The Monetary System

[cityfanlee23]

I've been looking deep into the Monetary system for a few years now, and it's plainly evident the bankers and politicians have succeeded in feeding the population of the majority of the planet, alot of crap.

 

I've seen plenty of people blaming todays poverty on "Low wages" "high taxes" etc etc, but the problem is, that's not the problem, that's just a symptom of the disease that is the monetary system, for it's the monetary system that controls all of this.

The fact 97% of the UK Money supply is digital money created by banks to benefit the banks is incredible, and we've hit a point where the only people that really greatly benefit from money creation, are the ones that are in control of it's creation, therefore have a huge incentive to just keep on creating.

 

50 years ago, you could feed a family on a single wage, Now, even though we have more money in our pay packets, we are worse off than 50 years ago, how the hell have we let this happen?

Why is this not being taught in mass to the population?

 

Because these people control the government, the less people that know how it works, the better it is for the bankers. 

 

This is a hugely important topic, probably the most important part of our lives in the present world, it control us. 

How can we change it for the better?

 

I've been looking into alternative monetary systems, as it's evident the government won't legislate to stop private banks creating digital money for profits, and I've seen some really interesting alternatives like a Kilowatt per hour backed currency, or even the "Lawful bank" which I'm looking into at present.

 

Does anybody have any alternatives, or even solutions to fix this disease we are all infected by?

Would be a really interesting discussion.

[cityfanlee23]

Thomas Jefferson in around 1806 (Date could well be wrong)

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

[Webbo]

I think you're ignoring the massive rises in living standards over the last 100 years.

[cityfanlee23]

I think you're ignoring the massive rises in living standards over the last 100 years.

 

Definitely not ignoring that, But the majority of that is from government investment and technology, Not from private banks loaning money they created from thin air for profit.

 

In the decade between 1997-2007, The treasury printed £18bn to be used for infrastructure building and relieving taxes on people, aswell as reform etc (to great applause I might add, it was essential)

 

In that time, Private banks created 1.2 trillion in loans (which is essentially individual debts) 

Our current debt as a % of GDP is 900% including household debts. 

 

The governments are controlled by bankers, convenient isn't it that the government changed the inflation calculations to ignore Housing prices and council tax, yet they include things like "Dating agencies" 

Imagine what inflation would have been 1997-2007 if they included housing prices, rents etc and council taxes into the calculation.

 

the UK money supply trippled in 10 years due to the banks being given free reign to control how much they print, and also giving them their own choice on fractional reserve, it was around 32% for years, as soon as they were given free reign in 1997, they dropped it to around 2% monthly target, meaning they could loan more (more personal debt) and increase huge profits, the government seeing none of it. (except for the increase of taxation due to the economic boom is caused - In hindsight was it worth the monumental crash is caused in 2008?)

 

So many crashes caused by speculation fuelled by excessive money creation.

 

Black wednesday

.com crash

Housing bubble

Now they are creating the biggest bubble in history, the stimulus bubble. 

 

I can't remember the correct timeframe, I'll try to find it, But it took america about 200 years to grow their GDP to $800bn a year, Between 2009-2010, america created a stimulus bubble of $1.6trillion.

[SMX11]

I recommend you youtube Steve Baker mp. He is one of the few politicians that understands this scam and speaks very well on the subject.

I completely agree, fractional reserve banking coupled with ZIRP is a plague which will destroy the current fiat system.

[Langley]

http://www.cii.co.uk/qualifications/unit-financial-services,-regulation-ethics-%28r01%29/

[The God Emperor]

Money should be left to the market, the state should have no involvment in supplying it.

The banks at the moment are like the unions in the 70's, they aren't inherently bad institutions, they're just taking advantage of a situation the state has created. Although they definatly aren't blameless.

The soloution is to abolish legal tender laws, central banking, regulations that protect banks from failure and allow  privatley produced, diverse and competing money into the market.

This system worked well historically, most recently in colonial America, although there may be other more recent examples. In colonial Amercia different regions used different money, Virgina and Maryland mainly used Tobbacco warehouse receipts, the Carolinas rice and New England fur and whale blubber. Most of these were measured against the most stable and universally used money which in this case was the Spanish silver dollar. This was all done with little or no regulation, when the colonial governments did intervene it resulted in the familiar booms and busts.

Prison economies are another good example.

Central banking was invented as an engine of corruption. It's there so the state can finance perpetual war, populist entitlements to keep the governened placid or buy votes and strengthen it's position with an empire of corporate welfare.

[Webbo]

Definitely not ignoring that, But the majority of that is from government investment and technology, Not from private banks loaning money they created from thin air for profit.

 

In the decade between 1997-2007, The treasury printed £18bn to be used for infrastructure building and relieving taxes on people, aswell as reform etc (to great applause I might add, it was essential)

 

In that time, Private banks created 1.2 trillion in loans (which is essentially individual debts) 

Our current debt as a % of GDP is 900% including household debts. 

 

The governments are controlled by bankers, convenient isn't it that the government changed the inflation calculations to ignore Housing prices and council tax, yet they include things like "Dating agencies" 

Imagine what inflation would have been 1997-2007 if they included housing prices, rents etc and council taxes into the calculation.

 

the UK money supply trippled in 10 years due to the banks being given free reign to control how much they print, and also giving them their own choice on fractional reserve, it was around 32% for years, as soon as they were given free reign in 1997, they dropped it to around 2% monthly target, meaning they could loan more (more personal debt) and increase huge profits, the government seeing none of it. (except for the increase of taxation due to the economic boom is caused - In hindsight was it worth the monumental crash is caused in 2008?)

 

So many crashes caused by speculation fuelled by excessive money creation.

 

Black wednesday

.com crash

Housing bubble

Now they are creating the biggest bubble in history, the stimulus bubble. 

 

I can't remember the correct timeframe, I'll try to find it, But it took america about 200 years to grow their GDP to $800bn a year, Between 2009-2010, america created a stimulus bubble of $1.6trillion.

Monetarism worked in Chile in the 70s but they had a police state and could enforce these things easier. Mrs Thatcher tried it in the early 80s but had to abandon it as it was causing to much hardship. Given time perhaps it could have worked but it would be a brave govt that tried it now. 

[VLC86]

Down wiv da system, Fuk da bankz. You get me?

[cityfanlee23]

Monetarism worked in Chile in the 70s but they had a police state and could enforce these things easier. Mrs Thatcher tried it in the early 80s but had to abandon it as it was causing to much hardship. Given time perhaps it could have worked but it would be a brave govt that tried it now. 

 

We are so far into this viscious circle, we have to prop the banks up, we have to let them keep going, because if we don't they will collapse, putting the planet into poverty, because at present nobody in power is considering anything different, imagine the riots the would ensue if all banks went under today?

 

I also read somewhere that a banker was asked about the debt, and he replied a long winded, regurgitated mess of an answer,

the same question was asked to a 12 year old who replied "If it's just numbers on a screen why does it matter" 

 

Obviously paying your debts matters morally because money is an exchange of goods or service, but when debts are put onto people unwillingly and corruptly, there comes a point where they are just numbers on a screen... 

 

Until we have a solution though we have to keep playing this sickening game. 

 

I recommend you youtube Steve Baker mp. He is one of the few politicians that understands this scam and speaks very well on the subject.

I completely agree, fractional reserve banking coupled with ZIRP is a plague which will destroy the current fiat system.

 

I'll have a look at him, it's the biggest scam in history, The rothschilds run the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm completely pro progression and success, there has to be competition and benefits to working hard or we will never progress as a planet, there has to be fruits to peoples labour, but in the same breath, the real wealth is our time. 

and the concentration of money is disgusting, the top 85 richest people on earth, have more money than the poorest 3.5 billion people, that's absolutely shameful. 

The 1% own 48% of the worlds assets, 

I'm up for wealth creation, and people becoming wealthy as a result of hard work, but these people could not spend this money quick enough even if they wanted to! 

 

with the top 85 being more wealthy than 3.5bn, and top 1% owning almost 50% of all assets, the rest of the 99% are left scrapping for what's left.

[cityfanlee23]

Money should be left to the market, the state should have no involvment in supplying it.

The banks at the moment are like the unions in the 70's, they aren't inherently bad institutions, they're just taking advantage of a situation the state has created. Although they definatly aren't blameless.

The soloution is to abolish legal tender laws, central banking, regulations that protect banks from failure and allow  privatley produced, diverse and competing money into the market.

This system worked well historically, most recently in colonial America, although there may be other more recent examples. In colonial Amercia different regions used different money, Virgina and Maryland mainly used Tobbacco warehouse receipts, the Carolinas rice and New England fur and whale blubber. Most of these were measured against the most stable and universally used money which in this case was the Spanish silver dollar. This was all done with little or no regulation, when the colonial governments did intervene it resulted in the familiar booms and busts.

Prison economies are another good example.

Central banking was invented as an engine of corruption. It's there so the state can finance perpetual war, populist entitlements to keep the governened placid or buy votes and strengthen it's position with an empire of corporate welfare.

 

I actually watched a documentary on tobacco trade, was very interesting. 

 

Theres also the famous story in the netherlands on tulip bulbs, People trading tulip bulbs that had black markings on them because they were rare, the price pushed up so much to the point one black tulip bulb was worth more than the average yearly income of someone from the netherlands.

subsequently there were speculation markets put on them because you plant it and don't know what's going to come out of the ground, 

the system finally crashed when they realised the black markings was nothing to do with the bulbs being "rare" but actually had a disease! 

 

They created the "Dutch tulip bubble of 1687"

 

Incredible! 

Providing money is created and used democratically I don't care who creates it, it would have to be an independent unbiased body who does though, if government could manage it then it does not matter to me, but at the moment it's only created for bankers.

 

 

Here's the difference between us and controlled governments, 

When the crash of 2008 happened, all bankers in the top 3 banks in iceland that crash were put in prison... In the UK, our bankers got away with it, not only that, they gave themselves bigger bonuses than the entire first round of public spending cuts! to make it even worse, they all landed expensively paid side jobs, advising the government on how to avoid it again, the same people that caused it!! And now they have somehow convinced the government the way to avoid it happening again, is to create an even bigger bubble than the last     

[Stadt]

How did I know this would be a long cityfanlee tinpot post

[cityfanlee23]

I recommend you youtube Steve Baker mp. He is one of the few politicians that understands this scam and speaks very well on the subject.

I completely agree, fractional reserve banking coupled with ZIRP is a plague which will destroy the current fiat system.

 

A researcher from the BBC decided to look into every single Fiat currency ever in existence to see how it worked and what failed it, 

He gave up at the letter B having found over 600 fiat currencies that fail.

 

This current system will fail, just a matter of time, The "Lawful bank" is something i've only been looking into for a few days but it's really interesting, 

It takes wealth from the banks and gives back to the people. 

 

How did I know this would be a long cityfanlee tinpot post

 

 Come on Wookie, I know you have alot to contribute to this.

[sphericalfox]

How did I know this would be a long cityfanlee tinpot post

 

I read, 'I've been looking deep into the Monetary system for a few years now...', then immediately saved myself from reading any further.

[Webbo]

We are so far into this viscious circle, we have to prop the banks up, we have to let them keep going, because if we don't they will collapse, putting the planet into poverty, because at present nobody in power is considering anything different, imagine the riots the would ensue if all banks went under today?

 

I also read somewhere that a banker was asked about the debt, and he replied a long winded, regurgitated mess of an answer,

the same question was asked to a 12 year old who replied "If it's just numbers on a screen why does it matter" 

 

Obviously paying your debts matters morally because money is an exchange of goods or service, but when debts are put onto people unwillingly and corruptly, there comes a point where they are just numbers on a screen... 

 

Until we have a solution though we have to keep playing this sickening game. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We're not really in poverty though are we? Even in the third world poverty is falling.

[Mike Oxlong]

Not sure whether to have Shepherds Pie or Cottage Pie for tea.

[cityfanlee23]

I read, 'I've been looking deep into the Monetary system for a few years now...', then immediately saved myself from reading any further.

 

So am I wrong then?

 

We're not really in poverty though are we? Even in the third world poverty is falling.

 

We are not in "poverty" in this country no, but living standards are now dropping and have done for the longest period in living memory.

 

Imagine the poverty if the banks failed now, in 2008 more than 100,000,000 were forced into poverty. 

 

People are losing houses when they default a single payment on their house. 

[Webbo]

So am I wrong then?

 

 

We are not in "poverty" in this country no, but living standards are now dropping and have done for the longest period in living memory.

 

Imagine the poverty if the banks failed now, in 2008 more than 100,000,000 were forced into poverty. 

 

People are losing houses when they default a single payment on their house. 

Living standards are going back up again.

 

As for your last point I'd imagine losing your house after missing 1 payment is extremely rare but even if it wasn't that's nothing to do with the monetary system.

[cityfanlee23]

Living standards are going back up again.

 

As for your last point I'd imagine losing your house after missing 1 payment is extremely rare but even if it wasn't that's nothing to do with the monetary system.

 

 

Over here yes, 

In america, No. 

 

We use the same system as america. 

 

It's coming over here too, Of course it's the monetary system... The monetary system is the set of institutions that provide the economy with money.. Bankers... the same bankers that inflated housing prices and cause the 2008 crash on sub prime mortgages, which put 100m into poverty and lost millions their houses.

[StanSP]

Not sure whether to have Shepherds Pie or Cottage Pie for tea.

 

lol

[cityfanlee23]

Not sure whether to have Shepherds Pie or Cottage Pie for tea.

Definitely shepherds, you better get it on quick though! 

[MooseBreath]

Sounds like you've been reading loads of dodgy blogs.

Inflation hasn't really outpaced wage growth at all over the last few decades.

Houses are more expensive but that's because of population growth and supply issues.

People aren't forced into debt, they choose debt.

Banks may benefit from the creation of debt but so should the debtor.

The money created hasn't disappeared, it's all around you in the form of schools, hospitals, houses, shops, products, services etc.

Regular home repossession after one missed payment simply isn't going to happen even if it was legal. Banks generally make more money from fully paid up interest than from repossessions.

[Mike Oxlong]

Definitely shepherds, you better get it on quick though!

Same mental joust with lasagne or moussaka. These are real life problems.

Beef or lamb, lamb or beef?

I think beef shades it tonight so Cottage Pie it is.

No rush though.

[cityfanlee23]

Sounds like you've been reading loads of dodgy blogs.

Sounds like you don't understand the very nature of our Monetary system.

Inflation hasn't really outpaced wage growth at all over the last few decades.

Inflation has not outpaced wage growth because the inflation calculation has been changed completely, the current calculation to inflation does not include things like Council Tax and Housing prices, rents etc. 

So I'd advise you to look into how Inflation is calculated. they use the CPI which is not geared to accurately calculate inflation and is a con to the people to tell them inflation has not really risen, when infact we are worse off relatively than 50 years ago, it's just political spin that all parties use.

Houses are more expensive but that's because of population growth and supply issues.

In a small way, yes that's true, but you'd be naive not to realise that private banks pumping hundreds of billions into the housing market in the decade before the crash was the single biggest contribution to housing prices rising, in the 10 years prior to the crash, housing prices tripled, During that time, the amount of money created by private banks for mortgages quadrupled, Banks benefit from this in 2 ways, They make interest from the mortgage, secondly because they have the house as security over the loan, in a market they have falsely pumped into to push the prices up, as opposed to say a bank loan for a business, that could fail and is very risky to the bank, creating a "bubble" is the easiest way to transfer money from those that don't have it, to those that do, look at every bubble in history. Yes your statement is correct that demand outgrew supply, but the main contribution to housing prices rising at the rate they did, was because the banks pumped hundreds of billions into it to create a bubble, to boom the economy, to keep their viscous cycle going. 

In 1997, a London resident would spend 22% of their salary getting a mortgage, in 2007 they had to spend 66.6%

People aren't forced into debt, they choose debt.

In some cases true, in a majority this is the biggest load of shit i've read today.

 

Banks may benefit from the creation of debt but so should the debtor.

In alot of cases the debtor does benefit, a mortgage in a rising market for example, the Debtor gets a house as a set rate, that is rising in price, However it's the future generations that lose from this in 1997 buying a house was one of the best investments you could make, fantastic, I'm alright jack... The fact your son/grandson now has to work 10x harder, for less, and cannot afford a mortgage without shelling out upto 70-80% of their income getting it is fine...... the way you say "May benefit" - come on, they are the only ones that really benefit, creating money from nothing, with your assets as security? they cannot lose. 

The money created hasn't disappeared, it's all around you in the form of schools, hospitals, houses, shops, products, services etc.

No... The money created by the TREASURY is around us. £18bn in 10 years, compared to the 1.2 trillion created by banks that's put the uk's debt as a % of GDP up to 900% including household debts? GREAT... 

Yes investment into schools and hospitals etc is fantastic, but the majority of the money does not go there. 

If the treasury created £1.2trillion in 10 years to use democratically to benefit the people, are you seriously suggesting we'd be worse off than we are today?

I'm all for money creation providing it's created to benefit society, not for bankers to take bigger bonuses than the first round of public spending cuts after the biggest crash in history....

Regular home repossession after one missed payment simply isn't going to happen even if it was legal. Banks generally make more money from fully paid up interest than from repossessions.

Yet in america it does? The monetary system is globally collective in capitalist countries, why do you think a bank run in america caused the uk so much damage?

They do usually make more money from fully paid up interest I agree, however whilst they create fake money at the rate they are, encouraging people to debt themselves to their eyeballs, more people default now than ever before, but the fundamental point is the banks cannot lose...

[Countryfox]

Sorry, stumbled onto this thread by mistake .....  Bye !