freedom Note Amendment
The fractional-reserve banking system, established by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 to oversee a debt-based currency, is obsolete and detrimental to the needs of the American people in the 21st Century. The very act of creating money by debt-assumption on the part of the citizenry gives unwarranted power to a financial elite and erodes the very foundations of the American Republic. The constantly increasing debt with its associated interest acts as a millstone around the neck of industry and stifles economic creativity, while rewarding the well-connected elite generously.
Therefore—-by amendment to the US Constitution, establish a new currency, the American Freedom Note.
All debt instruments (loan contracts, bonds, govt debt, etc.) originating in Federal Reserve banks, all existing Federal Reserve Notes and checking account balances, are exchanged for American Freedom Notes. Creditors forgo liens and are cashed out 100%. Debt is exonerated, and debtors assume 100% ownership of any encumbered assets, including—and most importantly—the productive assets of the country (factories, farms, productive enterprises in general).
A fixed quantity of AFNs results from this system-wide exchange and these fresh accounts can be loaned at interest rates determined freely in the marketplace, with the strict proviso that no fractional-reserve lending is allowed from that point forward.
Over time a natural deflation occurs and the American Freedom Notes, fixed in quantity by this Amendment, acquire increasing purchasing power.
Debt forgiveness, greed forgiveness. The financial elite are bought out, the rest of us indentured servants are freed, and most importantly, no blood in the streets and the American experiment in liberty, with its enshrinement of the rights of the individual, continues with renewed character!
This is an interesting link that I’ve come across. G20 summit may be pushing for special drawing rights?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/4986287/IMF-poised-to-print-billions-of-dollars-in-global-quantitative-easing.html
[...] Video = The Money Masters (3.5 hrs – 2 dvds); Best Book (By Far) = Web of Debt or Publisher’s website reviews and comments; Amazon Reviews of Web of Debt; Another Best Book = The Lost Science of Money: The Mythology of [...]
On further analysis I see my comment above is wrong because the Central Bank (Fed Reserve) actually does issue fiat money, without backing, as much as it wants, to set the interest rate it wants, and to buy government bonds.
Why is fiat money acceptable…?
Partly because of the usefulness of money per se and partly because the government requires money in taxes.
The risks are how much money fiat money the bank issues (and this affect on the value of the currency and price inflation). Once it reduces interest rates to near zero, then it can start buying government bonds to convert them to cash as it appears to be doing.
Money doesn’t have any solid backing in productive asset. It is a tool for facilitating exchange and paying taxes. The Central Banks role is to ensure the right amount is in the system.
Better…?
Yes, Ben. Much better. However, there is widespread misunderstanding about the term “fiat” when applied to money. It does not mean “paper money”, as most people mistakenly think. It simply means “legal” money or currency that must be accepted in payment of debts (unless otherwise specified in a contract). It also assumes that it will be accepted by the issuing govt in payment of taxes and fees. Gold and silver coins, for instance, have been “fiat” money, when they are valued for their stamped face value rather than their market value by weight.
However, modern currency is “backed” by the faith and credit of the issuing govt, for whatever that is worth. The soundness of the currency depends on the soundness of the issuing govt authority, and its citizens.
How can the government put a trillion dollars into the economy and half the national debt all in three years in the middle of a recession when it has no surplus in the accounts and obviously isn’t borrowing more…?
Does the following analysis make sense…?
Central banks don’t have depositors to lend against, what are they then buying back bonds with…? It must be against the money of creditors and shareholders. But it can’t be external creditors (through bonds) because this is the debt it is trying to reduce. And it can’t be greater shareholdings, because the government, which is the shareholder, doesn’t have any extra money to extend shareholdings (all tax income is already tagged to expenditure – there isn’t a surplus in the government accounts).
But hang on, if the central bank doesn’t have any money to buy back bonds with, and it’s not issuing new debt to buy back those bonds, then where does it get the money from…?
Well it must be getting the money from government, either in greater shareholder investment or in loans. But government doesn’t have a surplus, it doesn’t have any money. So where does government get the money from…? It can’t be borrowing it from the central bank. It must be creating the money on the books as an accounting entry, presumably a liability on one side and on the other side an asset (which is the loan or shareholding in the bank). This is the government acting like a bank. Theoretically we might say it also has the security of a bank because it’s shareholders are substantial (being every citizen of the country) but it doesn’t actually have their money or assets…
Providing the central bank stays in business there will be no bad debt or bad investment. But if the central bank doesn’t, then the investment or debt will need to be funded by tax payers. Of course it’s hard to see how a central bank could go out of business.
But this is all very strange…
There seems to be nothing to stop the government continuing to write up as much money as they want and put into the central bank so it can pay off debt. This money has no link to production, it’s not based against deposits, loans or shareholder funds. It doesn’t have to be paid back, it wasn’t borrowed. The government is acting as a bank without any money put forward (or borrowed) to kick off the loans. The government has not asked the public for the extra funds needed as capital to act as a bank, and it certainly doesn’t have any grand surplus to do this. This really is creating money out of nothing, on the books, with no capital to start with.
…
When the central bank goes out to buy back the bonds, what choice do the holders have but to sell…? The central bank will pay them a premium to break the term, but the money it is using must be worth less. It has no tie to production. It has not been created from invested capital, it has simply been written on the books.
Even worse for the bond holders, the new money it gets is worth less, and any remaining bonds they still hold are worth less because they are still in the national currency.
…
If you want to devalue the currency just create new money from nothing on the government books.
What could happen now is that no-one will take US dollars (or buy US bonds). They will want to only be paid in their own currency. But it is hard to see how this could occur where the US is concerned, given its currency is meant to be a safe haven, and it’s economy still the most reliable in the world.
…
What the justification for this…?
It is basically that the financial sector has expanded the money supply in a similar fashion by loaning money (created on the books against it’s borrowing and capital) into speculative markets which grew and grew on greater and greater loan leveraged speculation that massively expanded the money supply.
Why didn’t price inflation result…?
Because that money didn’t go into Joe Bloggs pockets, it went into massive investment funds operated by banks, huge corporates, pensions and hedge funds. Of course when the bubble burst that money was lost and the banks and other massive investors went belly up or would have done had not the government come up with issuing new money without debt to save their arses. In addition the government can pump the new money into the economy and pay back their debts buying their bonds.
…
I just put my project on Model Economy Wiki
Don’t be fooled by linguistics, Ben. ‘Monetizing bonds’ is loaning money, and the bond market sells debt. The government already ‘monetizes bonds’ for the issuance of new money (via the cnetral bank), and already spends this money on things such as welfare. They do this in a way, however, that reduces purchasing power. Tax repays government issued money–you pay for government issued money out of either Fed money or commercial bank loans. Same purpose, inefficient system.
Dear Ellen! I read your book every night in bed and now and then. Got it last week. Wow! The best book ever written I will say. Thank you for your effort writing it.
I wonder how Obama can handle the whole thing. I wonder if he had read our book. I don´t think so. Maybe he is better off not reading it beacuse he seem to be at sincere person. Knowing too much he will maybe do a Kennedy thing and be murdered.
I live in Sweden and will now send a mejl to Anders Borg – our financeminister. He´s a good one too – his a innocent one – but I will help him to se the masters behind the curtain. I have written an article about this and published in four papers in my locations. People don´t know in the first place that the printing of money in USA is in private hands.
You dedicated your book to your granny and your parents. I almost cried when I read it. And I felt so sad when thinking of my grandparents – Ragnar and Axelina on my mothers side – and Mary and Knut on my fathers side. They had to struggle trough the thirties too. Maybe they have all been better off it those horrible persons behind the curtains haven´t existed. I have always wondered where all the money comes from. Now I know.
All the best to you!
Yours sincerely
Helena P O
Is this what is happening now…? The government issuing new money to monetize bonds…?
Yes! I actually think it’s a good idea. I wrote 2 years ago that I thought Ben Bernanke knew how to save the day, and I think he’s doing it. The Fed rebates the interest after deducting its costs, and the debt is rolled over indefinitely; the effect is the same as issuing new debt-free Greenbacks (now FRNs).