Let me count the ways:
- National Governments:
- borrow according to “Public Borrowing Spending Requirements” (PSBR) and pay interest.
- Instead, they could issue interest-free Cash into the economy.
- While ‘creating money’ is the sovereignty of nation states, banks have expanded their ‘habit’ of creating Credit and turning it into ‘financial products’ such that their ‘money’ virtually represents all money in circulation (estimated to be 97%, whereas, in the UK, it used to be 53% at the end of WWII).
- Governments are supposed to either borrow or tax as their income stream, when, in reality, they should create interest-free Cash (or Green Credit) rather than allow banks to create interest-bearing Credit ad infinitum.
- For governments to borrow AND to tax is an affront and insult to taxpayers. They should simply create interest-free Cash to spend it into the economy.
- Taxpayers are made to believe a system of annual budgets, while long term trends show the realities of
- inflation of prices
- inflated credit supplies
- and the continuous growth of Governmental interest payments on national debts.
- Central Banks:
- pose as national banks, when, in reality, they are privately owned, albeit well disguised. See Bank of England Nominees.
- manipulate gold and currencies internationally – always for the benefit of the ‘financial economy’ and the detriment of the ‘real economy’.
- create Credit from thin air
- dare to ‘sell’ it for ‘interest’
- invent ‘financial products’, when they could provide an honest service.
- The Camouflage of What Bankers are doing through Teaching Economics:
- Credit created by banks (and other financial institutions) from thin air, is turned into Cash, as if there was no difference.
- Creating Cash is the monopoly and privilege of a Nation State.
- Creating Credit is the monopoly of banks, central banks and other financial institutions.
- Nobody creates the interest charged for Credit.
- Ignoring exponential growth of compounding interest on interest and instead, promote the unsustainable notion of ‘economic growth’.
- The problems associated with ‘money’ depend on whether we talk about it as
- Cash in our pockets
- Credit in our bank accounts
- the Budget of a government
- or as the currency of a Nation where Central Banks are the global players.
- Honest Money is a challenge to banking in the day-to-day dealings of handling money as debt aka as credit
- We the People are all victims, since Central Bankers have been ruling, since the Bank of England was established in 1694 – albeit with the intention of avoiding the oppression of Their Majesties’ Subjects – which is why we ask for the Enforcement of the Bank of England Act 1694.
- The myth of Public Debts and their necessity is perpetuated, without spelling out the beneficiaries, teaching the damages or generally being open and transparent.
- In the UK, the deadly embrace between The City of banksters and Westminster of civil servants and politicians ensures that HM Partnership reigns with immunity to prosecution.
- As a result, ‘money’ is ‘toxic’.
- Healthy ‘mutual credit‘ would enable the flow of goods and skills through society.
- Healthy money would be like healthy blood in a body and clean water in nature: enabling and enriching.
- Instead, the issuing of ‘credit’ without issuing the interest required, ‘toxic money’ is oppressive, restrictive and controlling.
If only banks were made responsible or accountable, they could not expand their control, while politicians are already in their pockets.
But, they are entrusted with ‘self-regulation’, just as the legal profession which is equally derailed.
The dishonesty of money is, however, being challenged by the class action of Americans who are suing The Fed.
The book Dishonest Money, published in the US, explains the same principles.
Posted in Bank of England, Bank of International Settlements, Central Banks
Tagged Bahamas, Bank of England, Business, Cash, Central Bank, Credit, England, European Central Bank, Federal Reserve System, Financial Services, FinancialServices, Government, Mervyn King, Money, Money supply, Nation State, public debt, Their Majesties, United States, World War II
This is an interesting story about Brazil, vouched to be correct by a commentator who lived in Brazil at the time.
The “Unit of Real Value” acts as an extra and REAL measure and thus provides a real and stable yardstick in a sea that wobbles with ‘credit money‘ and ‘interest money’ – unrelated to any real value.
The smart aspect is the fact that ‘monetary inflation’ is separated from ‘price inflation’, and the financial economy is separated from the real economy. And ‘economics’ becomes real rather than a ‘soft, sociological science’…
Who else might copy this model that worked???
Quantitative easing explained the American way on a 6-minute video.
First, I contributed to quantitave easing on Wikipedia.
Now, Ask the Deputy Governor offers the following 16 questions addressed to the Bank of England with their answers.
Aware of the Bank of England Act 1694, I comment not as an economist, but from the perspective of a mathematician, systems analyst and software diagnostician, formerly at CERN, looking at “money” and its purpose:
- 1. Given inflation has only just fallen below the Government’s 2% target, why is the Bank of England adopting such a large unconventional policy measure?
- The effects of monetary policy on prices and real activity only come through after long and somewhat variable lags.
Comment: 2% inflation of consumer prices is only possible when measuring inflation extremely short-term. The Office of National Statistics keeps writing about annual inflation, while also gathering monthly data.
Inflation as “price inflation” is only one aspect. The real inflation is the supply of money as currency for the nation as a whole, which should be called “monetary inflation”.
Posted in Bank of International Settlements, Monetary inflation, Money supply, Quantitative easing
Tagged Alan Greenspan, Bank of England, Bank rate, Central Bank, Monetary policy, Monetary Policy Committee, Money supply, Quantitative easing
This article is excellent as it makes the distinction between price inflation and monetary inflation.
And it reveals the true colours and intentions of the Fed.
I found it on this premier political community blog saying that apparently the Bank of England is taking its cue from the Fed.
What else is new?…