ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, October 04, 2016

Interview with an economic hit man

John Perkins is interviewed by Sarah van Gelder:
Sarah van Gelder: What’s changed in our world since you wrote the first Confessions of an Economic Hit Man?

John Perkins: Things have just gotten so much worse in the last 12 years since the first Confessions was written. Economic hit men and jackals have expanded tremendously, including the United States and Europe.

Back in my day we were pretty much limited to what we called the third world, or economically developing countries, but now it’s everywhere.

And in fact, the cancer of the corporate empire has metastasized into what I would call a failed global death economy. This is an economy that’s based on destroying the very resources upon which it depends, and upon the military. It’s become totally global, and it’s a failure.

van Gelder: So how has this switched from us being the beneficiaries of this hit-man economy, perhaps in the past, to us now being more of the victims of it?

Perkins: It’s been interesting because, in the past, the economic hit man economy was being propagated in order to make America wealthier and presumably to make people here better off, but as this whole process has expanded in the U.S. and Europe, what we’ve seen is a tremendous growth in the very wealthy at the expense of everybody else.

On a global basis we now know that 62 individuals have as many assets as half the world’s population.

We of course in the U.S. have seen how our government is frozen, it’s just not working. It’s controlled by the big corporations and they’ve really taken over. They’ve understood that the new market, the new resource, is the U.S. and Europe, and the incredibly awful things that have happened to Greece and Ireland and Iceland, are now happening here in the U.S.

We’re seeing this situation where we can have what statistically shows economic growth, and at the same time increased foreclosures on homes and unemployment.

van Gelder: Is this the same kind of dynamic about debt that leads to emergency managers who then turn over the reins of the economy to private enterprises? The same thing that you are seeing in third-world countries?

Perkins: Yes, when I was an economic hit man, one of the things that we did, we raised these huge loans for these countries, but the money never actually went to the countries, it went to our own corporations to build infrastructure in those countries. And when the countries could not pay off their debt, we insisted that they privatize their water systems, their sewage systems, their electric systems.

Now we’re seeing that same thing happen in the United States. Flint, Michigan, is a very good example of that. This is not a U.S. empire, it’s a corporate empire protected and supported by the U.S. military and the CIA. But it is not an American empire, it’s not helping Americans. It’s exploiting us in the same way that we used to exploit all these other countries around the world.
It's all about the debt. And debt that can't be repaid has to be written off, somehow.

Labels: ,

93 Comments:

Anonymous Rien October 04, 2016 3:21 AM  

"On a global basis we now know that 62 individuals have as many assets as half the world’s population."

Only as long as we allow them to. That is precisely what the current situation is about.

Anonymous Alice De Goon October 04, 2016 3:35 AM  

So... anyone know of a guillotine company that I can invest in? I get the feeling that particular stock is going to go through the roof.

Or maybe I can start a portable Guillotine franchise - install one on a flatbed truck and park it right next to Wall Street, charging $10.00 per banker decapitation. I'll call it "Madame Guillotine's Happy Headchopping Service." And I'll shrink down the heads and sell them to Stoners as hackeysack balls...

Anonymous Zed, Lord of the Brutals October 04, 2016 3:47 AM  

Valar morghulis.

Blogger Fenris Wulf October 04, 2016 4:07 AM  

I think this Perkins guy may be another Smedley Butler. I.e., someone who went from being an unscrupulous and dishonest operative to being an equally unscrupulous and dishonest muckraker. People don't really change, they just switch to the other side of the street. It's a shame, because the World Bank is certainly a destructive institution in need of a takedown.

Our side occasionally falls victim to charlatans. Diana West and "Souad" come to mind.

Blogger Mark Butterworth October 04, 2016 4:12 AM  

If you read the whole interview you find that the guy is essentially a hippie for world peace and all that, but there's no question corporations and crony capitalism are mining the US middle class for all their accumulated wealth.

Hell, planned inflation, printing money, massive debt, high unemployment and lower wages, and increased (rigged) medical costs are all doing the trick not to mention the trillions in unfunded liabilities.

Well, it's the way of the world, init?

At least a lot of us are armed, and that may hold us in good stead when the time comes.

Blogger Mark Butterworth October 04, 2016 4:19 AM  

I also think Nixon did the Chileans a favor in ridding them of Allende. They have prospered very well for a Latin country, although it looks like they're starting to want Heaven on Earth again and lots of free stuff.

If somebody had rid Argentina of Peron, and Cuba of Castro, they might have maintained the high standard of living they enjoyed until Heaven on Earth came to help them ascend to lots of free stuff. They're so much happier now.

What Perkins said about Honduras may be true, I don't know anything about. But his description of financially raping third world countries sounds true enough.

Anonymous SciVo October 04, 2016 4:24 AM  

Anything that can't go on forever, won't.

Blogger SciVo October 04, 2016 4:36 AM  

Rien wrote:"On a global basis we now know that 62 individuals have as many assets as half the world’s population."

Only as long as we allow them to. That is precisely what the current situation is about.


Indeed. They require gov't to enforce their ownership, so it is a tragedy for them that e.g. FedGov is losing the consent of the governed.

Anonymous Jack Amok October 04, 2016 4:37 AM  

So... anyone know of a guillotine company that I can invest in?

Nah, invest in .22LR and rope. Guillotines are far too sophisticated for the mess they're going to leave us in. .22LR might not be the best one-shot round, but... well, if they're hands are tied behind their back and they're shot in the head with one and left...

But if you insist, I do have some rusty pieces of steel that could be adapted.

Anonymous Pope Cleophus I October 04, 2016 5:24 AM  

I read his updated book over the summer. It is a good read although it gets a bit preachy and anti right near the end. He vilifies the Koch brothers, but has a gaping blind spot when it comes to George Soros, etal.

Blogger rumpole5 October 04, 2016 6:29 AM  

The "raping the third world" line is nonsense. The Third World is populated by an oversupply of people who are, by nature and/or nurture, lazy, dishonest, undisciplined, impulsive, violent, short sighted, dimwitted, clannish people. It is no surprise that such places attract like minded people and corporations from the West, but the West is not the underlying cause of Third World misery.

Blogger ChickenChicken Sweep October 04, 2016 6:36 AM  

I read it too, and frankly, I was unimpressed. It was quite preachy (a vision of Jesus as an auto mechanic? Really?), and much of what he covered I had read before in better books (Killing Hope and In the Footsteps of Mr. Kurtz, for example). His story also struck me as the kind of lecturing some Hollywood pukes spew when they happen to come in contact with actual non-Western poverty, and think it's some great revelation that in most of the world, most people can barely aspire to achieve subsistence.

And he believes Flint is an example of economic hit men operating for corporate interests? Come on. Sure, such things do occur in the US, but there's also plenty of blame to be laid upon cultural marxism, the diversity disaster, and those good old fuck-buddies, incompetence and corruption.

Blogger world entertainment October 04, 2016 6:41 AM  

1. Health Tips And Body Fitness

2. Click Here For Best And Healthy Body

3. Click Here For Most Amazing Things

4. Click Here For Entertainment And Fun

5. Click Here For Beauty Tips

6. Click Here For Care Tips

7. Click Here For Acctress Biography

8. Click Here For Tips and Tricks

9. Click Here For Better Reviews Things

10. Click Here For Trending Today

thank you...!

Anonymous Millenium October 04, 2016 6:42 AM  

I am reading Confessions of An Economic Hitman right now. Its very interesting but like Pope Cleophus I get the idea he has a massive blindspot for leftists. It probably comes from his time in the peace corps and his hero worship for the Panamanian Omar Torrijos. It also seems like he is trying to paint himself as more of a victim of circumstance and his hard swing towards hippie-ism is an attempt to assauge his guilt for his time wrecking poor countries for his 30 pieces.

@Fenris: That is the vibe his writing gives off. I can't help wondering whether the entire point of his 'confessions' is to hide who is really responsible or to set himself up as the spokesperson of the opposition i.e. controlled opposition.

That aside the book is fantastic in that it outlines what would otherwise be a 'conspiracy theory' from someone who was part of it. Most of what he revealed 'tin foilers' had already worked out but he describes it so simply.

Anonymous Millenium October 04, 2016 6:47 AM  

I am reading Confessions of An Economic Hitman right now. Its very interesting but like Pope Cleophus I get the idea he has a massive blindspot for leftists. It probably comes from his time in the peace corps and his hero worship for the Panamanian Omar Torrijos. It also seems like he is trying to paint himself as more of a victim of circumstance and his hard swing towards hippie-ism is an attempt to assauge his guilt for his time wrecking poor countries for his 30 pieces.

@Fenris: That is the vibe his writing gives off. I can't help wondering whether the entire point of his 'confessions' is to hide who is really responsible or to set himself up as the spokesperson of the opposition i.e. controlled opposition.

That aside the book is fantastic in that it outlines what would otherwise be a 'conspiracy theory' from someone who was part of it. Most of what he revealed 'tin foilers' had already worked out but he describes it so simply

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) October 04, 2016 7:06 AM  

It's all about the debt. And debt that can't be repaid has to be written off, somehow.

I'm reminded of the Clive Owen movie "The International" when a banker talking to an African warlord says "We don't want to control the war. We want to control the debt the war creates."

And yes, confessions of an economic hit man is a fantastic book.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) October 04, 2016 7:07 AM  

And he believes Flint is an example of economic hit men operating for corporate interests?

The entire flint crisis started from a project to build a new water treatment plant.

Anonymous Athor Pel October 04, 2016 7:09 AM  

"11. Blogger rumpole5 October 04, 2016 6:29 AM
The "raping the third world" line is nonsense. The Third World is populated by an oversupply of people who are, by nature and/or nurture, lazy, dishonest, undisciplined, impulsive, violent, short sighted, dimwitted, clannish people. It is no surprise that such places attract like minded people and corporations from the West, but the West is not the underlying cause of Third World misery.
"


While you were spreading the culpability around you also hit upon a key reason these economic tactics are beginning to be more widely used in the west now.

You can't con an honest man.

Blogger John S October 04, 2016 7:30 AM  

While you were spreading the culpability around you also hit upon a key reason these economic tactics are beginning to be more widely used in the west now.

Because they've successfully imported enough of the 3rd world that the same tactics are now viable here?

Anonymous Rally October 04, 2016 7:48 AM  

I'm surprised the powers have allowed John Perkins to live this long.

Blogger Aeoli Pera October 04, 2016 7:53 AM  

On a global basis we now know that 62 individuals have as many assets as half the world’s population.

I'm sure that's a fair, free-market valuation of their incredible talents. I've never met a rich person who didn't think so.

Blogger Jeff Wood October 04, 2016 7:56 AM  

@2 and @9

Alice and Jack, the French used to do a line in portable guillotines. I think it was at an exhibition in Pisa some years ago that I saw a photograph, from around 1910, of a chap being attended to on the spot in Paris where he committed a murder.

It seemed to me the blade drop might have been a little short. That said, the drawings for the kit should still be able to be had.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan October 04, 2016 8:00 AM  

Humans will seem to always want to bring demand forward so there will always be a demand for skunks like this Perkins

Anonymous Athor Pel October 04, 2016 8:16 AM  

This was the last line in the interview.

"And this is new. It used to be all we had to worry about was our local community, maybe our country. But we didn't have to worry about the world. But what we know now is that we can't have peace anywhere in the world, we can't have peace in the U.S., unless everybody has peace."

Pure globalist.

But by pulling back the curtain on this stuff I see him being part of building motivation and capability for taking down the oligarchs. In other words the elite are being set up for a fall by their own allies.

Hey tranzis, your future is being built brick by brick and it's almost done. Too bad it's gonna fall on your head. That noise you hear is your master laughing his ass off because you fell for his lies all the way to the end.


_____


" John S October 04, 2016 7:30 AM
...
Because they've successfully imported enough of the 3rd world that the same tactics are now viable here?
"


There are more greedy people in positions of power as a percentage of the total, migrant or citizen. Now that you mention migrants it also occurs to me that collective IQ is going down as well. Which hasn't been helped at all by our indoctrination centers, I mean our government schools.

So more selfish and more stupid and less educated. Kind of a perfect storm for societal self destruction.

Blogger bosscauser October 04, 2016 8:22 AM  

Couldn't agree more. Our kids in uniform policing for corporations who export our jobs and flood our markets with cheap junk!

Let's go #Trump and hurry!

Blogger bosscauser October 04, 2016 8:22 AM  

Couldn't agree more. Our kids in uniform policing for corporations who export our jobs and flood our markets with cheap junk!

Let's go #Trump and hurry!

Anonymous MendoScot October 04, 2016 8:47 AM  

I'm also getting more than a whiff of snake oil off of him. His summaries of Allende and Zelaya are at best deceptively simplistic, and more like propaganda for his new masters.

I never trusted Gayle Rivers, either.

Blogger Mountain Man October 04, 2016 8:48 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan October 04, 2016 8:50 AM  

Well ask him to name some good oligarchs, dare I say cross examination works if you ask the right questions.

Blogger Mountain Man October 04, 2016 8:51 AM  

"He vilifies the Koch brothers, but has a gaping blind spot when it comes to George Soros, teal."

Exactly.. I read some of his stuff nearly a decade ago and something always never set right with me about him. An earlier commenter alluded to him being a Smedley Butler type. Thats a good insight.
My own guess is he continues to be an agent of the Deep State. However, instead of acting as a grim reaper for the Banksters, he has now reinvented himself to act as a " prophet crying in the wilderness" who heralds a new way of doing things - One World Socialist Government.
The Banksters, using the US Military and the World Bank as their proxies have pretty much raped the entire planet. In doing so they have also destroyed every 2nd and 3rd world's national sovereignty, borders and economies The mission has been accomplished ( thanks John Perkins) . Their last goal is to destroy the base of operation from whence they been waging this roughly 50 year war - the West. They're accomplishing this now by mass immigration and a war on Whites. Once this is done they will be looking to consolidate their gains under one giant umbrella. They need to condition the masses to accept this. That is where John Perkins continues to do his part. His only change is that he ditched the suit and loafers for tie dyes and Birkenstocks. In my opinion he is a flaming fraud. Great at indicting the problems that occurred but always offering solutions that ultimately will accomplish the long term goals of the Globalists.
The corruption, crime and deception taking place these days is breathtaking in its audacity.

Anonymous Trumpo October 04, 2016 8:53 AM  

>>It's all about the debt. And debt that can't be repaid has to be written off, somehow.

Yup, but if you're a GENIUS you can make it work out for you for the next 20 years, believe me!

Blogger rumpole5 October 04, 2016 8:54 AM  

"Can't con an honest" - Not entirely true, but you have identified the problem with the Third World.

Anonymous Glenn Beck listener October 04, 2016 8:55 AM  

"On a global basis we now know that 62 individuals have as many assets as half the world’s population."

This is anti-semitism.

Anti-Semitism is not free speech but is hate speech.

You need to delete this.

Blogger Mountain Man October 04, 2016 8:55 AM  

"propaganda for his new masters."

The new masters are the old masters. The play remains the same, it just changed acts.

Musically this sums it up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYMD_W_r3Fg

Blogger Some Guy October 04, 2016 9:05 AM  

"The entire flint crisis started from a project to build a new water treatment plant."

Started by whom. If you can't find a crisis to exploit, you make one.

Anonymous Deplorable Psychedelic Cat Hair October 04, 2016 9:25 AM  

I read his book in '05 or '06. It was uninspiring to say the least. That article was pretty weak. He conveniently omits Allende was on the KGB's payroll. He further glaringly omits Zelaya was trying to change the Honduran constitution illegally so he could become president for life. The Honduran Supreme Court issued an arrest warrant for him which was carried out by the military. Furthermore, some of the violence that exists in Honduras today is courtesy of him. He used class warfare like all good Communists do against the middle class. I have a buddy from Honduras whose parents told him don't think about coming back because the violence is so bad. Before Zelaya, that was not really an issue. Lobos, the current president, is a mess. Nobody will deny that.

Blogger Escoffier October 04, 2016 9:43 AM  

Fenris Wulf wrote:I think this Perkins guy may be another Smedley Butler. I.e., someone who went from being an unscrupulous and dishonest operative to being an equally unscrupulous and dishonest muckraker. People don't really change, they just switch to the other side of the street. It's a shame, because the World Bank is certainly a destructive institution in need of a takedown.

Our side occasionally falls victim to charlatans. Diana West and "Souad" come to mind.


What's the beef with Diana West?

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 9:44 AM  

I really hate this BS where the depiction turns to good against evil, and after that factual analysis need not follow.

To narrow it only to Honduras, I followed the Zelaya story fairly closely. It was plain enough that he was attempting to make himself into president for life, or you know, some such thing. The found a way to boot him out, and unfortunately the people they booted in were a crock also. The country is a mess and the rule of law has largely broken down.

Background to the situation is that Reagan was using Honduras as a base to go after the commie Contras to the north in Nicaragua. One outcome was that it produced a lot of armed people in Honduras, and that damaged Honduras. The country ended up being collateral damage in our war against the Contras.

Blogger Escoffier October 04, 2016 9:45 AM  

It always struck me that this insistent pressure for growth in the economy was a setup for bad things. The only thing in nature that grows endlessly that way is cancer.

Blogger CarpeOro October 04, 2016 9:52 AM  

Anyone else note his personal timeline? 1968 Peace Corps, saved by a shaman. He learned from the natives. Then, went on to plunder them. Yeah, the con has changed up, not the man.

And Flint? That is the end result of unions demanding the moon and the sun for today, damn their children (apres moi, le deluge), and taking control of the city. The corporations AND the union bosses did give a damn that the promises were sustainable on their face. All we are seeing now is what happens in the ruins when the bills come due. Factories shut down, high unemployment, high crime, low legal gun ownership. Flint was doomed back in the 1970s. Nothing but the end game for failure to pay attention to reality.

Blogger CarpeOro October 04, 2016 9:57 AM  

Deplorable Psychedelic Cat Hair wrote:I read his book in '05 or '06. It was uninspiring to say the least. That article was pretty weak. He conveniently omits Allende was on the KGB's payroll. He further glaringly omits Zelaya was trying to change the Honduran constitution illegally so he could become president for life. The Honduran Supreme Court issued an arrest warrant for him which was carried out by the military. Furthermore, some of the violence that exists in Honduras today is courtesy of him. He used class warfare like all good Communists do against the middle class. I have a buddy from Honduras whose parents told him don't think about coming back because the violence is so bad. Before Zelaya, that was not really an issue. Lobos, the current president, is a mess. Nobody will deny that.

I'm betting Perkins was cheering when the USA told the Venezuelan military to stand down and let Chavez resume control. That went well.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 04, 2016 10:04 AM  

The trick is to train people to believe they will be worse off defaulting on the debts they were induced to accept than simply flipping the bird. Only those with something more to lose (including the opportunity to borrow more) will service their debts.

The current situation is beyond absurd.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) October 04, 2016 10:08 AM  

There's a lot of "well actually..." defenses of USA intervention in the comments today. Have y'all not learned anything?

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 10:42 AM  

The guy is producing a rant by taking every possible abuse of debt and imagining that they all occur in every situation. A little analysis over what really goes on:

On a domestic level our government has taken to guaranteeing loans a lot. By abusing it the government can spend money without admitting it is spending money. Somebody loans money, the government covertly or otherwise guarantees the loan. (A simple guarantee admitted to, or too big to fail BS, or whatever) Then when the loan never gets repaid it ends up being a gift from the taxpayer. Examples: Loan money to a "green" company, a covert political payoff. Race norm home loans: The blacks don't pay up, the banks threaten bankruptcy because they will go broke, and the gov is locked into bailing them out. Plus with banks forced into having a crap loan portfolio anyway, credit gets easy because they know a bailout is coming. And hey, white folks get in on the scam. And finally the political class gets cover by blaming the bankers who are merely (willing) agents of their policy. And every decade or so do it again. It amounts to welfare spending that does not show on the books as spending. That is, until the loans upchuck.

Internationally the usual thing is for a weak government to be in debt. It can be covert foreign aid, off the books spending, but more often it seems to be an effort at political control. Typically the government isn't that strong and if they fail to pay up they lose their credit rating. Nobody else will borrow them money. So, if they don't pay up the local economy goes into the sink and the revolution starts. Typically they keep up with the interest payments. The bankers win because they can get an above average interest rate on a risky loan that isn't risky because our government can coerce payment. And our government wins because the threat of terminating the loan gives us political leverage over them. They can't do things like seize US assets so easily. Not good vs evil as corrupt vs corrupt. And the losers are the nabobs out in the woods who can not figure this stuff out.

If you cut through the melodrama and 007 drama stuff, the above is how things usually play out.

Anonymous User October 04, 2016 10:43 AM  

Modern money is bookkeeping, not primates collecting shiny tokens. Running out of space on the ledger is not an issue with modern computing machinery.

The current $20 trillion US debt is a circumstantial indicator of a bad thing (stupid people making stupid decisions) rather than a bad thing in and of itself. If those $20 trillion in assets were held by a responsible hard working American middle class saving for retirement and investment in their children's future, how would it be unsustainable or bad?

Let's face it, the (((holders))) of the corresponding financial assets are the real problem. Why not be intellectually honest about that?

Blogger tweell October 04, 2016 10:53 AM  

“Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of gentlemen, barter is the money of peasants – but debt is the money of slaves.” Norm Franz, Money & Wealth in the New Millennium: A Prophetic Guide to the New World Economic Order.

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 10:54 AM  

@43

Borrowing abroad is worse then domestically, but it still comes down to the gov wanting to spend more while putting of the day when they have to show the bill to the taxpayer. And usually the "spending more" is not good.

Anonymous User October 04, 2016 11:06 AM  

@45

Borrowing "abroad" means only that foreign entities have reserve accounts at the Fed. I agree that large foreign accounts at the Fed are bad, but again only as an indicator of stupid people making stupid decisions. In this particular case the stupidity is weakening the US economy to the point where a large current account deficit results and that allows foreign entities to run massive dollar denominated surpluses year over year.

Like I said, I'm just asking for intellectual honesty. The real issue is the destruction of our people, culture, economy, and way of life. Don't mistake the smoke for the fire.

Anonymous BGKB October 04, 2016 11:06 AM  

in the past, the economic hit man economy was being propagated in order to make America wealthier

He misspelled (((America)))

I'll call it "Madame Guillotine's Happy Headchopping Service."

BigGaySteve's Services is already offering "cost plus" Guillotining as an extension of garroting service.

It also seems like he is trying to paint himself as more of a victim of circumstance and his hard swing towards hippie-ism

He only raped 3rd world nations for a living because he couldn't earn a ""living wage"" otherwise

I can't help wondering whether the entire point of his 'confessions' is to hide who is really responsible...controlled opposition

Like the whole 4th turning thing makes sense until they ignore Soros and blames white conservatives.

we can't have peace anywhere in the world, we can't have peace in the U.S., unless everybody has peace."...Pure globalist.

We had peace before we invited 3rd world refusegees into the US. Seems simple enough.

"Can't con an honest" - Not entirely true,

An honest man could still be subject to 1/2 of the scams Martin Luther documented.

Anonymous Glenn Beck listener October 04, 2016 11:18 AM  

"On a global basis we now know that 62 individuals have as many assets as half the world’s population."

Anti-Semitism. Delete this please.

"Let's face it, the (((holders))) of the corresponding financial assets are the real problem. Why not be intellectually honest about that?"

Moderator, please delete.

"He misspelled (((America)))"

Delete this.










Anti-Semitism: The belief or behavior hostile toward Jews just because they are Jewish. It may take the form of religious teachings that proclaim the inferiority of Jews, for instance, or political efforts to isolate, oppress, or otherwise injure them. It may also include prejudiced or stereotyped views about Jews. http://archive.adl.org/hate-patrol/antisemitism.html

Blogger Student in Blue October 04, 2016 11:25 AM  

And the cuck cried out, "delete this!", for lack of an actual argument.

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 11:31 AM  

@46

I am trying to figure out what it is you are thinking of with this "reserve accounts at the Fed." My understanding is that it is a "reserve account" when the Fed owns the debt instrument. Our very large foreign debt consists of debt instruments (bonds, etc.) that have been sold to foreign entities. Once they are sold they are no longer a reserve account at the Fed. Maybe payment goes through the Fed, I am not sure about that, but if it does it is only the Fed acting as the government's banker and the ownership would be transitory, a cash flow thing.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 04, 2016 11:34 AM  

The current $20 trillion US debt is a circumstantial indicator of a bad thing (stupid people making stupid decisions) rather than a bad thing in and of itself.

No. You are mistaken.

It is a vicious corruption for politicians to spend that which wasn't taxed. Credit to is created by entities that didn’t produce the value extended, which makes the subsequent entry into the market a product of counterfeiting. $20t is but the tip of the iceberg. Such deficit spending both pulls forward demand and warps the balance between capital investment & consumption.

For these reasons & more, this current love affair with spending like drunken sailors loose in a whore house waving a (seemingly) no limit Mastercard will end very, very badly.

Anonymous User October 04, 2016 11:50 AM  

@50 Foreign banks and US member banks are permitted to have accounts at the Federal reserve. The non-interest bearing accounts are called reserve accounts. Today they are used almost exclusively for clearing inter-bank payments and giving people a warm fuzzy feeling when they look at their account statement. In theory they are used for fractional reserve banking, but that's a bit of a joke since banks can create up to $15.2 million without any reserves at all (https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm).

I did simplify a bit though. Every reserve (think paper money and reserve accounts) is a liability of the Fed and an asset of its holder. Similarly, every bond, bill, and so forth is a liability of the United States and an asset of its holder. Since the Fed is a creature of Congress, it can, despite its fictitious independence, be viewed as just another (captured) piece of the federal government. Accepting that, the difference between reserves and bonds is analogous to the difference between a savings and demand account. They are all ultimately liabilities of the United States.

I'm eliding quite a bit in hopes of achieving clarity. I probably haven't though. I suggest ignoring pure economists and instead reading the writings of debt market participants who have an actual operational understanding of how this works. Unfortunately nobody I've ever read on the subject can resist launching into polemics and policy prescriptions, but if you stick to the operational descriptions it's quite enlightening. Warren Mosler does a pretty good job describing those.

@51 You're not getting my point. You desperately want to lash out at the real problem, but you're too conditioned to recognize it and instead rant about accounting details. It's not the accounting that matters, it's what's being accounted for. If spending like a drunken sailor would achieve our objectives, then I would be all for it. It's because it's being done to destroy us instead that it's a problem.

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 11:53 AM  

@51

Well, it is the government being stupid for people so they do not have to be stupid for themselves.[;-)

Anonymous Gen. Kong October 04, 2016 11:56 AM  

The first stage of raping and pillaging the assets of the world was not for the benefit of most of those living in the Banana Empire but for the ruling oligarchs in charge. The film-flam is a two-step dance of asset stripping whole chief benefit is invariably to the oligarchs. In step one (imperialism), the militaries of the oligarchs' host-countries are sent across the world to ensure the asset flow for the owners (Smedley Butler's work for the United Fruit Company being a good example), with some minor benefits for cooperating traitors in the host countries. This stage lasted for 150-200 years with the English.

Once the easy assets are stripped away from the colonies, the oligarchs turn their efforts to stripping away the assets of their hosts (as we see presently). Central banks - counterfeiting cartels controlled by the oligarchy - enable the concentration of wealth into the hands an oligarchy like the 62 described and indeed the operation of the whole two-stage racket. Even though this operation is termed by idiots and various shills as "the free market" it is not a free market but a rigged market - a racket as Butler so aptly termed it. One of the very few legitimate purposes of governments is to ensure an open market and remove criminals and racketeers from it. Once the gang has control these powers are employed to remove all possible competition.

Blogger Thucydides October 04, 2016 12:00 PM  

The fatal flaw in the book's argument is the debt was taken to create large fixed assets in foreign nations. KBR or Halliburton isn't going to come in and take the water treatment plant back to America if the local's don't pay up. In fact, during the "bad old days" nations often got away with defaulting by threatening to "nationalize" the assets in question.

Now the real trick was mentioned upthread, giving the local governments an incentive to stay in the game (i.e. cutting off access to further financing), but then again, the real reason seems to be more a case of the globalists allowing more people to enter the playing field. Third World juntas are just as easily seduced by the allure of being able to take part in a drunken orgy of debt financed spending and hight living as any US Congressman, if not more so.

Since the threat of cutting the cycle of debt was effectively removed by coopting Third World juntas into joining the party, we have now been on the receiving end of [i]3 decades[/i] of debauchery.

@38, @40 and @42 understand this pretty well, and you would be well served to go back and re read their posts.

Anonymous Jack Amok October 04, 2016 12:11 PM  

Because they've successfully imported enough of the 3rd world that the same tactics are now viable here?

Ding! Ding! Ding!

the French used to do a line in portable guillotines.

One of the bloodier Jacobins of the French Revolution, Victor Hugues, brought a portable Guillotine with him to Guadeloupe when the Directorate appointed him governor. Sailed into the harbor with it prominently displayed in the bow of the ship.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 04, 2016 12:17 PM  

User, forgive my rant; you wrote it yourself:

The obligations created by spending are an asset. You're right.

Is this not the same as saying that the more Congress (and everyone else) borrows and spends (regardless of the Providence of what is bought), WEALTH IS CREATED?

That's exactly what you wrote, and exactly how things have worked for 35 years.

Now. Please explain to simple folk like me how this "creating wealth by borrowing & squandering" is other than the biggest load of horse shit ever. Please explain how it didn't create the largest credit bubble boom in history and how such monetary madness won't produce an equally massive bust when it's finally over?

Anonymous Jack Amok October 04, 2016 12:18 PM  

And the cuck cried out, "delete this!", for lack of an actual argument.

Sarcasm, I think, though it's hard to tell these days. But "Glen Beck Listener" sounds more like a VFM sarcing that a Soros-troll.

Blogger Escoffier October 04, 2016 12:27 PM  

How timely...

"The catastrophic fiscal mismanagement of Chicago’s public schools is creating a windfall on Wall Street as the district borrows from big banks at ruinous rates. . . .

The seeds of the crisis in Chicago were planted long ago when powerful teachers’ unions negotiated implausible lifetime pension guarantees, and politicians, eager to win their favor, acceded. It turns out that Wall Street financiers are an unexpected beneficiary of this corrupt bargain.

Debt service is already eating up ten percent of the Chicago School District’s budget, and city’s deteriorating finances may cause creditors to jack up rates even further. If it doesn’t find a way to plug the holes in its fiscal ship, Chicago could well face the same fate as Puerto Rico and Detroit the next time a recession causes its tax base to contract."

http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/10/03/students-lose-wall-street-wins-in-blue-model-merry-go-round/

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 12:30 PM  

For the deaf ears:

"No State, Without Its Consent"
Restoring the Republic.


The 17th amendment supposedly amends Article 1 Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, the transfer of the states' power to exercise its suffrage in the U.S.Senate and giving it to the people. It does not, however, amend Article 5, which prohibits taking the state's right to equal suffrage, exercised though their selected representatives in the senate via amendment and without the state's expressed consent. As per Article 5, each individual state, all 50 of them, must consent to the 17th, and if only one state withdraws its consent, the 17th is automatically voided.

Article 5: " ~ that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."
It doesn't say, unless two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate three fourths of the other states decide otherwise.
No State, Without Its Consent.

The 17th was unconstitutional from its inception, Alabama; Florida; Georgia (refused to vote on it); Kentucky; Maryland; Mississippi; Rhode Island; South Carolina; Virginia; Utah (explicitly rejected amendment);. Did not consent.

The 17th is basically, a nonbinding agreement that is held in place by the rule of custom and ignorance.

Being unlawful to begin with, the 17th does not need to go through the repeal process, all the states' have to do is withdraw their consent to it, as per Article 5, and seat their selection of Senators.

IF the states' legislators were to do this, it would effectively end the 100+ year rule of progressive (socialist) democracy and restore the Republic. It would also decimate the DNC/RNC national party apparatus and cut the corporate bribery funneled through campaign funding by half, leaving the remaining half ineffectual. It would force people who divide themselves along party lines to seek common ground and common goals to counter state's ambitions in congress. And of course, it would toss the biggest monkey wrench into the gears of the Neoliberal/Neocon's nation destroying, empire building machinations.

Over time, the people would withdraw their attention from the newly established Federal and focus upon the politics of local and state import, and states will regain their individual, independent personalities, establishing laws that work towards their own population's ends independent of other states and of Federal interference. We would, once again, become a nation of states, distinct.

States' reputation of the unconstitutional 17th represents the fulcrum, the point at which the ever expanding centralized fascist police state can be overturned. All that needs to be done is to convince the states' legislators (the lever) that it is in their best interests to do it. They stick that one constitution based step into D.C., and we'll rush them with more constitution based reforms.

If nothing else, we'll find out which side of the totalitarian fence they stand on.

The only thing I would suggest to the states' legislators when they write the enabling law, is that they stipulate that the selectee must be native born to their state and have served for a minimum of six years in elected public service within the state.

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

Start pressing states' legislators into nullifying the unconstitutional, nonbinding 17th non-amendment. It would take only a small selected group of dedicated abolitionists in each state pressing the state's legislators and governors into taking this action, restoring the 'Republican Political Environment'. And another great thing about this course of affirmative action is that, you don't have to be indoctrinated into following any particular political ideology first, before taking the action, all you have to be is a believer in liberty.

the Frog

Blogger RobertT October 04, 2016 12:34 PM  

"It's all about the debt. And debt that can't be repaid has to be written off, somehow.

In the U.S. debt relief is taxable unless you're upside down. Better to isolate it .... yadda, yadda, yadda.

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 12:35 PM  

@52 We may be talking past each other, but I think you have at least one detail wrong.

There is a terminology problem with what is called a reserve. Banks are required to hold a certain amount of some asset as a reserve for the bank itself. If they also hold a correspondent bank balance for the clearing of inter-bank payments, perhaps that account would be called a reserve, but it would be a reserve for the correspondent bank for inter-bank clearing, not a reserve for the bank holding the asset and not a reserve used to satisfy the correspondent bank's internal reserve requirements.

With the fed there is the additional issue that they deal with both domestic and foreign banks, and so I would imagine there are actually three reserve categories. A reserve the fed holds for itself (held to support daily cash flow), correspondent bank balances for domestic banks possibly called reserves, and then the foreign stuff, which would be a reserve for the foreign entity held by the fed.

No?

As for reading the writings of debt market participants, what would you recommend?

Even though it is tied at the hip to the federal gov, my preference is to regard the Federal Reserve as a Bank because it operates as such.

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 12:47 PM  

@60

MY take is that the real problem is not institutional but cultural. The will to move on this stuff is just not there.

Anonymous User October 04, 2016 12:56 PM  

Cullen Roche's Understanding the Modern Monetary System is a decent place to start. He's a market practitioner who has put his money where his mouth is. He has plenty of additional writing online if you are interested.

Anonymous User October 04, 2016 1:07 PM  

Understanding the Modern Monetary System by Cullen Roche.

Anonymous Joe Blowe October 04, 2016 1:36 PM  

Escoffier wrote:The seeds of the crisis in Chicago were planted long ago when

...ineducable Aficans-in-America migrated to Chicago en mass from the Deep South circa 1910. Evidences of 1st World Civilization, like viable public education, were doomed.

Blogger Student in Blue October 04, 2016 1:53 PM  

@Jack Amok
Sarcasm, I think, though it's hard to tell these days. But "Glen Beck Listener" sounds more like a VFM sarcing that a Soros-troll.

My rule of thumb is, if it's not amusing then they really believe that. And that guy's spiel was repeated enough times that it was tedious.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 04, 2016 2:24 PM  

User wrote:The current $20 trillion US debt is a circumstantial indicator of a bad thing (stupid people making stupid decisions) rather than a bad thing in and of itself. If those $20 trillion in assets were held by a responsible hard working American middle class saving for retirement and investment in their children's future, how would it be unsustainable or bad?


Simply false. As they say, sufficient quantity has a quality all it's own.

What is important is not the sheer amount of debt. That's merely a number. It's the percentage of stored value that the debt represents.

If economic systems were linear and stable, perhaps your statement about the quality of debtors would have merit. Unfortunately we live in an Austrian world of boom and bust cycles. When the bust comes, if the debt can be cleared without ruining the debtor, that's great. If it can be cleared without ruining the debt holder, that's okay. If it can be cleared without ruining the debt holder's creditors, that's acceptable. If it cannot be cleared without ruining the financial system, you have a serious problem.

If the debt cannot ever be cleared because the creditor class will not allow it to happen, you have a systemic collapse waiting to destroy your nation.

This is the situation we find ourselves in now.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 04, 2016 2:28 PM  

@Duane Dibley.
In a world where the rule of law still had meaning, that argument might have worked.

Unfortunately we live in the 21st century, where they will simply redefine the word "Consent" or the word "Without" or the word "State" until they achieve the desired outcome.

And then ruin you financially and if possible send you to jail to be forcibly sodomized.

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 2:32 PM  

@64. User
"Understanding the Modern Monetary System by Cullen Roche."

Well that was a bust. First off, ours is a Legal Tender Monetary System, this means our money is defined by law. And nowhere in law will you find the debt based private credit generated by the Fed or the banking system designated, or even acknowledged, as being a 'money' or a 'currency' or even a 'medium of exchange'. There is no law anywhere that grants to the Fed or the banking system the authority to create U.S. legal tender money, or 'money' of any type, and they don't.
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/currency/pages/legal-tender.aspx

Here's a quote from the Fed that, up until Jan. 2014, was contained in every new release H.6 report published on the web:

"Credit dollars are a debt generated currency that is denominated by a unit of account. Unlike money, credit itself cannot act as a unit of account. However, many forms of credit can readily act as a medium of exchange. As such, various forms of credit are frequently referred to as money and are included in estimates of the money supply."

Why does the Fed count 'credit', which is primarily BANK DEBT, as if it were 'money' and include it, even though they admit it isn't, as being part of the 'money supply'? Because "various forms of credit are frequently referred to as money." Now isn't that one hell of a reason to count BANK DEBT as being 'your money'. Also noteworthy is the Fed's use of the term "credit dollars", which is a fiction, the credit they generate is neither dollars or a currency, it is a bookkeeping entry denoting a bank's debt credited to an account holder denominated in dollars".

Money as defined by law. Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, defines legal tender as "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues.

The legal tender is owned by the U.S.G. it is our 'public money' (your money) and it is not debt based, or a government debt, it is the money by which all debts, public and private, can be paid, as annotated on each and every note issued. The legal tender is what the government owes in final payment for all of its debts, and the legal tender money is what the banks owe in final payment to every account holder either upon demand or over time.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 04, 2016 2:50 PM  

@Dwain Dibley,
Again you mistake the black-letter law for what happens in courts, in government or in real life.

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 3:02 PM  

@70. Snidely Whiplash

Are you going to contribute or just troll my posts?

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 3:15 PM  

@69 Dwain Dibley
I can not quote statute, but what I believe to be true is that there are two laws on the books. One is that people can be forced to take US currency in payment, and the other is that no private party is allowed to create money. Perhaps the government gets permission by default, it is not prohibited.

One of the weird things about non bullion (paper and coin) currency in the Western World is that it got its start with the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They owed troops and did not have the money to pay them. So, they borrowed money from them by giving them an I-owe-you debt instrument. To ease acceptance of it they printed it up fancy, made it payable to bearer, and issued the I-owe-you(s) in small denominations. Because the colony was thought to be good for it, merchants would accept the paper in payment and it became the first paper money.

The point is that it was an interest free loan to the colony. Currently this is much harder to trace through because of the complexity of a modern financial system, but modern currency and coinage are in fact debt instruments, an interest free loan to the government. Until quite recently (FDR I think) paper money could be redeemed for bullion coinage, reliving the government of its debt.

As for legal tender, I believe the author of your reference is incorrect. You can not force payment by check or credit card, but you can force payment in currency. The reason a business can not take hundred dollar bills is that nobody wants to spend thousands in a legal lawsuit to force the matter and law does to some extent bend in the direction of reasonableness.

Blogger Demonic Professor El October 04, 2016 3:32 PM  

"Flint, Michigan, is a very good example of that. This is not a U.S. empire, it’s a corporate empire protected and supported by the U.S. military and the CIA."

Some Guy wrote:"The entire flint crisis started from a project to build a new water treatment plant."

Started by whom. If you can't find a crisis to exploit, you make one.


Yeah, conveniently left out of this is that it was government agents (Democrats) who approved the poisonous water, falsified records, and gave the okay to the Michigan state government and the Flint financial manager.

Those financial managers basically make sure the public sectors aren't just skimming money from the treasury, which as Democrats they were doing for decades.

That particular situation was created by the Democrats to serve Michigan on a plate to Clinton. Michigan's Republican state, and the Trump numbers there were very high. At 16 electoral votes, the Dems don't want to lose it.

Perkins is right overall that governments play with people's lives and livelihoods, but his conclusion (more government needed) is a little off. Yes, the crony corporations are awful, but they wouldn't exist without globalist government say-so/permission.

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 3:42 PM  

@73 Yes, the crony corporations are awful, but they wouldn't exist without globalist government say-so/permission.

Yeah, exactly. The government is the more powerful agent, thus it is the government that has to be fixed.

Blogger Demonic Professor El October 04, 2016 3:43 PM  

I read his book in '05 or '06. It was uninspiring to say the least. That article was pretty weak. He conveniently omits Allende was on the KGB's payroll.

Me too. While his overall warning about state/mercantile interventions is essentially correct, he is a Lefty in sentiment and still holds that large corporations rule the government when it's really a lot more symbiotic in relationship. Plus the whole "privatization" argument relies on saying that corporations like Exxon or BP are private corporations when they're really syndicates.

It was a good study in what tactics they use though and to see how nations get dismantled to allow regulatory capturing and monopolism in places.

Blogger Demonic Professor El October 04, 2016 3:45 PM  

Johnny wrote:Yeah, exactly. The government is the more powerful agent, thus it is the government that has to be fixed.

Aye. To paraphrase "House of Cards," look who has all the guns. When we might think governments are sneakier than that, Merkel did bring in a million mercenaries to make sure that Germany didn't turn nationalist. They are brutes and will use force.

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 3:46 PM  

@72. Johnny
There is no law that 'forces' anyone to accept the legal tender money. Hell, even the government accepts bank generated debt based private credit as payment for taxes, although there is an implicit assumption that the debt based private credit accepted, represents legal tender held. The government was granted the right to coin the money and issue bills of credit (paper money) by the constitution.

The current legal tender money is not hard to trace at all, the Coinage Act of 1965, Section 31 U.S.C. 5103 tells you exactly what the money is and it can be traced back to the Banking Act of 1933 where Federal Reserve notes were designated the primary legal tender money of the U.S., severing its ties to gold.

The author is me, relaying the facts in law. Again, there is no law that forces anyone to accept the legal tender money in payment. People don't want the money, a representation of the last vestiges of a free people, they can always accept whatever they want.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 04, 2016 4:47 PM  

Dwain Dibley wrote:Are you going to contribute or just troll my posts?

You're sperging something awful and pretending that your rigorous analysis of the various statues gives you an insight into how to work. block, or even understand the system. It doesn't

The law has become what the powerful will it to be. Nothing less and absolutely nothing more.

When they decide to grossly and explicitly violate the law, as they have done consistently since at least 2008, the courts will back them up. IF they decide to destroy you, you will be destroyed despite what the law says.

In modern America, there is no law, only power.

Blogger Johnny October 04, 2016 5:13 PM  

@77

It goes like this. If you hold my house mortgage and I offer to pay you in legal tender, coin of the realm, and you refuse to accept it and you try to foreclose based on my non payment, you will lose in court if it goes to court. Saying that somebody will take this or that in payment is not the same as saying that they are forced to take it. Hell, if the recipient of a payment is willing to take "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today," then that constitutes payment.

One test of it was a guy who was pissed at a bank and paid a large bill in pennies, a few hundred pounds worth. The bank initially refused to accept it, and perhaps the courts could have ruled against the guy based on some criteria of reasonableness, but they did not. The bank had to take the pennies. Hey legal tender.

The whole issue of paper money was contentious when the Constitution was written and the opinion varied as to whether or not the federal government could issue anything but bullion, and maybe not bullion. Alexander Hamilton talked Washington into the idea that the government could issue (paper script) money based on the "implied powers" doctrine. Based on that doctrine the government started a bank (First National Bank of North America I think) that issued script. Legally and socially contentious, its charter was not renewed. That created hassles and eventually they started a second national bank that died because then President Andrew Jackson opposed it. From then to Lincoln's issuing of "Greenbacks" there was no federal money other than bullion coinage. The Greenbacks stayed in circulation for a couple of decades, and eventually along came the Federal Reserve. And I assume you are correct, 1933 act officially dropped the ability to force banks to exchange notes for bullion coinage.

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 5:13 PM  

78. Snidely Whiplash
You grant them way too much power.

I noticed that your first post in this thread was an baseless attack against my states' repudiation of the 17th proposal. And again, when I explained the legal tender, you jump in with baseless assertions that were little more than a coward's mewlings against fighting the establishment. Why is that?

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 5:46 PM  

@79. Johnny
The first part of your first paragraph is just a variation of what I stated, there is no law that forces anyone to accept the legal tender money in payment.

As for "Hell, if the recipient of a payment is willing to take "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today," then that constitutes payment."

No that does not "constitutes payment", that constitutes a debt obligation to be paid on a Tuesday.

Banks are required by law to accept the legal tender money, regardless of form. That's not the same as forcing someone to accept the legal tender.

Your ruminations on past experiences the U.S.G. had with paper money are not germane to the current monetary circumstance.

Perhaps it would help me better understand the relevance of your monetary ruminations if you were to explain to me how they tie into the fact that Fed and bankster generated credit, which people are currently using as if it were money, is not money by any meaning of the word, and it's, most assuredly, not U.S. legal tender money.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 04, 2016 5:49 PM  

Dwain Dibley wrote:I noticed that your first post in this thread was an baseless attack against my states' repudiation of the 17th proposal.
I'll lay it out. Your proposal is stupid. No court in the country would uphold it. It is the sort of proposal that only a sperge would pursue. You are acting like the tax protesters, like Vox' father, who wound up in prison for tax evasion. Regardless of whether his analysis was right or wrong, it was a stupid move.

The attack is not "baseless". It an attempt to wake you up to the fact that your analysis, right or wrong, doesn't matter.

You're an idiot if you think otherwise.

Anonymous Gen. Kong October 04, 2016 5:49 PM  

You're just ghost-dancing, Dwain. There is no rule of law in the Banana Empire, only the law of rule. Hillary was just given a free pass by the FBI for things that would put a zek in prison for life. You can sperg and engage in all the deck-chair feng-shui you like. It changes nothing. By all means urge your state legislature to repeal their ratification of the 17th amendment. Hell, there's a very serious case that the 16th was never actually ratified. Take that one to court and see where it gets you … (you would not be the first by any means and those that tried before have ended up just as Snidely described) … but maybe it's all in the wrist action.

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 6:05 PM  

82. Snidely Whiplash
Ah, the coward mewls again. The courts are irrelevant, it not up to them to decide, it's up to the states' governments and our ability to convince them to act.

Sure it matters. Knowing how the monetary system is designed to function will better enable you to understand and counteract what they are doing. It's knowledge that's going to make a big difference when they attempt to foist a one world currency owned and controlled by the central banks upon the world.

Anything else mewler?

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 6:13 PM  

@83. Gen. Kong
"You're just ghost-dancing, Dwain. There is no rule of law in the Banana Empire, only the law of rule.

Well, with an attitude like that, why do you even bother reading this stuff and commenting? One would assume that people would be interested in a way to channel their energies and momentum beyond electing a saviour and going back to trolling sjws.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 04, 2016 6:41 PM  

Dwain Dibley wrote:Sure it matters. Knowing how the monetary system is designed to function will better enable you to understand and counteract what they are doing. It's knowledge that's going to make a big difference when they attempt to foist a one world currency owned and controlled by the central banks upon the world.


What a fucking retard.
They don't need a single world currency. They don't even want one, because having multiple currencies gives them several ways to plunder the saved wealth of the middle class.
Now you've taken to calling me a coward, based on what exactly, that I think you're a fucking retard? If that's what it takes, then the whole world is oowardly because everybody knows you're a retard.

Tell me, spergelord, exactly what you will do when they decide to institute your dreaded single currency?

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 04, 2016 6:52 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Sam J. October 07, 2016 6:12 PM  

I've read John Perkins book and agree that he outs some factions of the banking system but I also agree with those here who believe he's not telling the whole story.

There's two websites I know of that claim that western institutions are being demonized to bring in a new currency, banking system. Unfortunately it's all lies and it's just a renamed global supercharged version of what we have now.

http://redefininggod.com/

http://philosophyofmetrics.com/

All the talk about the money system here has really not grasped the bare details. The base of the problem. ALL money in the West is created by debt. Therefore if we pay off the debt, actually we can't, we would have no money. The system as founded is unstable and designed to over time put all the money and property into the hands of those that issue the debt. (((Yes them and their allies.)))

Experiments in issuing debt free currency have worked. Pennsylvania had this until Benjamin Franklin described it to the government of England and they immediately banned it.

Lincoln used it to win the civil war and probably to get himself shot by the Jew Booth. Hitler used it successfully.

All those that say it causes inflation are not telling the whole story and are comparing it to...a debt based system designed to fail eventually. They are also not taking into account that in the present debt based system you can monetize bonds into cash at any time. Therefore the issued bonds are cash. Even worse we're paying interest on bonds that are the equivalent to cash. It would be less inflationary to just print the money and at least you're not paying interest on the bonds.

Look at Scott Smith, a guy running for president, ideas on debt and taxes. I don’t work for him or have any dealings with him I just ran across his ideas surfing the web.

http://www.scottsmith2016.com/

His ideas are extremely good. He says we should gewt rid of the debt in 5 years by exchanging it for cash. I find his proposals persuasive as most of the debt is owned by the FED and can just be zeroed out.

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 07, 2016 10:12 PM  

@90. Sam J.

U.S. legal tender is not created by debt. The U.S.G. owns the legal tender (FRNs and U.S. coin).
The treasuries held by the Fed as collateral backing the issue of notes regulate the Fed's access to the legal tender. All interest payments received by the Fed on the treasuries held, is returned to the Treasury.

Legal Tender Status
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/legal-tender.aspx

The legal tender is not borrowed, lent or spent into circulation. The only way t gets into circulation is via public demand for the monetary medium.

How Currency Gets into Circulation
https://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/fedpoint/fed01.html

All profits obtained by the Fed's monetary activities and surrendered to the Treasury are counted as seigniorage interest payments on the notes issued. In other words, the Fed is paying the Treasury interest on the notes it puts into circulation, and that interest is all of the Fed's profits minus dividend payments and expenses.

Seigniorage in the United States:
https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/92/03/Seigniorage_Mar_Apr1992.pdf

the Frog

Blogger Dwain Dibley October 09, 2016 1:04 PM  

@88. Snidely Whiplash

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." ~ Henry Ford

I find it puzzling that people attack the legal tender money, their property, after being told that the Fed and bankster generated debt based credit is not a money, not a legal tender, that it is in point of fact, PRIVATELY owned by the banks and it represents the bank's debt to them, yet, people blow that off in favor of arguing against the public's money, legal tender.

Over $60-Trillion of bankster generated debt based private credit literally !POOF!ed out of existence during the 2008 financial crises, bankrupting entire nations and 10's of millions of people, ignored.

Puzzling.....

If "alt-right" or "alt-west" are to represent anything, it should be the restoration of the rule of law and the equal application thereof, the foundational basis of western civilization. Without the rule of law and its equal application, you are left with what we have today, the arbitrary rule of man, imposed via the color of law and force.

That's why I brought up the states' repudiation of the unconstitutional 17th non-amendment as it represents the basecamp from which the rule of law can be reasserted. The majority of western and southern states are already primed for this action, it's just a matter of informing them that it's available and a viable option.

I hold no illusions about the corruption and current sycophantic nature of most states' governments, but I also believe that they're becoming keenly aware that they are being relegated to being nothing more than front line cannon fodder for the ever expanding centralized police state. Especially so when that centralized police state is importing foreign hostiles (an act of war against the American people) and demanding the states provide them with safe harbor.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts