The Issuance of Debt-Free Money
(That would end the income tax-war-debt usury system)
"The government should
create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to
satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of
consumers..... The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only
the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's
greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the
long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied.
"The taxpayers will
be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The
financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable
government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will
become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be
furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will
cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy
will rise superior to the money power." — Abraham Lincoln, on the
issuance of the Greenbacks, government issued, debt-free money which is
in sharp contrast to the privately owned and controlled
“Book money [by
banks] is a good modern invention that should be retained. But instead
of it proceeding from a private pen, in the form of a debt, those
figures, which serve as money, should come from the pen of a national
organism, in the form of money destined to serve the people.”
“In practice, here is how it would work: the new money would be issued
by the National Credit Office as new products are made, and would be
withdrawn from circulation as these products are consumed (purchased)….
Thus there would be no danger of having more money than products: there
would be a constant balance between money and products, money would
always keep the same value, and any inflation would be impossible. Money
would not be issued according to the whims of the Government nor of the
accountants, since the commission of accountants, appointed by the
Government, would act only according to the facts, according to what
[the people] produce and consume.”
boom and starve a recession,' is not the way to manage an economy. Only
Social Credit gives a nice even flow of new currency, watering every
household equally and with just enough to keep enterprise and opportunity
flowing steady and independently.”
" ...That to secure these rights, Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of
the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive
of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,
and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such
principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem
most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. —
The American Declaration of Independence
North American Social Creditor Richard Eastman
"Good advisors give us good counsel on controlling debt in our
families and small businesses. Every word of it is true
and their love and desire to help us avoid going under is clear
to all and greatly appreciated. But there is more to
fighting debt than that.
something offered as counsel to governments and nations for
ending debt dependency for the economy as a whole.
It's my opinion, given our current national money "plumbing
system" that even an entire nation of wise and frugal and hard
working as the hard working people providing for American
families, many would still drown in debt simply because of the
way purchasing power (bill-paying power) drains away to high
finance which does not return it. I guess this is free
plumbing advice to this great good country which, we all know,
has become lost in its finances. It is my attempt at "service"
-- combining the best economics I know of to analyze the problem
and come up with a solution.
disagree with any or all of this, no matter. A man can
design a new kind of wrench to fix plumbing and not expect his
good friends to use it or like it. But I do ask that you give at
least some thought to the problem this tool is intended to
solve. It affects you in big ways."
There is no magical protection in gold, only fatal error. You are buying
from the Rothschilds who have monopoly power to control the gold price
-- and when the the American People are totally crushed because they
trusted gold and not each other, the men with metal detectors that
find your gold by its density and take it from you with no
compensation and maybe at the cost of your life if they think you "held
out" on them. Ron Paul, Gerald Celente, Glenn Beck may be false-friends
-- or else they don't understand what they are talking about. The real
answer -- the populist answer -- is something that can quickly
bring wealth and happiness to the entire population of every nation that
adopts it as their monetary system, but but to have it you must first
throw down Rothschild gold and usury.
"It is the
criterion of a just money system that what is both socially and
physically possible should also be made financially possible.
aim of the economic and financial system is the service of man.
The goal of an economic system should be the satisfaction of
human needs, the production of goods (the role of the producing
system) and the distribution of goods so that they may reach the
people who need them (the role of the financial system).
Social Credit proposes a technique that would make the
production and financial systems serve their purpose." — Eric V.
Everybody knows that
people go to work so they can get money to buy things. The things
people buy are paid for with money people earn by making the things
people buy. And that would be all there is to say about it if it
weren't for a big problem that keeps happening.
Sometimes the good
things people make on their jobs simply don't sell even though everybody
knows people want those things and need those things. When this happens
and selling stops the people who make things have to stop making
them. Companies don't get any money when they don't sell what has been
made and so they don't have enough money to pay all the people who work
at the company. This causes troubles for nearly everyone.
How come there is not
enough money for people to buy the things that they can so easily make
for each other.
start because some of the money that goes around and around from
families to companies and back to families again gets taken away so
there is not enough money being spent so everyone can keep their job and
keep on spending. The big problem is the money that is taken away so it
can't keep going around businesses and families doing good for people.
The reason the money
goes away is that it is only loaned to people, not given to them.
Families and companies have to borrow the money so they will have money
to buy and sell. The people who loan the money to companies and
families give it, but then they expect it back or else they will take
away the house or the companies for themselves. Sometimes the people
who lend the money really want to get those companies for themselves and
get the houses and start making people pay rent who live there.
If people didn't have
to borrow money to get it, then there would always be enough money to
buy things that people make when they go to work. There would be no
problem if everybody just got together and voted to print money and send
some to every family so they could spend it. Doing that is called
Social Credit. With Social Credit the money does not have to be paid
understand what I've said so far?
Social Credit is easy
to understand and it is easy to do, but the reason why we don't get our
money this way and avoid all the troubles is that very rich bad bankers
can steal a lot of money from everybody when money is borrowed instead
of being given to people from Social Credit.
Now there is one more
thing you need to know about.
When bad bankers take
away more money than they put in they are stealing the things that that
money could have bought for families if people used Social Credit to put
in new money instead of borrowing.
The bad men don't just
lend money and then get it back and then lend it again right away to
someone else. If that was the way money worked then maybe money
wouldn't be gone away as much and there would be enough going around for
everybody to keep making things and buying things. But the bad men do
something much different. What they do is called usury.
When a man wants to
start a company and give people jobs to make things he goes to the usury
man at a bank and borrows money from him. The usury man writes on a
piece of paper that the man starting the company is to get some new
money from the bank. The company is started and people get jobs and
people have money to buy the things that are made. But then the money
has to be paid back. For every dollar that the man starting the company
borrowed, a year later he has to give back to the usury man a dollar
plus a dime a nickel and some pennies; and sometimes he has to pay
back with each dollar a whole quarter.
That extra money that
has to be paid back for each dollar that the man owning the company
borrowed is called interest. It is called interest because the
extra dime and nickel and penny paid back with the dollar is what makes
the usury man interested in lending to the man with the company in the
So all the time people
are borrowing new money that comes in but paying back the same amount of
money plus more. Money is always being lost by families and companies
to the bankers.
And this is what causes
troubles. Because all the time the bankers have all that interest they
get and families and companies are short that much for buying what is
produced and keeping companies busy with everybody working. People
lose their jobs. Companies go out of business. And the bankers don't
want to lend money to companies because the companies don't have enough
But bankers are in the
business of lending money, and if people can't borrow money because the
banker knows the people will never be able to earn enough to pay back
each dollar with an extra dime, nickel and penny because the banker has
taken out all of the money that was going around -- the banker will
look elsewhere for people to lend money to. He will lend money to other
countries. Or he will pay bad people to get countries angry with each
other so they will start a war so that people will have to borrow money
to buy guns and airplanes and ships and bombs to win the war. Then the
banker can lend all of the money he took away as interest and the
companies can hire people again to make the guns and bombs. The bankers
will even cause other kinds of disasters if they can so they can lend
their money to rebuild after the disaster. These are the kinds of
troubles that happen when people get their money from borrowing it from
banks rather than just agreeing that money will be printed up for free
and given to each man, woman and child to spend without having to pay it
back at all.
After thinking about
usury and Social Credit I really hope that people will find a way to
have Social Credit without usury. If people have Social Credit then
companies would make enough money that they could keep everyone hired
and make new things and different kinds of things and better things and
everyone would have the money to buy the ones they like.
Are there any
Q: How come people
don't fix the problem by having Social Credit and not having money
that's all borrowed and all that sort of nonsense.
A: That's exactly what
I wondered. So I looked up the word "economics" in the school
encyclopedia and read what it says about what causes companies to go out
of business and people to lose jobs. It didn't say anything about the
real reason of people having to pay interest without extra money being
added so they could pay it. Instead there were two famous men who were
paid by the bankers to give people different reasons why people lost
their jobs and and couldn't buy things.
One man named John and
another named Paul said that when companies couldn't sell that the
government should spend money so companies give new jobs to people who
lost their jobs. But this answer was wrong because the government had
to borrow money before it could spend it, and the leak of interest later
on would more than undo the spending that the government does now. And
besides, the government spending what they want is not the same as the
people having the money to spend it on what they want.
Another man with
another wrong answer was named Milton. Milton said that the banks that
make money should look at prices and if prices go up they should lend
less money and if prices go down they should lend more money. Well, of
course that sounds good, but of course it doesn't fix the problem of
interest draining away the money people have to spend on the goods they
make. Even when prices don't change, the bankers are slowly ending up
taking out more dollars than they have put in. Milton didn't understand
that it makes a difference if there are ten dog food companies making
puppy biscuits with everybody working and selling the puppy biscuits for
fifty cents a box and having only two dog food companies in business and
people without jobs with the price of puppy biscuits still fifty cents
for a box. Another thing that Milton said was that while the people
were incapable of deciding how much money their should be, that the
bankers could be trusted to just lend enough money so that prices
wouldn't change. Milton didn't seem to know that bankers would want
price to go down and the amount of money to go down most of the time --
because everyone owes them money and if prices go down then the money
they are going to get from people paying interest will buy more for the
bankers and the people will have to work harder and longer to get each
dollar, dime, nickle and penny. They also like to have the amount of
money going around to become less and less because then more people will
have to come to the bankers to borrow more and pay back a dollar and a
quarter for each dollar borrowed instead of just a dollar, a dime and a
John and Paul and
Milton would not tell people that using money that is borrowed rather
than money that is just made and given to people is what causes
everybody's troubles. It doesn't matter if puppy biscuits are one cent
a box or if they are a million dollars a box as long as people receive
enough money to buy everything they can make and want to own.
To conclude this report
I simply wish to say that I think Social Credit is the best way for
companies and families to get the money they use and that usury is a
very bad way that only does good for a few very bad people.
Teacher: Thank you,
Betty. That was very nicely done. However, before you take your seat,
I have a question that I would like you to try answering. Some people
say that if our money were gold instead of paper or checking account
money created by bank loans that prices would not go up and everything
would be fine. In light of what you have learned about Social Credit,
do you think that could be true?
Betty: I don't see how
it could be true, Miss Shirley. To get gold one has to pay the cost
of getting it out of the ground. And when people hide it
away it doesn't get spent. With Social Credit the money just comes to
every house without people having to do anything. With gold you would
have to either get it out of the ground or borrow or buy it from the
rich people who own it all, and they would want interest. To pay their
debts people would not only have a harder time because money had gone
away in paying interest, but because gold is so hard to get hold of to
put in people's hands in the first place. The gold money would never be
enough and so the bad bankers would prosper at the expense of everybody
else even more with gold than without it.
Teacher: Very good.
You may take you seat. Now class, it is time to put away your reading
notebooks and bring out your geography textbooks.
Richard EastmanNote: Economists mentioned were John (Keynes), Paul (Samuelson), and
With Social Credit the
money first enters the economy as a check to each household, not as a
New York bankers loan to a giant corporation. The following
diagram presents a version of Social Credit that I propose to impose
right away. It would come with repudiation of debt -- or freezing debt
paying and then repudiating it later. And instantly providing treasury
money to substitute for the purchasing power which High Finance would
immediately attempt to dry up and otherwise sabotage. Call it simply
the American populists' social credit plan.
a populist plan revising the economic system of this republic to
replace Rothschild usury and debt money with Social Credit and
debt-free treasury money. The market system, purged of usury
will remain, while keeping Honest government funded by printing
its own money and taxation will be there if the people want it.
The rewards of intelligence and work and creativity in providing
good things for all people will less obstructed and less limited
than at any other time in recorded history.
The National Credit office is like an Anti-matter IRS -- not a
penny it issues goes to government. The prime thing is the
dividend going to household and the wages plus dividends going
to businesses (to the retailer who with it pays his suppliers
and his employees). The government sector is not shown here
and neither is the banking sector -- the banks being 100 percent
fractional banking with regulated interest rates -- as in the
1950's when savings accounts earned 3 percent and borrowing
firms and home-buyers paid 6 percent on loans. In short we have
no usury, except the tightly regulated "George Baily" savings
and loans. Banks will all be state run and state regulated --
no Federal Involvement. The banking system will not control the
money supply, -- that will be the job of the Treasury Department
and the Social Credit Institution (called the National Credit
Office in the Diagram above).
system -- the A + B problem The Financial sector manipulates
us into booms and busts by either expanding loans (and B) or
contracting loans while obligations of firms and houses to pay
on their loans the amount stipulated in the loan contract
remains the same -- forcing bankruptcies and foreclosures.
Interest payment obligations, "B," grow in expansion
but they do not shrink. Loans are cut back and fewer dollars
are in circulation to meet household needs and debt obligations.
The international bankers have monopoly of credit. They keep the credit
tight to maximize loan income and the value of their debt portfolios.
Unfortunately keeping the money supply tight means that the corporations
they invest their money in and buy stock in do not have customers. So,
hiring Israeli intelligence they pay for a false-flag attack in New York
sky scrapers so they can have a war and a great need for anti-terrorism
measures which their defense corporations can cater profitably, solving
the problem of insufficient purchasing power to buy their products.
They also create weather disasters and other disasters with secret
technologies -- because the emergency services business and the
reconstruction businesses are also lucrative -- paid for by government
which borrows the money from the bankers to pay the corporations. etc.
Meanwhile the people not involved with war industry or the disaster
business continue to lose jobs and houses and standard of living
because of lack of purchasing power.
or System #2:
System #2: The government has debt-free treasury money that it creates
without borrowing from international bankers. They give an amount of
money to every American -- not a redistribution of funds, but the
government giving households the chance to spend the new money into
existence -- so that household demand will guide the market economy.
The entire economy will shift away from catering war and disasters --
and from making war and making disasters -- as people receive these
checks and treat them like they would a tax return or a dividend payment
or a pension check. People will still work for a living -- the social
credit does not replace work, or entrepreneurship, or the market system,
or earning a living -- what it replaces is the way new money enters the
economic loop. Let housewives again decide what this country will
make. And under this system the domestic economy will get the stimulus,
because American families do not spend their money on war. Social
credit is the death knell for both finance capitalism and socialism and
the welfare state. There can be no free market system with consumer
sovereignty without social credit. Their can only be poverty and war
without Social Credit.
Citizens All Over the World
Repudiate the Private Credit Monopoly
The private credit
monopoly is a criminal conspiracy with traitors in government and the
courts. Repudiation is the only course, along with compensation for
damages and redistribution of their ill-gotten wealth. Remember, that
fraud vitiates all contracts -- and executive orders, legislation and
decisions from the Supreme Court are null and void if made by a
conspiracy intending sabotage. It would be best if all nations and
individuals repudiated debt at the same time and with replacement credit
systems ready. Treasury money and social credit are the innovations
that will make that possible.
Under the Social Credit system we get
rid reliance on the bankers loans based on fractional reserves and with
spendable deposits increased or decreased by the Fed's buying and
selling of securities to the big investment banks, which work their way
to the little banks slowly and imperfectly -- the money often going to
invest in construction in China or other low-wage land ow-environment-user-cost
countries -- THAT SYSTEM IS ELIMINATED. Instead, new money arrives
each month at each household (not to firms) -- this money takes the
place of loan money. It is debt free and it does not have to be paid
back. (No, it is not impossible. It is no less impossible that the
fact that we can finance two wars when were are already busted and sunk
to the center of the earth in a debt hole that neither householder nor
government can climb out of. -- Now let me tell you the secret: We
are killing Iraqis in payment to our Jewish creditors and we are killing
Afghanis and soon Pakistanis in payment to our Chinese creditors. And we
will soon be killing each other for both of them. -- ) As I was
saying, the social credit dividend goes to each household and the
housewife etc. then takes the money to the stores and buys what she
thinks best for her family. Father still goes to work, and mother too
if she prefers that to domestic production of home culture and her own
children's social and cultural development etc -- the householder still
has a job -- but more leisure because he does not have to pay the
Rothschilds -- all debt incurred under the old criminal system has been
repudiated -- and so people need only work a fraction of what they
This Social Credit System -- let's call it the American version of
Social Credit -- to distinguish it from the more purist C.H. Douglas
versions that are widely promoted by populists in Australia, Canada, New
Zealand, and, in dark basements of Britain. American Social Credit is a
lazy combination of Douglas, Kitson and Soddy -- taken with a great deal
of artistic license. As I was saying, this Social Credit System gives
money to the householder, who then takes it to become the effective
demand for new goods and services offered by firms. The people not
being entirely wage dependent for their consumption (for their buying)
are able to pay a higher price firm enabling the firm earn some profit
that does not have to be eaten into by payments of "B" the usurer.
The firm can make an honest profit and the amount of purchasing power in
play will not be tampered with by devious criminals in top floor offices
of the Rockefeller Center or the small group of investment bankers who
on the Second Floor of the New York Federal Reserve Bank tell the FOMC
chief (Geitner's old job) what the open market sales and purchases of
securities will be. (Remember, these purchases and sales of treasury
securities between Fed and bankers is what under the present system
expands and contract the supply of loanable funds that finance business
investment and mortgages (i.e. increasing and decreasing spendable
deposits, those debt-based deposits that provide our purchasing power,
such as it is). All that will be shut down under social credit. There
would be no Fed. Money would be created by the Treasury, and credit
would be created by the National Credit Office with every penny of
credit going to household and not to any agency of Government. The
householder will be the first spender, not the government and not the
elite international corporation. The housewife will again (or for the
first time) direct production and become the center of the attention of
profit seeking entrepreneurs as they once again (as not since the 1920's
and early 1950's) do everything they can to satisfy her wants for
herself and her family -- which is called Consumer Sovereignty,
something that only Social Credit really provides without tricks --
without debt and the grand larceny of intentional manipulations of
credit to set up and then knock down households with inflation and
deflation, boom and bust, easy credit and tight credit, investment and
bankruptcy and transfer of assets from workers, entrepreneurs and
engineers to bankers and their crony monopoly corporations.
It is very important that the households receive the social credit
checks and not the government. The big spending Democrat is the partner
of the banker (the Republican IS the banker!) -- I'm speaking of the
decision makers, the policy setters of the party, not the rank-and-file
fool who is led by the nose by deceit and bribes and scares and
seduction and envy and whatever politically useful emotion paid
agitators can stir up. But under Social Credit, the household gets the
money, they spend it on what they think households need most -- what is
best for their children and for their own personal development and
health and future and public contributions they wish to make -- the
American citizen will once again have money to give to charity, even as
charity will not be as necessary -- although there will always be
spendthrifts -- there are other problems which are addressed by
populist remedies other than social credit -- but we are not talking
about those here.
The government will continue to get its money by taxation. It will not
spend the social credit money itself. It will only get that money when
it is paid to them as taxes. There will be no withholding on social
credit. (Very important.)
Social Credit will not replace earned wages. People will still go to
work. But they will not have to work to pay big debt and they will not
have to work to pay their household debt -- except a reasonable mortgage
debt on a bank with 100 percent backing -- people can deposit their
debt-free treasury note money at 3 percent interest and people wanting
to buy a home will borrow at say 6 percent -- which will be fixed for
all time -- inflation being impossible without the dishonest banker
expanding and contracting credit at will. The householder will not
have to work until May or some other late month just to pay the national
debt, the tax to pay interest on the national debt. That debt, to the
Rothschild interests will be repudiated -- as gained by fraud and
malfeasance and the igniting of wars and boom-bust cycles and bubbles
and other forms of financial and government boondoggle scandals. The
Rothschilds and other banking dynasties will have most of their money
taken from them in reparations -- let them go into the wine business or
sell fine art -- under Social Credit the Rothschilds have no function
-- even as they are a dead weight loss on society today -- remember, a
banker is not an entrepreneur -- he only controls entrepreneurs and
engineers and workers because of his monopoly of credit -- the
Rothschild's control too much to be good entrepreneurs -- Investment
Bankers of the City of London and Wall Street care nothing about
pleasing the American housewife, or any other American family member --
the banker profits not from building better a better mousetrap or
computer mouse, and neither does the big corporation -- rather, they
profit by creating monopoly for themselves, monopoly created by
destroying the competition through the shock of damaging expansions and
contractions of credit as already explained.
Governments will tax and they will provide public services. But the
money will originate in the hands of the householders -- not the
government owned by the corporation getting into a war, or building up a
giant Homeland Security boondoggle -- or fake crises that each have to
be met with expenditure of trillions and the regulation and shut down of
everyone not related to a big financier etc.
Businesses will need to apply less for loans because they will be
profitable enough to expand without loans, that is provided they still
can satisfy the housewife, if they can still attract her dollars (social
credit plus wages and profits from business ownership). Social credit
is real free enterprise, the only really workable market system that can
hold up a complex modern society without the scam, boom and bust and all
out corruption of the debt-money private credit monopoly system we now
languish and perish under.
Because the housewife directs production with the purchasing power that
social credit and a husbands paycheck that does not have to go to pay
creditors and the tax man who turns it over to Rothschild as interest on
the National Debt. Motive for war will be gone. Wars, as Hobson showed
over a hundred years ago, is caused by the people not having enough
money to buy what they themselves produce -- so that firms had to sell
abroad (in exchange for raw materials etc.) to sell that they produced
-- giving credit to foreign countries to develop their resources on
condition that they buy from the Imperialist country's firms --
because, as Douglas put it, the domestic population only earned "A"
while the products for sale had to cover both "A" (wages, profits) and
"B" usury -- so that a constant stream of loans by usurers were
necessary to keep firms going -- a responsibility abused by rigging the
game with expansions and contractions until the banker and his pet
monopoly corporations owned everything. The heck with that noise! All
of that will be out of our lives forever -- if and when we -- all
nations -- rise up and overthrow the money power and replace it with
treasury money, social credit, debt repudiation against international
crime banking syndicates..
Mark S. Bilk:Betty did a good job.[see "Betty's
Book Report on Social Credit,"
above] But I have a question: Does everyone get the same amount of
social credit money from the government?
Mark S. Bilk: Seems
to me the amount should be inversely based on income or wealth. No
point in giving millionaires extra money -- they already have enough to
buy things and keep the economy going. It's the poor and middle-class
people who don't, so they should get it. That way you don't give out
more than is necessary and risk inflation. Right?
Richard P. Eastman:
Social Credit is not a redistribution instrument. It is not a tool of
social policy. The poor and the rich get about the same amount of
oxygen to breathe and they get the same
amountof Social Credit. If it were otherwise than immediately Social
Credit would become an instrument for criminal misallocation, for
political argument of how "progressive redistribution" formulas were
arrived at. Politicians would run for office either as Robin Hood or as
George Bush. Political corruption, and in fact political parties of all
kinds, are based on capturing the instruments of redistribution.
Bilk:And is getting social credit money dependent on working?
Because if it's not, wouldn't people just live off that money and not
Richard P. Eastman:
Receiving a Social Credit dividend check is not dependent on working, or
being needy. Or anything else. If people want to live off that money
they can do so. But without exploitation at the job, with lots of
interesting employers all making profit and able to hire people that fit
their very varied needs -- working is more attractive and easier to
obtain. Most people want to so something and be proud of it. Others --
artists, or maybe people like you and me -- will forego larger incomes
in order to serve others for free -- the self-sacrificing
do-gooder. Everyone wants to work under the right conditions. Those
who don't probably shouldn't. If they don't they shouldn't be a drain
on family members who do work. We have great modern technology --
Social Credit is modernist -- and plenty of resources (despite the lies
of monopolists who seek to hide the reasons behind planned dearth for
higher prices of their monopoly/oligopoly corporations. I think we
need men who don't work -- people who develop themselves in highly
individualistic ways. But for the reasons given, I do not think people
will want to forego work -- and one more reason: Without having to pay
personal debt, and national debt and with such abundance from business
with plenty of demand and no interest payments (i.e. not hobbled by the
"B" in the "A" plus "B" theorem of cost of production plus interest
payment equaling cost of product -- Social Credit eliminates "B"
(interest payment component and related components or it compensates
them with Social Credit making up for the drain of "B") with the
ultimate result that people don't have to work as long to produce the
same amount of product (think of it as less overhead translating into
higher wages and lower prices, i.e., higher "real" wages, or
purchasing. If going to work means only four or five hours a day --
people will not find work adversive. Almost everyone not overworked
enjoys the first one, two or three hours of work. The fourth hour is
tolerable, but work becomes aversive if you are tied to in for longer
periods. Of course the work that is more interesting -- the
professions etc. are especially rewarding for in visible accomplishment
and social status -- individual achievement or love of the craft - or
dedication to the service -- that many will work long hours and like
it. They are free to give their time to work or not -- they are no
longer debt slaves forced to work for Rothschild, Rockefeller and their
debt collector the IRS. Everyone likes work of their own choosing on
their own terms. No one likes to hang out in the street when they can
really be doing something they feel good about. Also people are
competitive -- men will still pride themselves on what they can do,
what they can earn, what they can give their families -- that almost
defines the middle class ethic. Under Social Credit we will all tend
towards that ethic. And that is good -- whatever anarchists or
communists or libertarians or conservatives or progressives may urge to
the contrary. The Rothschild's substitute for the "real thing" has
led us to where we are today.
But that means that there would have to be enough jobs for full
employment. And because of increasing automation, computerization, and
other forms of technology, the standard number of hours worked per week
would have to be gradually decreased to insure that there would be jobs
Richard P. Eastman:
"Full Employment" is a bogus goal. The error gained prominence from
Keynes who viewed the old excuse for depressions as "over production" --
but we know that there is no such thing -- in the Depression of the
1930's milk was thrown out and crops burned because there was
insufficient demand due to insufficient purchasing power in the hands of
the people. Keynes put his name to the General Theory because he sold
out -- making millions in 1930 -- to the schemers behind the
depression. Montegu Norman and Bernard Baruch among them. Keynes book
was written by a circle of agents of the City of London. At any rate,
Keynes theory was that when factories were idled because of
"overproduction" or "underconsumption" the solution was not Social
Credit -- Keynes was bought to be the figurehead of "the new economics"
that was simply change the packaging of the old system and sell that to
the country, pushing the Social Credit reformers aside.
Keynes had a good reputation because of
his book The Economic Consequences of the Peace -- which described the
mistakes of the Versailles treaty in demanding impossible reparations
for Germany when Germany was not the country that kept the war going and
when Germany was the country that first agreed to quit the war and
accept Wilson's Fourteen Points -- which they never got. Keynes was
right and got the international respect he deserved for being right.
Keynes also was right when he wrote a shorter piece in 1925 called "The
Economic Consequences of Mr. Churchill" in which he foresaw the
consequences of Winston Churchill, then the Chancellor of the
Exchequer who did a Ron Paul and put Britain on the Gold Standard at
pre-war gold-content of the British pound -- this in order that the
British ruling and financial elite -- who loaned money in the war effort
would now enjoy the windfall that goes to creditors when debts incurred
earlier as paper must now be paid in gold at a gold per dollar price (in
this case the pound) that represents an incredible amount of purchasing
power that must be earned with an incredibly larger amount of labor for
the debtor to meet his debt obligations -- of meeting the government's
war-debt obligations through the paying of higher taxes through
revaluation upward due to the arbitrary setting of the currency's gold
content so high.
Note: All fooled people who follow Celente, Paul, Beck and all of the
pundits with gold-dealer sponsors -- need to know that the Rothschilds
monopolize money to scam people in this way -- right now they are
selling their gold accumulation at incredible prices as people panic
into turning over their purchasing power for this dead metal. They will
get it all back again after the fall of the US. The equipment for
detecting gold at a distance by its density is already mass produced and
standing in readiness for the day gold confiscation comes. You Ron
Paulers really made a big mistake when you bet on gold instead of on
saving your country with good domestic investments in productive
capacity and store of provisions for what is ahead. I say this over and
over -- no Ron Pauler or Becker or Celenteist seems interested in
defending their position against these criticisms. I wonder why?
At any rate, back to Keynes and Keynesianism -- his remedy for a
shortage of "aggregate demand" his name covering the real problem of
insufficient purchasing power for wage earners to buy products that have
to cover production costs that include both wages, profits and usury --
his "solution" was to have the government borrow money from the
Rothschilds and use it to "stimulate" the economy, to "prime the pump,"
with growth of government. But Keynes ignored the fact that the
stimulus comes from borrowing which only adds to the interest burden.
He thought the "stimulus" would increase production enough that the
increased debt could be paid off -- forgetting that a stimulus that is
debt financed is nothing but "junk food" -- eventually draining out
more than in pumps in.
Bilk:Already, lots of people work at jobs that produce nothing, or
even do harm, like most advertising, real-estate and stock speculation,
enforcement of laws against cannabis, and imprisoning people who use
this herb (which is far less harmful than alcohol, and actually
beneficial in some circumstances if used correctly). I think these
non-productive and anti-productive jobs exist partly because with full
employment, people would only have to work 20 or less hours per week to
produce everything that they consume.
Richard P. Eastman:
Yes, the Dilbert comic strips are not far from the truth of corporation
world. A corporation is nothing but a small communist state -- they are
run internally like the Soviet Union while outside they thrive because
of monopoly power and other government bestowed anti-competitive
privileges. Single proprietorships like Henry Ford, Thomas Edison,
Henry Kaiser, Walt Disney, and perhaps Bill Gates always outperform a
corporation apart from any exclusive patents they may have purchases.
Most of the government is inefficient. For every person caring for the
retarded for example, eighty percent of paychecks go to administrative
and consultant personnel who never work directly with the residents.
In fact when cuts have to be made, the skilled hands-on caregivers and
the group home are replaced by an apartment with uninsured street people
hired to be "caregivers" while compensation for bureaucracy and
consultants remains undiminished. (I was the administrator of a group
home for severe-profound developmentally developed youth at the time
care for people with developmental disabilities was being gutted in
Washington State. The state was totally dishonest and it came from the
With Social Credit people will have the money to buy care for their own,
without the state. People do not realize that the real enemy of
socialism as well as of usury capitalism is Social Credit. I agree that
Wall Street cares very little about entrepreneurship and investment in
America -- it is all about speculation and grabbing peoples incomes so
the billionaires can use it for their "o.p.m." leveraged buyouts etc.
And you know I will never agree with you on marijuana being good for
people. I have seen to many people, once sharp, become lotus eaters
talking and thinking like Cheech-and-Chong (hey, remember them,
man?) -- As you know I nevertheless favor the government providing
every addict with his substance at cost or for free -- i.e., pennies,
grown on government farms etc. -- in order that people will not rob and
kill to get money for drugs and in order that all those trillions of
dollars don't keep ending up in the hands of
People adopting Social Credit around the world will not knock out
Rothschild/Rockefeller organized crime unless the profit is taken out of
cocaine and heroin and other addictive drugs. When drugs are provided
to all addicts no questions asked for pennies -- the pushers will
disappear -- the pressure will be off to take it. The jails will be
empty. People can get back to work again -- possibly with addiction
health advice and therapy provided by private charities or local or
state taxes. But yes, I agree there is a lot of busy waste in
corporations -- especially because of nepotism -- keeping it in the
families, while our ruling elite are jjust as sorry as the sorriest
bunch of clowns any declining civilization has had to endure.
Bilk:Also, the state-run banks that make interest-free loans to
businesses would have to require some collateral and/or would have to
evaluate the soundness of the business plans. And the borrowers would
have to be legally bound to pay the money back. Otherwise there would
be all kinds of con-men borrowing money and absconding with it. Right?
Richard P. Eastman: Banks
would charge interest on loans, but the loans would not be the source of
our money supply. Banks for business and home building investments
would have 100 percent backing -- they would actually pay savers to
actually lend to the banks -- say at 3% on the same terms that the
banks, after bundling up the savings deposits to make big loans, would
offer, say 6% to entrepreneur borrowers. These banks would thus not
control the money supply in any way. It costs them to keep depositors'
money in the vaults, since they are paying 3% for them to have the
deposit, and so they will lend the money as quickly as possible to the
entrepreneur with the most promise of being successful, paying the loan
back and then coming to make a bigger loan. etc. Notice that banks
become only savings banks. The checking account function, and
clearing checks, could be done through the Social Credit Agency as a
public service -- people would use their Social Credit Card for
everything -- the Social Credit dividend simply being added to
everyone’s account at the specified time etc. Remember, no more
fractional reserve banking -- no more creation of money out of thin air
because of the fractional reserve system. Banks will simply be
borrowers from the many at low interest in order to be lenders to the
few entrepreneurs who have worthy ideas that require a lot of capital
for start up. Muslim banking principles would also be allowed under
Social Credit -- where the bank becomes a partner in the profits and the
depositors get, not interest, but a yet smaller share of the profit --
profit sharing on top of principal instead of interest on top of
principal. Profit sharing with the banks will last
as long as the loan is paid off. Lots of
room for creative finance this side of usury.
Bilk: Oops, here's
another point. The people in charge of handing out social credit
money, and the people running the state interest-free banks, would have
to be watched and controlled very carefully, and accurate descriptions
of all their actions made instantly available to the public (via the
Internet). Because the dynamics of such a situation, with people having
power over the well-being of others, invites power-hungry people to seek
those jobs, and also invites massive corruption. Whether they're called
commissars under communism/socialism, or administrators under
populism/social-credit, the psychological factors of the situation are
Richard P. Eastman:
On the second Tuesday of each month, before live television, the
comptroller of the National Social Credit Service and the official
Dispenser of the Dividend will go to a small round domed marble building
with a single room under the dome and space for cameramen and
witnesses. Directly under the dome will be granite block with a
numerical keyboard and no letter keys and a windows to type in the date
of entry, 9-21-2010, the day the dividend will be deposited and the
dividend amount each person will receive, say $200; and then both the
Comptroller and the Dispenser of the Dividend will insert their
individual keys which when both turned will activate the "enter" key
which will be the entry, authorization and instruction for the
distribution of that amount to each person's Social Credit Card to be
created -- out of thin-air and without having to be paid back -- to be
received at 12:01 am on the first of the month, Friday October 1. The
granite "credit stone" will automatically reset to receive the next
entry on third Tuesday in October for the amount specified. Then they
lock up the Chamber of Social Credit until the next month.
But what about verifiability? Well,
since everybody in the country gets the same amount, it is no invasion
of privacy to provide that every citizen's name and city shall be listed
on a Social Credit Website showing exactly the amount that the single
specified amount was indeed created in that persons account. (It is an
error to say the money was "transferred" to people’s accounts. It is
created in those accounts by the Social Credit Agency -- but the Social
Credit agency is not debiting its own accounts. The Social Credit
agency has no accounts, no deposits, no money. It merely says "let
there be money in each persons account" and it is done. Now everyone
will know what the social credit dividend is each month and each can
check the amount against what was created for them -- and so can
everybody else check to see that everyone else got the same thing. If
people do not consent to have their names on the citizen roster to
receive the created dividend then it it will simply be electronically
impossible for them to receive their dividend. But the ultimate
fail-safe is this: the program will be hard wired in such a way that
everyone receives their created dividend together -- that there is no
way for the system to look up an individual and change his dividend
amount from what everybody else gets.
Public inspections of the software, with
public access video of the entire process. The system will be too
simple to hack.
Another fail safe could be that social
credit money must all be either spent or converted to paper cash by the
next month. That way no Social Credit Card will ever have more on it
than the specified amount for the current month. Grocery stores, could
simply give cash back for unspent social credit in a given month.
I think such a system would be much less
prone to tampering, embezzlement and fraud than the system we have now
or any other system I have ever heard of.
Third Tuesday of Every Month - Social Credit Dividends Created
is Household Spending Power -- sent to everybody like electric power
from a public utility.
It is real unborrowed legal tender
money that households receive to spend as they choose and never have to
From where? Who pays for it? From
"thin air" and from the fact that good money managed nationally in this
way creates an economic pie as no other system. It is money from the
same "magic hat" that the Rothschilds have monopolized and from which
they have from "thin air" made their loans in usury. Money from the
same store of assets and potential that the Rothschilds got all their
wealth from when they monopolize credit and lend to us for their own
interest-harvesting, as they farm the fruits of our labors at our very
The Rothschilds' Assets Total $500 Trillion Dollars. Think about
it. This is obscene. The Rothschilds must also make and
create wars to finance the debt created by their usurious system.
Social credit, a non-usurious system is what we should fight and die for
to bring in real freedom, peace and prosperity not only for the nation,
but for the whole Human Race -- and NOT for these Financial
Gluttons and their artificially created and generated wars based on pure
lies, deception and propaganda. Wars in other people's lands are
simply to maintain their system of usury.)
basic-right dividend checks to everyone providing interest free 'money'
backed by the willing acceptance of the entire nation in acknowledgement
of the great benefit the system provides at so little cost to the
nation. The power of money at the service of all from out of thin air
and right to your own home.
“Now you're going to have to make things a whole lot simpler if you want
us to understand what Social Credit is all about."
"All right, Paul. We will try. On your planet
you have a game, a game played on a board
with pictures and slips of paper indicating purchasing power and other
of paper called deeds. I believe this game is called 'Monopoly.'
Here, let me show you a picture of it on the Explain-tron."
"In this game everyone is supposed to start out with a certain amount of
money according to the rules.
The object of the game is to buy property and get money and build
rental houses and hotels
and charge people money if they stay at those houses and hotels until you
and everyone else loses all their money and property."
Under Rothefeller rules all players start out with no purchasing power
One player gets to be banker.
The banker is chosen by himself. Anyone who does not accept him as
banker is not allowed to play the game.
the begining the banker has all the money -- his money and the bank's
money are mixed together and there
is no telling the two apart.
order for other players to enter the game they must borrow purchasing
power from the banker
at a percent that the banker specifies.
All players entering the game must pay the banker interest on the money
they are using every time they pass "Go."
The banker may buy houses and hotels with the money of the bank. If
other players should be lucky enough to own a house or two but then fall
behind in his payments to the banker his property can be auctioned off
and the banker who can outbid anyone because he has use of the bank til
ends up owning all properties and buildings.
Under Rothefeller rules the banker gets to mix his money and the bank's
Now this system is like the one you have now here on your planet, Earth.
On our planet, Marva, we once had a similar economic system,
but we found that everything always ended up belonging to the
player who named himself banker.
At first we did not know what to do.
One man suggested that we should change the rules so that
instead of paper purchasing power borrowed from the bank that
thin plates made of gold be used for money instead. But of
course to get the gold purchasing power plates so you could play
the game you had to first buy or borrow them from the banker,
because he owned everything including all of the gold on our
planet. To buy the golden money ordinary players had to borrow
even more from the banker to get started in the game. However
once people did all this and had their golden money tokens they
found to their surprise that it did not solve any of the
problems that having gold money was supposed to solve. It just
made the poor people poorer and the banker a much more powerful
Finally someone came up with the idea of Social Credit -- which
was to give everyone outright and with no interest an amount of
money at the start of the game and at regular intervals
throughout the game so that they can stay in the game. Then we
added the rule that no one can own more than three hotels. And
finally we made the rule that the bank money and the richest
player's money should no longer be mixed -- that the banks
should be impartial and rule governed and that the money people
use should be debt free. Of course no one loses and is forced
out of the game under that system -- everyone stays in the
game, using the money they get to improve their lives and invent
and create and think thoughts and do the things they like to do,
buying and selling, and even competing to provide better
products and services -- while the money system simply is there
to let them do it. Why should someone spend all of his time
getting some property and putting a house on it only to have the
house have to be auctioned off and the property auctioned off
because that person can't pay the banker the interest on the
purchasing power with which he staked that person's entry to the
game? Who gave the banker that position and privilege?
Are you understanding me, Paul?
End of Lesson on How to Free Planet Earth
from the Only Alien Invaders the Earth People will ever Need to Call
First, as a system where the ruling elite,
that is the financial elite, have separated the money circulation of the
common people from the money of the elites. They have the real
purchasing power – and they have it in plentiful quantities – and we are
the inmates of the asylum on a token economy, the Debtor's Prison for
the Dumbed Down kept on short rations. But what about China and us
buying from the Chinese? The fact is that at the low labor costs that
the International Money Power pays to make the goods we import, we
should be paying much less than we have been. Deflation and monopoly
pricing have kept the retail prices only marginally less expensive to us
than where the good made in the US – even though the labor price
difference is (was) tremendous. But why? Because the international
money power wants to use its dollars to build Chinese factories paying
little, but they do not want us buying Chinese products at equivalent
discounts. The upper loop buys Chinese at low Chinese prices. The
lower loop buys Chinese at high almost-American prices – prices just
enough lower than American prices to drive American firms out of
business, but no lower!
Second, we should view the economy as a two
loop system in which the master players who use the top loop, will
arrange booms and busts for the lower loop. Why? Because of the A+B
problem – the chronic tendency to insufficent purchasing power to
sustain domestic industry due to the flow of investment loans and
housing loans to households and businesses being less than the flow of
investment loan principal and compound interest on those loans being
paid back – is a problem that justifies to the people the instigation of
an inflationary boom to "end the recession/depression" – during which
time interest rates climb – if for no other reason than that an
"inflation premium" is being added on by lenders – but also because,
since it is a boom, those high rates are what the traffic will bear.
But guess what?
There is another reason why interest rates
are high in the inflationary boom – or should I say – why the high
interest rates and inflation always recur together. On top of
inflation premium and high investment demand in a boom economy, there is
also the reason that the Money Power lenders know that the end of the
boom will be another depression with deflation – usually imposed
Rothbard-Volker deflation to "fix" the inflation problem – and that
means that the inflation premium they charged to lenders now becomes a
giant windfall to the creditors. Oh, wow! We have just explained why
booms and busts won't go away until usury is done away with. Let me
restate it so you are sure to get it: Lenders not only offer loanable
funds at high interest rates because they require an inflation premium,
they also lend because they expect a subsequent windfall when the
deflationary "correction" is arranged.
How does the deflationary correction occur?
Simply by turning off the credit -- or even faster – calling in loans
– as the Great Depression (the first one) was begun when Wall Street
initiated the margin calls on the three black days – which works with a
money-multiplier effect to contract currency in circulation and create
the dearth of sales that soon leads to firing of workers and the
shutting down and bankruptcy of firms etc. They bring it on
deliberately. "They" being the credit monopoly.
If in a depression a
reduction in taxes is deemed beneficial then why should there be any
objection at all to social credit. What is the difference between tax
going down from $5000 to $4500 and tax doing down from $500 to -$500
(i.e. a negative tax were the householder gets money instead of paying
But with social credit there are two reasons why the new money will not
be harmful. 1) It goes to households for spending and not to
corporations for investing when US corporations, corporations that who
haven't a clue about household demand other than that it doesn't exist
because of lack of purchasing power. This means the new money will not
go to "malinvestment." The demand is real – it reflects what households
want and it is true purchasing power that will reward the entrepreneur
who best satisfied that demand. Money for big windmills and for tearing
down hydroelectric dams and for war on all Islam – does not result in
more domestically produced economic pie for citizens. But with social
credit – the housewife with her social credit dividend check has money
and only wants to spend it on economic pie that is good for her family.
And with the social credit dividend check coming regularly – and
debt-free – and never having to be paid back – there is not going to be
any contraction of credit which is associated with every debt-financed
credit expansion or debt-financed stimulus "malinvestment" by Government
(which is what Obama economics is all about).
to Institute Social Credit and Debt Free
Treasury Money Through the Ballot Box
all future elections vote only only for candidates who sign a pledge
break relations with Zionistan
(2) repudiate Rothschild
(3) switch to a debt-free fiat
(4) monetize the domestic economy with Social Credit dividend checks to
all households rather than throwing
our money away on the irrational and criminal measures of:
tribute to Rothschild/Rockefeller to "stimulate" / reinforce
their ambitions of self-deification within the galaxy (or whatever);
b) debt-based bubbles
to a housing market where no one can afford houses -- like throwing a
ball with a big rubber band on it, the interest on the debt will always
snap you back to depression:
c) open market purchases
of securities that flood the international loanable funds markets with
money that will never be invested in US productivity (i.e. easy money
for the rich that never trickles down to the loop where the non-elite
people earn and spend and look for jobs.
mumbo-jumbo superstition of the High-Priests of Finance which says that
government can't print up its own money but must have Rothschild (whose
interests own the Fed) print it up and charge interest for each dollar
created -- and then charge the interest again when the money is
deposited and serves as bank reserves. Good inflation is not only good
-- it is essential to our recovery and survival. Giving Rothschild the
levers to inflate and deflate where and when they want is like (or just
putting yourselves at the mercy of a gang of sociopathic killers.
Inflation is the only good way for governments to intelligently create
the purchasing power the people need to produce goods for each others
use. Remember -- the car won't go right unless there is air in the
tires -- and it is better to inflate with free air rather than with air
you have to pay for at compound interest. And no way should
Rothschild/Rockefeller be the ones to decide who gets and spends the new
money first. Everyone should get a per capital share of the new money
that enters the circular flow -- money in the form of social credit
dividend checks to households.
And so far no libertarian, monetarist, Keynesian or neo-classical
economist or any other economist has dared come against that fact. They
can't. If they debate it they lose. And they know it.he ontem that gets both big Government and big Usury out of the
people's market economy.
The Conspiracy of Economic Gurus
Who will Not Offer Solutions
Everyone with eyes sees the collapse of the American economy due to the
parasitic usury component and private monopoly of money and credit and
money distribution for first-spender advantages.
But none are telling you that the disaster can be averted. None are
pointing out exactly which faulty components have left the door open for
the few in a position to handle the controls to rob and destroy until
there is nothing left for the families of mankind to live on. Even
their taking of a trillion dollars from future tax payers -- they then
demand for fixing the problem -- more money, which of course they will
not lend to anyone who would invest in domestic production.
Who would invest in a nation where it is no so clear that even money
loaned at zero nominal interest rate will be prohibitively high because
of the very high deflation premium that must be paid back -- because
entrepreneurs see that Americans will buy less, not more in the future,
despite the "stimulus bailout" given to the banks with no obligation
placed on them of what they must do with the money. (What they are
doing is hoarding dollars, even selling their gold to obtain them,
because the dollar is their currency, not ours. They are buying dollars
at the bottom, knowing that once they own all of the asset in America
and the middle class have been killed off, or else dumbed down and
pushed to slum rental housing and near subsistence wages -- and futures
for their children that are hard brutal and short. The dollar will
remain their currency to the end -- its connection with the United
States completely broken.
While you were waiting for hyperinflation -- you made all of the fatal
mistakes that one makes in a deflation. Meanwhile they positioned
themselves to take full advantage of the deflation which they knew was
coming because they were the ones who had the power to make it come or
not. They accumulated everyone's IOU -- but they were not after earning
streams of interest income this time. Rather they were after the
collateral on those loans. All of those middle homes they wanted to
become their rental properties. All those businesses that compete with
their Chinese industrial plants they wanted foreclosed and cannibalized
and put out of business -- providing them with monopoly power through
market concentration, through the economic death of all of their
competitors. And especially they wanted competitor banks, like
Washington Mutual, closed up or absorbed into their banks, like Chase.
They took on liabilities -- but that was only on paper -- what they got
was the title deeds to all of the valuable assets of the planet which
they did not already own. They knew Congress could simply be ordered to
whip the taxpayers some more subsidize -- as a stimulus bailout -- the
entire theft operation.
And so we have a housing market where the only people in a position to
buy are the elite of the financial sector -- who certainly don't by
these houses for themselves to live in -- or the foreign investor --
both looking for rental properties with good former-middle class tenants
who still remember how to mow lawns. The government buys the houses
that can't be sold because of insufficient demand and sits on them.
That keeps supply low enough to keep prices higher. Houses don't fall
in price to fit people's new lower incomes, and property taxes don't go
down, and debt still outstanding does not adjust downward to the new
deflationary depression prices they should be at -- all because of the
monopoly power of big finance. Libertarians are dead wrong.
Government does not make these messes -- the bankers do. If the
Libertarian eliminates the state --i.e. representative government, they
are merely turning themselves over to banker rule with privatized
mercenary debt collectors to replace the old tax collector. Yet the
people to not see the massive crime of the financial sector manipulating
to keep highly priced the assets acquired in foreclosure -- foreclosure
because of severe deflation (severe starvation for purchasing power in
the domestic production and household loop of the economy.) I am saying
that houses should be selling for $12,000 not $120,000; for $90,000, not
$300,000 but that government buying and withholding the "toxic" houses
to keep prices high is the problem. And of course in the face of the
purchasing power crunch local property taxes have increased not
decreased. All of this prevents the prices, wages, incomes, output,
purchasing power etc. from adjusting to allow the economy to recover
with proper balance of all of it's components.
have not heard one person comment favorably on my suggestion that debt
burden should be adjusted to an index to full-time wage earner
purchasing power -- or even average working day wage earnings. To
avoid giving the Financial Sector windfall
real-value-of-interest-payments-received profits from deflation -- by
adjusting the burden to deflation. Remember this -- when Bernanke super
inflates but the helium all misses the balloon -- don't expect any
lift. What you can expect is that the Money Power will end up owning
the balloon that you can't fly and you will end up paying for $20
trillion of helium released into the atmosphere to affect that
transaction. And right now the plan is to do it all over again. Why
not. So far it has never failed as a super efficient means to greater
wealth for the better banks and the better corporations owned by the
better people -- for the winners in this rigged game of strip-you-down
There is only one Macro solution for all this. We have to cut out some
defective financial systems and replace them with systems that to not
even offer the means for private Money Power manipulation. That solution
is 1) repudiation of debt 2) nationalization of money and credit --
taking it out of the hands of wall street and the city of London 3) an
impersonal mechanism that introduces money directly into the hands of
the consumers -- instead of into the hands of the speculators who then
bet the multi-national-corporations horses while fixing the races so
that only their horses can win etc. Under this plan -- called Social
Credit -- market demand will once again organize and build up
production to meet that demand. Where there are buyers with money there
industry will grow. That is what has been missing in this country
through its long tragic history under the power of
Populists are trying to
teach the public that the the economy has collapsed because of
insufficient purchasing power in the hands of the public. Of course the
Money Power which Bernanke represents does not want this simple solution
to be accepted because it will spell the death of international lending
to governments and second mortgage and other lending to distressed
households (and other reasons). So Bernanke is creating a lot of money,
but he is not getting any of it.
Some people would
like to fade in pure fiat money and phase out debt-based currency over
thirty years. In my view we need 100 percent fiat right now because
we must have immediately one hundred percent repudiation of national
indebtedness to the criminal money power. Repudiation is impossible if
you plan to fade out of debt-based money. Debt money has to be killed
in one day and the replacement organ be ready to transplant and take
over that same day. Anyone who wants to do this slowly is a charlatan
who has no intention of killing the monster.
Other people want
"flexible credit" -- that the credit system should expand and
contract whenever people need it. This cannot be done without getting
back to credit manipulation to rig markets for financiers against
households and firms. In some things rigid (like 100 percent annual
balance of trade and 100 percent deposit backing of loans) is better.
The money in the system should be set by the Social Credit authority.
They will provide the social credit dividend to households -- to each
person -- so that the household will be where EVERY dollar gets its
start. They will not control the amount of money in circulation, which
will depend on people saving and upon the velocity of money (which
depends on things like how often people are paid). The National Social
Credit Office will provide the dividend checks and will set their amount
according to new measures of household purchasing power. So what about
the entrepreneur who wants to build some new innovation on a large
scale. Credit will not expand to please him. Instead, along with
social credit there will still be state banks who lend money to
businesses. But the money they lend will be 100 percent people's
savings. There will be no fractional reserve banking. When people put
their savings in a bank there will be stiff penalties for withdrawal
before the allotted time period. Those penalties and durations may be
set by state regulators. If a bank has overextended its loans and
people choose to withdraw their savings -- then let that bank borrow
from other banks who have savings to lend. The bank that suffered the
unexpected savings withdrawals will lose and the other bank that loaned
to it will gain -- but the net of the entire banking system will be
The idea that banks can issue fiat on their own "just as we do now" is
totally unworkable and would give us once again a financial elite with
extraordinary power over the household and business sectors.
Think about it. If the
financial elites who own the gold wanted to buy gold they would not have
their mouthpieces telling you to buy it, bidding against them for each
ounce. They would have the mouthpieces selling you on the idea that
gold is obsolete etc. as they quietly cornered the market with quiet
buying agents. Instead they have Celente and Ron Paul and Glenn Beck
pushing gold like old-time carnival barkers selling a patent
medicine. They are agents assisting the Money Power in buying up
dollars. Clearly Beck and Celente and all the others are not your
financial advisors so much as they are Rothschild and Rockefeller buying
agents. The dollar is going to be around. Remember a dollar is
a share of the Federal Reserve Bank -- a bank owned by other banks which
are in fact a consortium of Rothschild-Rockefeller controlled banks
acting as a holding company in control of the Fed. The appointed Board
of Governors are token figures. The New York Bank has the power, but
only the power to conduct the open market securities transactions that
the big investment bankers want conducted. The Board of Governors and
the Chairman are informed after the fact. The Fed shares -- US dollars
-- are being bought up by the Rothschilds and Rockefellers who are
actually paying for them with US Securities. The US securities are
being shorted in anticipation of the default which the same Rockefeller-Rothschilds
have engineered. Trick or treat? Guess who gets the trick.
What will save America
-- is keeping our dollars here and in circulation and getting more of
them in the hands of the American household sector and business sector
and out of the hands of the financial sector.
There is no honest
economist who also knows what is going on to ask. If you want to verify
what I say you are going to have to do the the thinking yourself --
that, after all, is the law of the jungle for humans.
"The FED has now said
that they can loan money directly to states and companies. Since the
FED is just a collection of rich bankers, it will be interesting to see
just who they loan to. They will undoubtedly loan to companies that
they would like to own,,,, hoping for a default. But, will they loan to
states? Since a state is not a money-making enterprise, I suspect that
Rockefeller won't cough up a penny.
"Now we see why the Fed is pouring out new money -- called inflation --
when really it is a transfusion from the domestic loop to the
international corporations so they can better vanquish the domestic
economy and capture all land resources and industry and assets
(including privatized public wealth). The Fed is buying government
securities and giving the dollars to the international corporations and
to China (the PLA being partners with every international corporation in
"The Fed buys Corporation and Chinese held securities giving them
dollars which they do not spend here. The securities have value because
they pay interest. Whatever their market value when you buy them you
get a stream of interest payments. That stream of interest payments is
paid for by you and me the taxpayers. The fact that the Fed is buying
up securities and putting out up-front dollars from them shows that the
International Financial Elites are expecting the US to go down -- the
securities to be worthless -- but that actually the dollars will keep
their value because the US still has land and resources and your labor
it can buy (or control through debt slavery) -- the Fed is a separate
entity, not part of the US which will default on its securities. So the
securities will no longer be held by Financiers -- just by pension
plans and little people through their mutual funds etc. -- so they will
be the ones stuck from the default. Because in the default it is the
securities that go -- not the private central bank money. That is why
they want those dollars -- dollars will be safe -- dollars are what
will be traded in for the new gold-backed currency they have in the
works. You will take the gold you have bought -- have it minted into
coin and then use it to pay your debts which will still be there after
the US is gone.
"Or perhaps you don't like where they are taking you and would rather
have social credit?
"Remember this too: The prices we pay for objects include 40 percent of
interest payments. Those are prices going to the financial sector which
is not recirculating them back into the economy -- those dollars paid
in the price of goods that do not go to the producing firm but go to
finance are dollars that will not be calling forth more production.
More than three quarters of our tax money goes to fund both interest
payments on the national debt and the military that maintains a world
empire and, currently two major wars/occupations. The wars themselves
are a form of "export" (exporting destruction) that is make-work for US
"Now if we have social credit households -- making strong household
sector demand -- then entrepreneurs, engineers, managers and skilled
workers will be called forth to create more household goods, more labor
saving innovation, more beauty and knowledge now that the slavery of
serving the creditors is ended.
"Only recently has it all come together -- exactly what is wrong and
exactly what the solution MUST be -- to end the basic problem that has
plagued the world since the creation of the Bank of England.
"Anyway -- now you know -- if instead of skimming a hundred posts
today you were to print out this one and really study what I have given
you -- write it out in your own words -- then you will have equipped
yourself to provide others with the medicine that can save us." "Learn about why social credit is the only cure
-- the nation's only defense in this foreign attack that involves the
infiltration and destruction of our economy through the weaknesses of
our system stemming from the usury component of our monetary system in
the control of hostile international bankers who control our financial
sector, and all three branches of the Federal Government."
"Learn about why social credit is the only cure -- the nation's only
defense in this foreign attack that involves the infiltration and
destruction of our economy through the weaknesses of our system stemming
from the usury component of our monetary system in the control of
hostile international bankers who control our financial sector, and all
three branches of the Federal Government."
Social Credit to Replace the Usury
and the Monopoly System
(which includes the Flight and Full Liability of Corporations)
Through a Constitutional Amendment
Bilk" & "Richard Eastman"
I had a few questions regarding social credit.
Do you recall the social credit schematic flow chart where everything is
balanced and working under the social credit system? So, my thought was,
what if you didn't have a social credit office? Would things work out
anyway, simply because you reformed the system enough to make it work in
an honest and sound manner without the need for social credit?
guess is yes -- "if you reformed the system enough." But I have no clue
how that could be done. The system in need of reforming has injections
going to investment and leaks in the form of investment going to a
financial sector with no particular incentive to cultivate economic
development evenly and no commitment to the "utility function" of the
household. If you have a plan I would like to see it.
Brandon: I suppose you are you looking to remedy
the age old problem of unemployment and thus destitution, in other
words, practical Christianity? I take it that you want to ensure people
can participate in the economy no matter what, correct? Ok fair enough,
I can't really argue against that nor do I really want to, but I did
have some questions about the social credit office operations and
to be cheeky, but I agree with Clifford Hugh Douglas that the goal is
greater unemployment not less. People work far too much because of
usury and monopoly. Women were not liberated when they were forced into
the work force, leaving their children and the development of the
household sector where children are raised and the science of refined
consumption cultivated. I agree with Douglas that full employment
is entirely the wrong goal. Technology exists so mankind can work
less. We do not work in order that we may work. Man spontaneously
wants to serve others, wants to improve things. But we like to give it
as a gift out of our own leisure time. Social Credit provides
purchasing power for the household so that household demand will be
sufficient to make invention and entrepreneurship and art and
craftsmanship and efficiency profitable -- so that all of the creative
ideas of the common man -- the man from whom all innovations come --
will be unleashed. All men want to be deemed good in the eyes of other
men. I oppose the Marxist doctrine of "from each according to his
means" -- because it will always be the state who decides what those
means are (as social security retirement age creeps from 62 to 67
etc.) And I oppose "to each according to his need" - because then again
the state determines need -- and everyone will be envious if
someone's child gets braces or another child gets a trumpet. Let each
get a Social Credit dividend check and then delve into the market place
and make good, because under Social Credit, Horatio Alger Rags to Riches
will again be a reality -- deflation and monopoly will be no more."
Brandon: First of all, is a national credit office
even constitutional? I know that might provoke a rather crucial debate,
but I'm willing to have it if it means I can learn something. Ok, so
let's put that on the shelf and just imagine that we've built the office
and we're now in charge of issuing the credit. First of all, is there a
difference between a treasury dollar issued by the treasury and the
credit issued by the national credit office? I remember reading
something about that, but I don't recall what the article said exactly.
Social Credit as an idea to discuss is constitutional. I don't think
the Supreme Court would not allow Social Credit or the Debt
Repudiation that I have in mind. However Congress and the States have
the power to amend the constitution. It is constitutional to make
Social Credit constitutional -- and that is what I would like to
see smoothly done.
Brandon: Ok, so the operations part, how much and
how often does the social credit office issue credit? Regarding the
difference between a treasury dollar and social credit, how is a
treasury dollar issued? I suppose that's through the national credit
office or through the treasury itself?
are asking the questions of the science that will replace
macroeconomics. Many people have their paychecks every two weeks. Stock
dividend are paid once a quarter. If no advantages are found for one
over the other relating to velocity of circulation or something, I would
just as soon see the checks every every month, to help families now
living hand-to-mouth meet their mortgage payments and buy winter coats
for their children etc.
The social credit automatic deposit will be like any check from a bank
or the US Treasury. Perhaps one will be issued a social credit card
which can be used in stores but also can be taken to a bank to transfer
to an interest earning savings account or even cashed for money to stuff
in a mattress. I would hope the Social Credit system would not allow
corporations to arrange for automatic withdrawals from
Brandon: Alright, so back to the
operations question, I have some more thoughts on it just to clarify
some things. I came up with a projection based on a scenario in which
people are paid $300 a week, totaling 1200 a month times 12 months =
$14,400 a year times the population of the US rounded to 300 million,
equals a grand total of $432,000,000,0000!
Now again, this is just an example to get some thoughts going about what
the realities of this system would be.
Richard: You are a very generous man -- considering that the productive
capacity to satisfy all that demand has not yet been called forth.
There is such a thing as overwatering a garden. Consider that whatever
money is circulated through Social Credit Dividends will be spent and
re-spent with a multiplier effect. The Social Credit dividend is not
supposed to carry the family, but to stimulate household demand so that
"good times" in terms of jobs, paying down debt, rising standard of
living, more successful enterprises and loss only if an entrepreneur has
failed to provide the housewife with as good a mousetrap as his
competitor. The question is ultimately an experimental one. The kind
of reasoning you engage in above is essential, and we must remember that
with repudiation of the national debt and much securitized mortgage debt
the nation is going to need a sizable injection of social credit to move
the wheels of industry. The price takes some thought, but on the other
hand even "flying by the seat of our pants" and plucking a number out of
the air, say between $75 and $150 per person per month for starters
would be a reasonable first trial committed for a definite length of
time so it will be treated as income and not as a windfall. It may take
as much as a year or two to get a handle on what the injection is doing
-- we will certainly never be able to measure the good that it does,
because each household has its own plan for their own family.
If every citizen receives a dividend deposit of $208.33 that would
amount to 10,000 in a year for a family of four. If each receives
$104.67 the family would have $5,000 more for spending, saving or paying
off commercial credit (stores will still have their own credit cards) or
their mortgages or business loans -- post repudiation of course, and
under the new one hundred percent reserve requirement banking system.)
That's not far from what the banks take in NSF checks fines in
Brandon: Put aside the figures for a
minute because I have yet, another question that needs to be addressed
before figures can really be drawn up. So my question is, since the
money is a fiat money not really backed by anything so to speak, what
exactly is the value of the dollar in the sense of a price mechanism?
For example, what is the dollar pegged to as a standard of relative
value that we can use to calculate projections about how the monetized
credit is distributed both in terms of velocity and quantity?
Richard: Fiat electronic, fiat paper, silver certificate, gold
certificate or gold coin -- the purchasing power of a currency can only
be arrived at by statistical sampling, in the way pioneered by Irving
Fisher, by having teams of test shoppers each buy a standardized
"shopping basket" of items (food, clothing, rent, education, medical
care, insurance etc.) but also the wage, house work, leisure and seeing
how it changes over time. There will be inflation -- or deflation if
after cutting off usury they system does not replace sufficient
purchasing power. But the important thing is that inflation will not be
anywhere near the terrible thing it is today, because the new purchasing
power will be coming directly to households and directly to employers --
and not to some investment project for which there may or may not be a
market as we used to do it until investment dried up completely.
dollar is not pegged to anything, except what each household recipient
chooses to buy with it. The value of the dollar is what it buys -- and
that is a subjective value of the consumer himself. The econometrician
will simply price the price of a typical bundle of goods a household
Doctors may monitor a patients blood pressure and blood count and heart
rate, but they do not have to know where all the blood is going and how
much is running in every single vein to keep the human organism happy.
Remember, the invisible hand of the market system will still direct
production and move production to efficiency and service of the
consumer -- as long as the consumer has the purchasing power to call if
Brandon: Previous suggestions were of
course gold and silver weight, at other times perhaps a certain other
raw commodity and then finally as a debt-instrument. We of the more
enlightened kind decided it should become something of wealth creation,
but we were stumped on how to do it exactly.
Richard: Money can be sustained in purchasing power simply by the
government accepting the money in payment for taxes (legal tender
status). That will make the money acceptable and that amount of value
will carry it to taking on the value of all other things that will be
offered for sale to get hold of the dollars. I have never been stumped
on this because I am familiar with the principles of Pavlov and Skinner
on how a neutral stimulus can be conditioned as a conditioned stimulus,
how, for example, a chimp or a rat or a pigeon or a man can be
established in "working for tokens" and "spending tokens." In the great
conflict between behaviorists and cognitive psychologists and between
behaviorists and economists I find that we value things because of
conditioning, not because of innate tastes or a built in appreciation of
"intrinsic value". We learn the use of things and when learn when they
are rendered worthless (like after a hyperinflation).
Brandon: Ok, so if I understand you
correctly, despite my questions let me see if I've got this right:
1. Banking is simply a savings and loan operation with absolute rules
governing lending activity set forth by the state governments? Or would
it be a national standard for all the states to adopt the same rules so
that the system was uniform rather than disjointed?
Richard: Yes. (There would also be commercial credit -- by a furniture
store or appliance store or car dealership.) Banks would transform
from fractional reserve banking to 100 percent banking. More savings
put in time deposit accounts would the source of new loans. The States
would regulate the banks -- each would be a laboratory. If Kansas
develops an especially effective and easy to manage system then other
states will be free to drop their system for one that has proven to be
better. Nothing is disjointed. The household receives money. The
banks can offer an interest rate if they agree to park their money for a
long enough time so that the banker can lend the money and share any
investment earnings with the borrower. It is simple. There is no good
reason to meddle with that.
Brandon: 2. Government is financed through
taxes collected from households and businesses, does this apply to both
the state and federal governments? If the federal government collects
taxes and is hence managed on that basis, how does it supply funding for
large scale infrastructure projects at 0 cost to the states? Doesn't the
federal government depend on the states for the financing from taxes to
spend on construction costs in the first place? In effect, is the
federal government simply monetizing credit to finance the building of
infrastructure separate from the tax money it typically collects to fund
the general government?
Treasury has the printing press independent of the Social Credit
Office's power to provide the dividends. The rule that the people can vote for
public services that are tax funded or they can vote for them inflation
funded. The representatives
of the people would determine how much in any government money would go
towards this or that. I would hope that Congress returned to
the practice that for every spending bill they would vote the specific
supply that would pay for it, whether a household levy, a sales tax
increase. Of course if the public has more purchasing power they could
also buy bonds -- but that for an emergency repair job or else for
something that would pay back the extra interest with entry fees or
users fees. Social Credit is not part of the tax system. Remember,
Social Credit is not tax financed. State and Federal Government will
continue to tax until they vote to do otherwise. I personally favor a
transaction tax on finance and a the elimination of the income tax. A
head tax would be better than an income tax. Again -- Social Credit has
nothing to do with what kind of public versus private mix the community
wants to have. Social Credit will work with a minimalist night watchman
government or as much of a nanny government the voters want to provide
for themselves -- but it will be tax finance, not debt financed.
Brandon: 3. Since exports have to be balanced
wouldn't that make it impossible to get certain products or limit the
distribution of other products simply to meet an imposed government
quota? I understand you're trying to avoid the dumping of cheap exports
into our domestic economy, but I thought that was the point of the
tariff and the tax measures outlined in the constitution? Even still,
why would we want to limit the sale of imports that aren't necessarily
cheap imports, but in fact might be specialized products or staple
products of another country that we always trade for despite not really
having anything to trade with that country because they either don't
have the purchasing power to buy from us, or they have more expensive
money that encourages them to buy from us more than we sell to them?.
Richard: This is an old debate
in our country. I tend to side with Calhoun. We should impose a tariff
only to raise taxes, not to keep out industry. Foreign trade be brought
into conformity with a policy of balanced trade -- exports should pay
for imports. Investment should not be allowed to migrate. In
settlement of our debt with China we should give them the shares of
overseas factories owned by American corporations. The international
corporation will be a thing of the past. Corporations will be allowed
to import and export, but they will not produce in multiple countries.
The true law of comparative value under which obtains mutual gain from
trade according to specialization according to comparative advantage
requires that neither labor no capital migrate to the country with
absolute advantage -- otherwise there will be a loser and the country
with an absolute advantage in cheap slave labor or the freedom to dump
pollution freely will see all labor and industrial capital migrate there
-- and the country without absolute advantage to be reduced to
destitution forcing slavery and pollution to match the country with the
Brandon: In other
words, why can't everybody buy from everybody else, even in different
countries, without there having to be barriers. I think there is a clear
difference between honest and fair trade and free trade as we understand
it today, I wouldn't want to arbitrarily impose quotas on the market, if
that market was operating under and honest system, that just doesn't
seem fair, unless I've overlooked something perhaps?
Richard: They can. No one restricts trade of goods and services. What
is prohibited is international speculation, international finance,
currency manipulation, carrying the tremendous debt of the US with easy
credit for cheap foreign purchases so as to vanquish US domestic
production with foreign slave labor backed with credit terms that enable
the US to go deeper and deeper in red while domestic production is
driven to the ropes competing with debt-financed pay-later consumption
of foreign goods. But again, Social Credit is not a scheme for
regulating international trade. I do point out that our usury system
encourages the system where leakages of purchasing power given away to
foreign countries that do not come back and spend the money here -- so
that we have a drain of imports > exports that harms us in the same was
as loans from the financial sector are less than the principal and
interest that has to be paid back. I am saying foreign trade must be
re-regulated and from the standpoint of the benefit of the domestic
economy -- not just the exporter, not just the importers, not just the
futures markets, commodities markets but for the good off the national
economy, rather than the international speculator.
Brandon: Simply put, How do currency exchange rates work under the
credit system? How do I go to a foreign country and buy something and
Richard: We would have to get out from under the problem that there are
more US dollars and dollar denominated deposits outside the US than in
it. Most of a nations currency should be in that nation. The people of
Ying wanting goods from the country of Yang must exchange their currency
for the currency of Yang to buy the goods. The relative cost of
currencies will depend on supply and demand. If Yang has all the good
stuff then Ying will be sending all of the currency to buy the Yang
product and the supply of their currency of the foreign exchange
market. Too much supply of the Ying currency looking for Yang currency
and not enough Yang currency looking for Ying currency -- so the Yang
currency will become expensive relative to the Ying currency -- the
price of the Yang goods in the Ying stores will go up and less will be
bought. Meanwhile, the investing in the Ying with Ying currency
captured by the Yang money will be illegal, and so the Yang will have
nothing to do but buy Ying products. That is how trade should be
balanced. The trade does not have to be kept small, but it should be
balanced. There are people who if assigned the task and with the right
incentives could design a trade policy and rules to accomplish balanced
foreign trade. The point is if the people want it and elect an
administration to get it -- the test of the administration will be to
see if it can organize the right team of economists and administrators
to obtain the desired effect.
Brandon: Ok, now that I got that out of the way, let me get a little
more intimate on this subject. It seems that if you give people just
enough money to live on where they don't really have to work, don't you
kind of create a welfare state? Not that it's a bad thing necessarily,
but given my previous projection, doesn't that rate and volume of
inflation jeopardize the purchasing power of the money and thus
eventually threaten the stability of the entire system because you have
an unsustainable rate of expansion of unlimited purchasing power built
on a never ending demand for limited resources?
Richard: We have created a welfare state under the present system.
Prisons are our a welfare state. Welfare checks are our welfare
state? Crime is a help-your-self welfare state redistribution program.
People want to work. I don't know one Mexican man who does not work or
would not accept work if he could legally have it. People want to
work. They have a hard time in a buyer's labor market. The great
crusher of all young people today -- middle and lower class is that no
one wants their services, that there is nothing worthwhile to do, that
they are going to go to school, learn a job, get a job, have the job go
under, go back to school and learn another job and keep going. This is
hell. Social Credit gives them a variety of prospective employers all
bidding for their labor if they have the right stuff. They can bid one
employer against the other because the household sector is placing
orders with their dollars and there are not enough good laborers so to
fill them. No one wants to be an idle bum and no one wants to be a
slave working until May to Pay the Government and until September to Pay
the Rockefellers and Rothschilds -- before you start earning money for
And, as I wrote above, the
object of life is not work. Sixty years ago all futurists were
anticipating four hour days, tremendous blocks of leisure to go with our
high technology labor-saving scientific production -- all captured by
the Usurers. (In the '80 the Japanese were pioneering the robots that
would free us for better lives -- but the Rockefellers preferred the
slave model and Chinese drudges making our products while our citizens
got their leisure in the form of moneyless unemployment. My puritan
ethics are not offended that people get social credit for nothing. I am
offended that about 40 percent of the price of things you buy is to pay
the lender of the business loan that financed production. With social
credit that percent will be much smaller -- profit will replace
borrowing as the financing engine of economic growth.
if the people don't want to work -- let the media make movies about
workers doing a good job, about innovators about great contributors to
society -- try to rebuild the man with the work ethic they have done so
much to destroy.
Brandon: How do you reconcile supplementing purchasing power with
social credit, but then having to justify banks being used to finance
the building of businesses and homes presumably because people do not
have enough purchasing power, despite social credit, which in turn
forces them to borrow in order to do what they want in the economy?
Richard: Money is the reward of production. Without it no one
produces. The problem today is that people do work long and hard --
overwork and still lose the house -- because of deflation and monopoly
pricing and outsourcing and because of the interest payment amount that
is carried over to the price of the finished product. People do not
have enough money to reward their work with the fruits of their
efforts. Social credit is added so that the workers can profit earners
can get their due -- and not come up short because the payroll and
profits were short because the bank took it all in interest. Social
credit increases sales which increases demand for labor and hence wages
and employment. With more labor output goes up. With more profit
rolled-back into new equipment work productivity goes up -- and work
productivity is the basis of raises and a higher standard of
Brandon: I understand your disdain for corporations, but why doesn't a
company have the right to issue stock to people in order drum up funds
for the business?
Richard: Partnerships are
good. Full liability is good. And only 51 % controlling interest of
stock must be owned by full liability partnership -- which requires new
laws. The other 49 percent can be common stock -- since those
investors do not make the decisions and so they are not liable. When a
corporation is taken to court, I propose, the 51 percent are on the hook
for full damages -- just as if they had poisoned a customer themselves.
Also, no US corporation will be a legal person any longer -- and they
certainly will not be allowed to make campaign contributions.
Corporations are not necessary in the computer age when people can
organized a venture with the internet. Real people can do that now,
without the giant doing it.
Brandon: What about LLC's? What if two companies wanted to do
business as some other 3rd company, but wanted to retain separate
balance sheets and liability concerns as a member of the LLC? What if a
person wanted to build a bigger business than what they could as a
proprietorship or partnership and needed a more unique and flexible
business arrangement? What if they wanted to do this without risking
their home or entire personal savings from a business failure, in which
they are only held liable for a certain reasonable amount that would
typically be borrowed in order to start the business. I mean, after all,
why else is liability an issue? It's an issue because people do not want
to owe more than they can afford for failing in the economy and having
that sort of protection, under a reasonable set of circumstances, tends
to encourage entrepreneurship rather than hindering it because of
barriers to entry and life altering risk concerns. Am I wrong?
Richard: If they are that enterprising they will adjust to the
constraints and streamline to 51-49 partner-stockholder arrangement.
Where those who don't want full liability can own up to 49 percent of
the firm. And those who want to to put their superior skill running the
company without being exposed to liability, they can get the 51 percent
to hire them as management rather than owner. In fact a hired manager
could also be a 49 percent owner -- as long as the 51 percent who hired
him and take full responsibility for his decisions trust his judgment.
did you ever think that the bigger returns coming from the more high
risk ventures -- big game hunting for the international
speculator really didn't have to be that dangerous -- for example
getting involved with staging a coup in a country to get a more
favorable deal from the new dictator -- that is not what all-domestic
US corporations are going to be doing any more. Instead, a corporation
will say to a foreign country.
But the most pertinent answer is that under social credit there will be
the household demand that has always been deficient in the US economy --
without building up a loan-call day of reckoning down the pike.
With social credit most businesses will succeed. More entrepreneurs
will succeed than are succeeding now. Fewer will be failing. And they
will fail because their product was not competitive, NOT because of a
contraction of the money supply.
Brandon: It occurs to me that anybody
should be able to make a business with their own money without having to
borrow from a bank, but that only those people who are qualified or have
thoroughly thought out a business plan and put it in writing would
actually be able to create a business. Your system seems to support a
more just consumption cycle, but unfortunately it is just that, a
consumption cycle that is not organized for sustainability beyond the
sustainability of the monetary system that helps run the economy
smoothly under your social credit model. It has all the features one
would like to have from an economic system, that of benevolence,
freedom, and creativity, but I think it's missing that all important
sustainability characteristic that is often lost in the mix in an effort
to make a more just economic system. Would you disagree?
Richard: With social credit Edison would have been able to go to people
who believed in him and they could have pooled their money and
bankrolled his early inventions. With the success of the Model T Ford
was in a position to start other ventures. Disney went from successful
cartoons to experimenting with amusement parks. Increased
profitability. The most beautiful and charming ventures have failed --
after getting usury financing -- because of a recession where the money
authorities have contracted the M1 money supply. That kind of
contraction will never happen again under SC because the same great flow
will flow out of each household and into the shops of every town and
city. Big cities will have concentrations of social credit
expenditure. They will see revivals of their downtown areas.
Homemaking and leisure will increase -- a good thing -- people will
have space -- freed from debt slavery -- to devote to
politics, recreation, garden clubs, new institutions of unity etc., more
parks , more public swimming pools -- the money that would have gone to
war or disaster relief or whatever else mass-murdering international
banking could devise. (If you have any doubt about who is
responsible for 9-11, then perhaps you should put this letter aside
until you have looked into it -- because that is the one fact that
makes replacing the current Usury system a moral imperative.
Brandon: Regarding my point about the unsustainable rate of expansion
of unlimited purchasing power built on a never ending demand for limited
resources, is there such a thing as a too much purchasing power? If that
is the case, then what purpose do banks really serve? The only real
reason people would borrow money is because they don't have the
purchasing power to do anything productive in the economy, but under
social credit it would seem that the average person, given my previous
budget projection, would have an extra $14,400
a year income! I don't think
anybody would need to borrow money with that kind of purchasing power,
so why the pretense of having banks around to lend money to people that
already have the purchasing power to consume, but simply need additional
income to save up to start a business?
is part of the ecosystem. We speak of the economy as if it is
self-contained, but in fact it is a component within the biosphere. Men
manipulate the environment to provide for themselves. Once there were
hunters and gatherers -- eating berries and whatever else they found
growing on the forest floor and killing an occasional animal. What as
a sustainable population then. But mankind adapted. First the
discovery of seed planting increased the numbers sustainable on the
land. Next came irrigation projects. Then breeding and domestication
of animals. The wheel. Science enables us to do more with less. So far
our science has been diverted to missiles, H-bombs, shock and awe -- a
waste of human brainpower that could have been working for the Fords and
Edisons and Buckminster Fullers or the Walt Disneys and maybe Steve
Jobs -- doing more with less -- we still haven't tried living under
ground, or making cars that float two feet off the ground so we don't
need to cover all this good farm land with paved roads -- or the vast
excavations that could build water systems that would provide north
America with all of the water necessary to populate all that empty
government land in the US. It is not the middle classes who destroy
land. It is dire poverty, being so hungry and hopeless that the
environment no longer matters.
As I said, your award of Social Credit is far more generous than I think
is prudent -- given multiplier effects and given the purpose of
social credit. The purpose of social credit is to originate demand in
households and to provide enough purchasing power to pay for the
providing of people with a better environment and better health and
provision within that environment.
We are learning animals. When we reach a constraint with either adapt
to it or we find a way of getting around it. But no group of academics
with Rockefeller grants are going to tell us what can be sustained and
what cannot -- because the Rockefeller NGOs do not know what
adaptations free people with great means at their disposal are able to
come up with. The people who talk about sustainability or about
overpopulation -- are just looking for rationalizations for not cutting
them in on some of the wealth pie.
are the banks necessary? Because the banks pool capital
(peoples savings) so that bigger projects can be undertaken in the
private sector -- homes for young families that can't pay cash but want
a house while their children are still young. There is total freedom
to try anything as long as you can convince a lending officer at a bank
or a bunch of wealthy people on the internet to back you.
But as long as we are kept on the short leash of tight M1 in order to
"fight inflation" but in reality to keep us to a bear minimum of
capability so that we do not compete with the Elite Loop who always have
easy money from swaps with the Fed of securities and money at the
discretion of the big investment banks -- we are living in a slave
society, on slave rations and with no future.
Brandon: Perhaps initially the banks would be used, but I think
eventually they would go by the wayside as anything but a middleman
between the people and the national credit office, despite the draw of
an interest rate for depositing money, am I wrong? Just admit it, you
want to get rid of banks and institute a national credit office to issue
money in place of the banks and you want the treasury to agree to
monetize the credit issued by the national credit office as a way of
legitimizing the whole social credit operation, which in effect, cancels
any notion of lending money in the first place, am I right? ;)
Richard: The need for people to accumulate large sums for large
undertakings will ever be operating. Social Credit, being a small check
to everyone and nothing else does not and cannot fulfill or compete with
Social credit monetizes social credit. Once the money is in circulation
it is either spent or saved (in a mattress or family vault) or deposited
in a time savings account where it is pooled with other money and may be
loaned to people wanting to build production facilities or
buy machines or build houses or private transportation or robotics
repair or whatever. The household reigns supreme over the market
economy and the entrepreneur has all the people in the world and all the
resources in the world to see if he can put together a good or service
that people will buy leaving him with a profit. Under Social credit
that will be happening a lot more than it is happing now.
Brandon: Don't get me wrong, I don't really see anything wrong with
that per se, other than basing the system on a constant consumption
cycle, it's certainly better than paying thieves to loot us like they do
now, but as you can plainly see I have some questions and concerns that
I would like to try and hash out with you, if you're willing, which I
really hope you are. Think of it like an intelligence operation where
you have to teach the new young buck rookie how to handle life on the
job, or whatever scenario of your choosing that you see fit to envision.
I want to do this because I really want to come up with a better system
or at least the means to achieve a better system through some sort of
transitional system that bridges the gap between an old paradigm and a
Richard: I see no constant consumption cycle. I see the composition of
consumption changing. I see consumption really as depreciation of stock
-- that has to be replaced, perhaps with an entirely new means of
satisfying that personal utility function of the individual.
Consumption can be high -- or, if people have a rage for asceticism, it
can be low -- and saving and investment higher.
Social Credit can be "Small is Beautiful" but it does not have to be. I
think in terms of family households. Communes are always a thought in
the back of the mind of anyone who really enjoyed living in a college
dormitory -- so there may be efficiencies of scale in larger groups --
but that would take another revolution of tolerance. Nor is the system
against wealth per se. The wealthy are able to try out new living
technology that may become available to others later on. No need for
envy. But the wealthy will be the innovators, the savers, the ones who
could spot the entrepreneur and inventor to bet on. And the money would
be possible just from donations -- once school children funded the
building of a battleship with their collections -- once we were the
most generous people in giving aid to the poor of other countries and
coming to relief in disasters -- we the middle class that is. Social
Credit is the path back to that kind of world, that kind of middle class
affluence. The debt incurred at each step in the past has largely been
excessive if not completely unnecessary. We haven't dreamed of what we
could do set free of that constraint.
Brandon: I would really appreciate
your thoughts on these matters and hopefully you can follow all my line
of questioning and address them accordingly without getting bogged down
in too much minutia! LOL, well, I look forward to your reply, Agape.
Richard: I appreciate your questions and criticisms.
part of social credit would you keep? What part discard?
The Logic of Social Credit is Irresistible
* The Benefits Immediate and Lasting
Deliverance Within Our Reach
Making MAN a slave is not the remedy and if we
want to be free, we have to remove everything that is enslaving us. It's
a big job but we are the only ones who can do it and the more of us that
do it, the easier the job will be.
. . .
New money never enters as a market transaction. It is "thin aired" into
existence. The only question is who "thin-airs" it and who gets to be
first spender and what fee (interest rate, repayment of principal) does
he have to pay for that privilege.
Right now the international private money power have arranged the
economy so that new money is "thin aired" by the financial system and
the borrowers have to pay to the "lender" ("lender" is a misnomer --
because the bank is not lending from a static stock that already existed
and that was accumulated through saving -- rather it is thin-aired and
it cost the banker nothing to create it. Real LENDING is when someone
has saved a stock of something and they lend it, whether at interest or
not. Charging interest and demanding an equivalent amount of purchasing
power on money that was simply "thin aired" is a criminal racket -- or
should be considered so and defined as such by law.
Social Credit merely takes the power to "thin-air" new money from the
financial sector and instead arranges that every citizen have an equal
share of the new "thin-air" money originated in his household -- free
and clear (no interest to be paid, not principal to be "repaid") In
this way household demand will direct the economy, there will not be
ever accumulating debt, the financial sector will not suck up all the
wealth of the economy, and the market system will finally be able to
operate as Adam Smith envisioned - with the entrepreneur serving
household demand and being rewarded with ample profit to continue
production or even expand if he is doing a good job of satisfying the
consumer at lowest cost or else he will suffer loss for bad
entrepreneurship and will revert to the work force -- which is how the
system should work but never does under the unjust expropriating usury
On 19/11/2010 10:00 AM, David wrote:
Yep! you are right about this issue Dick ~ Loans created out of thin air
~ create deposits; which in turn create debt at no cost to the loan
sharks who own & control the system ~ put
Check books still play a major role in this financial
chicanery.........not hard cash money printing presses.
Dick Eastman: You chose the right name for yourself. Let us smash the
icon of the monopoly power of a few financiers to create the new money
and to decide who gets it and to extort payment of principal and
whatever the traffic will bear in interest (with the ability to jack up
the price covertly through a policy of deflation) and set up the
virtuous system of giving out the "thin air" money to everyone equally
with no strings attached.
"The only question [about new money] is who "thin-airs" it and who gets
to be first spender and what fee (interest rate, repayment of principal)
does he have to pay for that privilege".
But the only question for me is who wants some of my "thin-air" money?
Dick Eastman: Everyone who works
works for the things money -- and only money -- will buy. The thin air
money is legal tender -- which means it can be used to pay taxes. It is
also still the dollar unit that everyone is accepting in payment -- and
which even if people lose confidence in it they will just spend all the
I need someone to paint my house and if
anyone's interested I will buy the paint and materials and you only need
to show up.
Dick Eastman: You will buy the paint
with money -- and the paint store will not care whether you dollar was
originally "born" as a "thin-aired" bank loan as is usual today or as a
"thin-aired social credit dividend that originates under the full
ownership and command household members.
If you can bring an extra ladder that would be good as I only have one.
I will all but guarantee that you will be the one that gets to be first
spender of the money I will pay you "IF" you do a satisfactory job and
clean up your mess afterwards.
Dick Eastman: Actually YOU would be
the first spender when you give him some of your social credit payment
to help pay your house. He would be the second spender.
And there will be no fee (interest rate,
repayment of principal) that you will be required to pay for the
privilege of painting my house and making this "thin air" money.
Dick Eastman: That's right. If you
have a house you want painted and your receive your social credit
allotment of new money to inject into the economy you are fee to spend
it on the services of a housepainter if that is what you value most of
the things you can buy with that amount of the new money. It is called
the market system. All we are doing is fixing it so the banker does not
have monopoly power as the man who rents out the medium of exchange
which costs him nothing to provide.
I refer to this type of transaction as my
"get a job" philosophy!
Dick Eastman: You still get a job or start a business under the social
credit system. The only difference between that system and the one we
have now is that when you get a job or start a business you have a good
chance of the job continuing to exist and of the business making money
-- rather than succumbing to "interest death" in a usury induced
deflation/recession. Social Credit makes the market system work the way
we all have been taught the market system should work -- where the
better and less expensive mousetrap brings success to those who produce
it and sell it thanks to the rule of household demand -- of sufficient
purchasing power to sustain the national economy.
Highlights of Another Discussion about
Social Credit and the system it replaces.
Was Cheryl talking about what should
be or what makes sense rather than what is being done? I think she is
advocating what ought to be, not describing what is. She also describes
historical examples -- Lincoln greenbacks -- which are closer to what we
should have today. I think she is right.
In practice today it is the open market purchases of securities which
gives Goldman Sachs and other FOMC market participants in these
transactions fresh money is one mechanism for putting new reserves in
the banks which may or may not result in commercial banks getting fresh
deposits added to the money in circulation which after many transactions
ends up expanding the money supply by a multiple of the amount that was
added from the open market sale by the Fed -- this multiple above and
beyond the original injection being the new money that is "thin aired."
Of course Goldman dictates to the New York Fed the terms of the open
market transaction -- it is not really a market -- merely a "money
market account" of the big money families -- interest is paid on the
securities when they are held -- and Goldman etc will withdraw from
their Fed "money market account" when they can make more money on
investments (say in new factories in China or in weapons production for
war against Islam) than will be earned in interest from the bonds (of
course these rich families also own the banks which own the Fed -- so
they still get the interest earnings from that channel even after they
have sold their bonds to the Fed for the new loanable funds). Social
credit eliminates the bonds and liquidity changing hands -- no more
open market operations by the Fed. Instead. all new money originates in
credits to household social credit accounts.
I would replace the Fed and the IRS with a national treasury system that
pays out the social credit dividends (unless we want the states to do
that) and which collects the taxes for whatever public goods congress
approves and the president signs (or that overrides the presidents
veto). Social credit will be received like a return of overpayment to
the IRS, like a negative income tax that goes to everybody. It will be
under the administration according to rules laid out by Congress. But
there could be a better way. It is the general idea that we are
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Cheryl
Yes, according to Bill Still's research as shown in his documentary The
Secret of Oz, the question of who thin airs something is obvious -- it
is the government that has the authority and credibility to do so, not
some private family across the ocean.
The government thin-airs the money, as Lincoln did with his greenbacks
and as America did with colonial script and 4 other times in our history
when we issued our own money. The government thin-airs the money and
uses it to pay its government servants, road builders, army, congress,
whatever. Then this money goes out into the economy.
Dick Eastman: This puts first
spender power in the hands of politicians, which is what social credit
avoids. Whomever has "first spender" rights to the "thin air" new money
is sovereign. This can either be the financial sector (rule by wall
street), the government sector (Lincoln running a Civil War economy --
although he also did some borrowing), or the household sector being
sovereign. If the government gets to be first spender - then
corporations will court government -- pay for expensive campaigns for
friendly politicians -- and will concoct a nice war -- so that
corporations don't have to go through all that trouble of finding what
kind of clothe or washing machine or hair spray or mousetrap the
housewife wants -- just produce the bombs, so the government can drop
them on some enemy and then come back and buy some more -- real simple
The second question is the amount of
thin-air money that is issued. If too much is issued, then there will
be inflation. If not enough is issued, then there will be deflation and
depression. You cannot have an economy without a unit of trade, i.e.
Dick Eastman: Did you know that
there is always inflation when "thin-air" money is introduced -- more
claims to the economic pie, means smaller pieces per dollar or more
dollars per slice. But did you also know that under the usury system
where loans bring new money but payment of principal plus interest takes
away more than the original loan introduced so that there is always
increasing deflation. The inevitable deflation under the usury system
is what causes recessions. Big new debt-financed war, or unemployment
benefits, or bailouts may inject new money into the domestic economy
(although the bailouts of the banks have not really done so) may inject
money to counter the deflationary drift -- but eventually the paying to
the financial sector of principal and interest will eat up the boom of
the new debt-financed spending.
Inflation is bad only for savers locked into a fixed interest savings
account and people on fixed pensions or people holding bonds that pay
off in the future when dollars will purchase less.
However when social credit is established and is paid out at a certain
rate each period -- markets will adjust -- prices will be more stable
But even if this did not happen -- inflation is something we could live
with. Did you know that recessions only end with inflation, with rising
prices from new demand. And it is not the inflation that causes the
next recession -- that view is the old von Mises mal-investment theory
and it is false. What really causes recession is a failure of demand
and a failure of demand is caused by the constant drift to deflation
resulting from injections of new loans being smaller than the leakages
of the paying of principal and interest on old loans. Social credit
eliminates the eating away of new money - by interest and principal
drain to the financial sector. Instead under social credit the
purchasing power originates in the household sector.
Now let us look closely at inflation. Inflation of prices resulting
from too many dollars chasing too few goods, as we all know, harms
savers who are earning a fixed interest rate on their savings; it also
robs purchasing power from people on fixed pensions; and most important
to the elite -- it takes from people who own bond wealth -- just as the
current systems tendency toward deflation gives bond holders a windfall
of unearned and uncontracted purchasing power -- the dollars being "paid
back" each having more purchasing power and being harder to acquire than
the dollars that were originally lent -- apart from the reward to the
lender of the interest payment.
But under social credit there will be no leakage of principal and
interest to the usurer for each dollar in circulation. And with
leakages less, the tendency towards deflation will be less and the
social credit injections can be much smaller. The only leakage will be
uninvested savings and government taxation when government runs a
surplus and does not spend all that it taxes. Social credit payments
can then be very small and the economy will still be deflation-proof and
And if inflation should occur it would not be a major disaster because
the householders are first spenders -- they get the benefit of inflation
that now goes to the pet corporations that the investment banks favor
with new money loans.
In today's economy all but a tiny percent are debtors. The great
holders of bond wealth are certainly deserving of some inflation. They
were certainly pro-inflation in the late 1970's when the middle class
had savings to rob. Why not let it be their turn for once -- that is if
the social credit office economists happen to set the social credit
dividend too high. (The field of economics will be transformed by the
switch to the social credit system -- Irving Fisher and price indexes
will come back in style and the question of the optimum social credit
dividend amount will be a question. But there will be no right
answer. Mistakes will not be fatal. Social credit makes inflation a
very small and a very temporary problem.
Remember, inflation does not cause recession. It eats up bond wealth but
that does not harm the real economy, the interaction of the household
and business sectors. Bond wealth adds nothing to production.
Remember, we will not longer be dependent on the grace of international
lenders to keep our businesses afloat against the deflation/recession
tendency. Social credit will end that tendency as it ends debt slavery.
England got along famously for about 600 years on tally sticks. Bill
Still shows how this worked.
Rome got along for about 600 or 700 years on cheap brass coins, and
built an empire that way. Julius Caesar changed the coins to gold with
his image on the coins, and killed the system. People hated it, the
Senate hated it, and Bill Still says Julius Caesar was assassinated
because of it, but the gold coins remained and helped to bring down Rome
and its economy.
IOW, the gold standard is crap.
DE: Except that it makes very poor
Bill Still spends a lot of time discussing the election between William
Jennings Bryan and (the other guy?) -- when Bryan was advocating for
silver coins, known as "free silver." His slogan, "you shall not put a
crown of thorns on labor, you shall not crucify us on a cross of gold."
DE: Actually Bryan was owned by the
silver miners -- the real populist -- or people's party of the time
advocated pure fiat money -- the Lincoln greenback of which you wrote
above. The cross of gold was real enough and his arguments against the
gold standard -- but switching to a cross of composite silver and gold
is not much of an improvement -- especially as the fractional reserve
banking practiced still enabled the financial sector to expand and
contract credit at will. J.P. Morgan created the depressions that led
people to beg for the Federal Reserve system, which was misrepresented
as "progressive" legislation.
The people were clamoring for silver coins. There was no money. You
cannot run an economy when there is no money. The Banksters dry up the
money supply and deliberately cause depression, and so people are forced
to sell their assets for pennies on the dollar. This is what they have
been doing for centuries.
To compel a man to subsidize with
his taxes the propagation of ideas which he
disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Larry and Richard — Gold versus Social
Credit — final part.
What should our response/attitude be to the threat of total economic
Richard: People who buy the gold are getting a metal that will not
circulate for buying and selling until after the economy collapses
Larry: I'm having a tough time with this
statement you've made. First of all, what do you mean by "collapses?"
The economy collapses – under the present rules which no politician is
seeking too change -- when foreign and upper-loop American rich lenders
determine that the US cannot make its interest payments or is on the
verge of not being able to meet its obligations. At this point
government debt-financing will become impossible. The US will not
longer be able to fund government services through loans as they have
been doing. The government will have to cut its services except for
what it can pay for through taxes – except what is paid for through
taxes will have to go towards payment of those creditors for interest
payments on what has already been loaned. The government will tax but
it will not spend. The pubic too will feel the collapse as all business
becomes unprofitable due to the complete loss of purchasing power from
The people will not longer be able to import food and clothing on credit
as we have been doing without realizing it. (When we got second
mortgages on our homes and refinanced our homes with companies that sell
their mortgages for securitization -- we were in fact getting loans in
order to buy clothes and feed ourselves. Our equity is gone, our homes
foreclosed. We can no longer get food that way. We have to provide for
ourselves without the aid of government – the government is from now on
nothing but a tax collector so the debt can be paid -- the IMF will
dictate all policy in every area. At such a time we will no longer
have Babylon to support us . And there we will be. No factories left.
No small farms -- the foreigners own the agribusiness. We have no
skills -- we have been in the service economy so long that we can’t
produce. Those who know how to produce are in rest homes. Sons have
not learned their fathers trade because their father have had no trade.
With all credit gone – with no money in circulation – all of the
organization and institutions that make our modern society will stop
functioning. The organic economy will die for want of blood in its
veins – the complex division of labor will not be possible because there
will not be purchasing power enough to sustain all of the interconnected
organs of production and service. With the means of producing plenty –
we will perish for want of the tokens with which we pay each other for
services, And most certainly, gold will not be able to replace the
credit money that is now gone.
And guess who the real heroes will be then. Guess who the most valuable
man will be when Credit Babylon falls. The most valuable man will
certainly not be the financial accountant or the corporate lawyer or the
stock jobber or the investment banker or the gold dealer -- the most
valuable man will be the Mexican peasant in the US. Because they alone
know how to build their own house, to live close to the land, to make
things grown, to get by with less. We will look to them for the way to
becoming self-sufficient again -- but of course without a money economy
an extended division of labor cannot exist -- an economy without
purchasing power is like a computer when there is no power of any kind
to operate it.
Gold is sterile. All it really is for is buying your way out of the
country after it has fallen -- as I have said before -- and for
outbidding your neighbor for the morsel of food that will either keep
your child or his child alive.
Gold is merely one step from barter – the final collapse of the modern
economy – where you have to find someone who has something you want and
who wants something that you have and don’t value as much as you do in
order to make a trade. Gold – when people have confidence that it will
be accepted – enables you to buy something from someone who doesn’t
want any of your possessions in return. He can accept your gold and
then go look for someone who does have something he wants and is likely
to accept the gold for it. But you can’t rebuild a country with gold.
Only credit builds a country -- and that is what has been stolen from
Economic collapse is when everyone is suddenly unable to provide for
themselves and there is no longer any money to keep the great systems of
production and provision operating. It is an atomic war without the
explosion and the radiation -- but in the end just as devastating.
remember the 1950s about survival after an atomic war “Panic in the Year
Zero” with Ray Miland and Frankie Avalon come to mind -- in which the
real problems that would be faced were never considered. When the
collapse comes you can have your gold and your guns -- but it will do
not good -- without domestic production and processing, without
imports so many score of millions will perish.
is madness to invest your money in gold against that hour – when you can
keep your dollars and spend them and work with the social creditors to
prevent the collapse -- to take away the credit power -- to create our
own purchasing power and distribute it among ourselves right now -- to
avert a collapse. People who listen to Beck and Celente and the other
gold sellers pretending to be your friend are throwing away the one
thing that can save them -- purchasing power with which to provide
reinforcement for the continuation of the operation the economy that
keeps us alive -- and which cannot be kept alive if the dollar
collapses and all that remains for to finance commerce is our individual
hoardings of gold. And of course not even our dollars can sustain the
economy – because we have been living on international credit and have
while we have been feeding and clothing ourselves with foreign products
paid for by second mortgage equity that is now gone and while were were
doing that our industrial base just crumbled away – even as the
financiers took our savings and our tax money going to pay the interest
on the national debt and used to it build productive capacity in China
so they could produce with labor of a few dollars a day rather than the
rate of wages in this society. Yes, under free trade where capital can
migrate and goods can flow without protectionism -- wages will
everywhere equalize -- we will be living on the real wage the Chinese
get -- except that we are no longer an industrious people – having been
corrupted by living bank credit attached to our assets and demanding our
payment of compound interest on top of the principal of the loan.
there was an honest politician who was also educated -- we might have
been warned -- we might have been lead out of this trap -- but we
were not. Our elite has accepted the rules -- because High Finance can
afford to pay off a few million traitors in order to take down a nation
of 300 million.
And yes, we have every right to repudiate all debt owed to
international organized crime -- just as the Greeks and the Irish have
that right. Just as the Iraqis had that right under their elected
leader Saddam Hussein who had closed the central bank and was attempting
to build his nation without the interference of international bankers.
Do you mean that our society is so broken that dealers cannot even
trade with metals any longer?
mean that if we reach the point where gold is the only money people will
accept – that a large fraction of the American population will die
because the economy that feeds us -- and even now it can’t feed all of
us because we have become dependent on debt-financed imports which will
no longer be forthcoming . If gold becomes the medium then we are dead
because the economy that keeps this large population alive cannot
operate on that little purchasing power - it can’t operate without the
flow of credit that keeps the Zeppelin in the air.
the collapse the gold will remain money -- but little people will not
be able to hold on to it. It will be taken by them rather than spent by
them. Only people with private armies will have gold. It will be a
return to feudalism -- gold will be for the aristocracy – we will be
the debt-slave serfs. But, yes, gold will still be honored -- aren’t
If we reach a point where the banks all have to close, and businesses
simply cannot do business any longer, then I'm not sure even most barter
commodities will be of any use. People may resort to looting and will
have no interest in gold. Before such a time, most gold hoarders will
have already sold their supplies, since they will perceive that they
need to get the value out of the gold while there's still time. That
point, I clearly see.
If we let the collapse happen people would barter to the end – except
in contexts when one party is in a position to take from the other with
reasonable impunity. But production will end. One again those to try
to revert to a productive peasant life growing food to feed themselves
and to trade for other items of need -- woolen socks and so forth --
will find that the bandits get it all -- and in come cases the bandits
will let the peasants live if they pay tribute in food or slave labor
-- and so the old middle ages return -- while the financial elites how
are now enjoying billions in real wealth -- and ownership of factories
around the world -- will be the gods of the planet. They won’t miss us
and they won’t write an honest history of what we were really like and
what we were really capable of when free of their depredations.
Larry: A great deal depends upon the speed
of the collapse, the intensity, and the government response. However,
before this happens, in all likelihood, there will be a time when the
gold has increased in value to be traded for what paper money is still
left, and those who were smart enough to invest in physical metals may
be holding the rest afloat.
I’m sorry, Larry. With the collapse of the US economy and the plight
we will be in without credit and with creditors thinking they have a
right to vacate the current occupants and resettle the US all over again
with their aristocracy firmly in charge from then on -- I can’t see
how you can be worrying about what advantage your gold hoard can get
you. My point restated: If you have reached the point where gold is
your only reliance then you are likely going to be dead soon and if you
live it will be as a slave -- it is a future not worth planning to
For Americans of the lower –loop who will not receive any consideration
from the money power now absolute masters of a bankrupt people with no
legal standing under the master’s rules of bankruptcy – we can’t allow
ourselves even to think of accepting that future. If the economy is
crushed and the creditors are moving in with their plans to do with this
country -- with giant estates of the rich and a sustainable servant
population to keep it smoothly running for them - are you going to be
going around with your gold trying to buy yourself a little freedom, a
Only a slave will prepare for living in that world. Every man and woman
of worth – of golden hearts and character – will put out all of their
effort, all of their dollars now to prevent this world enslavement from
And the consequences of collapse that I am painting are not fanciful.
After the fall of the Soviet Union millions died. Millions died in Iraq
when that country was placed under sanctions by Bush Sr and Bill Clinton
and Bush Jr. up to the invasion. People are starving and freezing right
now. Old people are dying – rest homes are killing old people and
concealing the fact. The worth of a human being is being forgotten in
the brutalization and desensitization that comes with hunger and
hopelessness. We are already in the collapse -- but not so far yet
that we cannot reverse it if we rebel against the criminal conspiracy
that has put us where we are.
Repudiate. We owe these criminals nothing. They owe us everything in
restitution for the wars and depressions and other crises they have
arranged. We can provide our own debt-free purchasing power that will
revive our production, or existence as people who can provide for
themselves. Who can live within their means while always expanding
their means through good management and the banishing of the speculators
and credit monopolist bankers. [I differentiate between speculators
and entrepreneurs -- the entrepreneur leads the production sector --
the speculator is a product of a dysfunctional financial sector where
the power to create money and a monopoly of credit has bred the most
ruthless corruption and counter-productive exploitation.
Those individuals can just as easily turn around and blame people like
you for convincing people not to buy the metals when there was
And I will answer them telling them that they brought the calamity on
themselves by giving up the god of economic cooperation and trust that
we can all work it out if they get behind reforming the economy that is
keeping us alive. You might as well drain your family members of all
their blood and buy gold with it, as take the precious dollars for want
of which we are dying, so you can buy some accommodation for yourself
after the return of the stone age. If you want to save your family
then save this economy in the only way it can be saved -- with
repudiation, debt-free fiat currency and social credit. We have to
save the dollar -- the purchasing power distributed to citizens in this
country -- and do so by breaking all the taboos of banking and
finance -- we must repudiate, take back what has been stolen from us by
fraud. We are dying for want of purchasing power -- and our starvation
of he means of payment is part of a deliberate plan by a ruthless
combination of foreign enemies and domestic sell-outs. We have to
fight now – to avoid the collapse and the post-collapse world that gold
will not make any more tolerable. If after the collapse someone comes
up to me and says: “Richard, I could have bought gold that would have
enabled me to feed my family etc. if only you populists hadn’t talked
me out of listening to the libertarians and conservatives who said to
buy gold -- and if only you hadn't talked me into buying from my
neighbors to keep them in business and investing in domestic production
-- I would have gold to pay people to take food out of other peoples
mouths so I can survive. “ Then I will tell them. “Your problem is
that you did not listen to all that I told you. You needed to get
together with your neighbors and with the victims of criminal finance
all over the country and world and repudiated the debt slavery system -
and led in the banishing of the money changers from government and media
and commerce -- and having the people simply provide for free the
purchasing power that for want of which the nation perished. Things did
not have to come to this. You could have been a good citizen and stood
with your neighbors against a ruthless enemy seeking your ruin -- but
instead you listened to Glenn Beck and Celente who told you that the
world was doomed and it would be very man for himself and that only gold
would have influence on people in the future. Well, sir, here is the
very hell you chose for yourself. The very consequence of your
selfishness and greed – your wish to gain at the expense of your
neighbor through the worship of the golden idol.
Larry: The vast majority of the people out
there can afford to buy a silver dime, for a dollar. Most of them don't
care, and by some power beyond my comprehension, they end up able to
afford cigarettes and alcohol! I cannot tell you how many times I've
heard, "I'm broke!" while they're smoking a cigarette. The pack of
cancer-sticks ran about three silver dimes.
It exasperates me that you are completely by-passing all discussion of
whether there are means of averting the catastrophe in order to make
sure that someone has a few silver dimes --when all the gold coins and
silver coin and bullion in the country are not enough to keep the
engines of our national life support functioning. Certainly, the
outer-loop elites don’t want us to change the rules of the game and hand
out fresh purchasing power to keep us little people of the household and
domestic production sectors “in the game.” The moneyed elites have
built their portfolios to profit from our catastrophe – and not just
with gold -- they are selling gold too fools who listen to Beck/Celente
– and using the money to buy the real wealth – the non-financial
tangible wealth – of this country -- our lands and houses and
businesses and resources and patents and copyrights and inventions and
organizations and ports and roads and airports. They are taking it all
by cheating -- by manipulating money and credit over which they never
should have had any control!!!!! And we can save ourselves if we get
together and stop them. But your concern is that after our nation and
world are destroyed that you will have enough gold to buy – not produce
or grow -- food out of other peoples mouths.
Let me summarize: If we let the collapse happen and hedge against it by
buying gold, millions will die and those who survive will be either an
aristocracy with the power of gods, and a servant people who will exist
only at the sufferance of their absolute masters. If that is the world
you want to have some gold in -- let me give you this advice -- spend
your money not on gold, but on the professional training of a
successful prostitute on the best way to lick an ass – because that is
going to be the only coin that buys anything for the surviving lower
classes in the post-United States of America world that is on the way
unless we prevent it with the measures I am advocating.
Can you imagine what would happen if all the silver and gold gave
smokers the same kick as nicotine . . . and they all had silver the way
they now have the tobacco?! Can you imagine all that silver being
pumped back into circulation?
have been used as money in prison camps and in occupied countries after
wars. But I don’t see your point.
Now, you can tell me they'd hoard it, but I see nothing wrong with
that. Yes, I have sold some of my gold and silver without a
collapsing economy. it was because my own economy was
owning gold an investment? Does it add to production? Does it keep
someone employed. Does it reward an entrepreneur who has organized
production to provide things for consumers? No. It does just the
opposite. To get that gold you had to send your dollars out of the
country where they will do no American any good – where they will be
used to borrow a foreclosed house to turn it into a rental property
where the rent will not be going to a foreign landlord -- who will use
the rent to buy yet more houses etc -- and the lower-loop Americans
will not have any purchasing power to bid agains them. What you call
the collapse of your “personal economy” is exactly what is happening to
everybody below the elite upper loop of international billionaires.
Don’t you see there was a disconnect between you investing in gold at
the behest of Celente and Beck on one side and the failure of the
economy to provide you with a sustainable livelihood on the other. You
save for the “Panic in the Year Zero”, while neglecting to wisely manage
and invest and support the world that provides for you and for everyone
else. We can avert disaster – but you are convinced the disaster can’t
be averted and just want to make sure that you have some gold and silver
coins so you can buy snacks as you witness the unfolding of the end of
What about buying some populist reform to prevent the catastrophe -- in
fact to reverse the catastrophe?
Don’t you want to see the country saved – the people lifted out of this
misery? Or do you just want to outbid them for the remaining bites of
food with the gold you have hoarded?
But the primary issue is, while you're working on a social credit
system, which may never happen, if you buy gold, you'll have something
solid that will work throughout nearly any economic crisis. It
will hold its value most of the time, and might be used for
certain transactions. It's real and here right now, to protect your
future for most scenarios.
have a different God upon which to rely -- and different obligations to
my fellow man than to ensure I have the means of controlling them later
on with a hoard of gold. My protection is my bond of cooperation and
mutual help and shared intelligence and good will of my fellow man -- of
my fellow common man -- because, by the grace of good, good men have
devised a system that can very easily save us from the collapse that
Beck and Celente and those who hold their leashes have bet on. Social
Credit promises the immediate deliverance of all people from the
worshipers of gold above mankind and mankind’s vision of all men as
brothers looking out for each other, saving people from unnecessary
hardship. I won’t get into religion here – but that comes into play
too. (I am a Mormon, a Mormon who disagrees and opposes the views of
Glenn Beck and Mitt Romney.)
You tell me you want to prevent collapses, and of course, i totally
agree with you. Go ahead and fight for social credit money , , , and if
it fails to ever be implemented, what have you got left?
If I fail to save my family, and neighbors and my community and my
country with all of the good people I know are worthy of a better life
and better prospects -- then gold and the things gold will buy won’t
mean anything to me. The only thing I would be interested in would be
how mankind could possibly free themselves from this tyranny -- but I
know I will be too old and shaken and broken to be able to contribute
anything towards that end. I am more like the Captain who goes down
with his ship after doing everything in my power to keep it afloat. Let
others worry about whether there are extra rations on the lifeboats --
because I know that there aren’t enough lifeboats to save even half of
In my situation, as long as gold is being traded, I will have the
ability to help those less fortunate than I . . . and, as the case may
be, those too stupid to have bought their own stash when they could
When you get to that situation, just stand up on a big stump and yell
to all the “stupids” -- “If only you stupids had bought gold like me
we would all be feasting now? But too bad for you. I am eating because
I have gold and you are starving because you didn’t buy gold.” But tell
me Larry, -- how could it be that if those people took their wages and
instead of buying goods and services with it bought gold – how doing
that would put more food on tables than if they had spent the dollars on
food keeping a farm going, or on local products that would have kept
local production going? If they bought gold too then there would have
been even less food in the country for that gold to bid against. There
would be gold inflation. Just like paper inflation. But don’ t worry.
There is never enough gold to meet the needs of a nation. Only a
minority of the powerful. Gold is how they control the world.
And that is, to an extent, already happening to me. Most of the people
I'm currently helping will not buy even one silver dime. Their brains
cannot comprehend long-term value. In the coming years, if my own stash
increases a thousandfold, I'm sure they still will not buy any of it,
and nor will you. You will be out there screaming about social credit
money, and how rotten the bankers are . . . and perhaps wondering if I
can cash in a gold coin to keep food on your table. Thank you for
writing to me and working my brain cells. We are both in the upper
one-percent crust of patriots who actually care about this matter, and
would like to do something sensible about it.
You draw a picture of a world where there are winners who trusted in
gold and losers who did not. You envision of world of scarcity – where
gold can pry the scarce goods from people -- zero sum game where gold
determines who gets the remaining crumbs. That is hell. I will not
spend my time thinking of how I can get an edge over other people in
hell. I will put all my effort in saving people from this hell that is
the logical consequence of usury and fractional reserve banking and the
private monopolization of credit.
This coming December 15th, I will be picking up some repaired clothing,
and the woman doing the work was offered cash, silver, or a seminar in
the money problem. She has roughly two weeks to make up her mind, and I
gave her a promotional sheet on the seminar. Now, I have a feeling
she's going to want cash, but what if she said to me, "I want silver,
and I'm going to start selling eggs here, because you told me you wanted
to buy some. I will accept your silver for the eggs. They will be more
expensive, and you'll be paying for what I already bought at the store,
but you'll be paying with silver."
Now, if she did this, I would have a choice - either pay at the store
with dollars, or pay her with silver. If I use silver, I will be
putting silver back into circulation, and end up buying more of it.
Even though the banking class may end up with most of the dollars, We
the People will have one more silver dime in circulation. If she sells
more products that I know I will want, she'll get more silver, and I
will buy more. Now, she might tell me what she was planning to buy, and
that she'd rather go silver with me. Ok, now we're both in silver-based
businesses. To a very small extent, we've started a new country - one
with a silver standard. Population: so far, only two. Employment
If a third person comes in, we will have the productive capacity of
three, instead of only two. And the silver will be used among us in
trading - never going to anyone outside the "country." If we want to
trade with the outside world, we have to go back to dollars, but since
our "country" is using silver, no one is hoarding it. My dealer is
having a field day, because he's selling more and more silver to us, to
expand our economy. And We the Three People are fully employed, and
prospering. One complained once about the changing market value of
silver, but the advantages were outweighing it . . . such as total
privacy, and that we could do anything we wanted. it was an attractive
"country" for several others who were broke, and wanted to get a
silver-based job, after they were turned down by the store up the
street. I'm going to stop the story here, but you get the idea, don't
you? Unlike your social credit money, the silver would not require any
major actions by government, or other gargantuan institutions that never
listen to poor people. It is limited only by our own willingness to get
the silver, and put it into action. And you can forget about any kind
of "economic collapse," since people like us were running the money
system itself. Now, if the people wanted to use social credit money
instead of silver, how would we determine how much each piece of money
was actually worth? In the case of silver, we would have the dealer's
reaction for our reference point. We might not always use it, but it
would have some sort of home plate.
Okay, that's it for now.
between Larry and Richard (most recent first)
. . . of course dollars leave the domestic economy when you buy gold.
Larry (2): My dollars went to the dealer,
who often, he told me, buys at trade shows, from other dealers. The
gold goes to the customers, and away from the foreign bankers. The
dollar devalues, so the foreigners, as you tell me, will end up with
losing value in the paper money. But the dealers are making a profit,
and spending the bucks both on more gold, and other commodities here in
America. They are all in the business of putting the metals back into
the hand of Americans. Let's say the the foreigners are making money at
this game - what of it, as long as the real commodity money is coming
back to us, for future usage? Do you have a problem with us having
precious metals, even if it's with someone else's short-term profit?
If you have a problem with them buying houses through an illegal,
unconstitutional foreclosures, that is a whole separate topic. That has
nothing to do with buying gold.
Richard (2): Yes, Larry, I agree. The gold the dealer sells does go to
the people why buy it and away from the the international speculators
who owned it. I am saying this too. The point is that the people who
buy the gold are getting a metal that will not circulate for buying and
selling until after the economy collapses. What I was saying is that we
can prevent the collapse if we reverse the deflation in the lower-loop
economy where households and domestic production conduct exchanges with
M1 money supply (checkbook money). The money that you give to the gold
dealer goes to the people who supply the gold -- the international
market from which your dealer buys at spot. Your dealer has a spread
upon which he makes money for being a middleman in this transaction
between Americans who let Paul and Beck and Celente do their thinking
for them and the international sellers. The money earned by the dealer
in the price he charges over spot may stay in the country -- but the
dollars equal to the spot price leave the country or -- which amounts to
the same thing -- goes to Americans who operate in the elite loop of
lending and speculating -- neither of which are going to use that money
to buy US goods or invest in new domestic companies that will produce
American goods and hire American workers. Perhaps this will clarify the
issue: Just as most US dollars are held by foreigners and
"internationalist" American elite who operate in the outer-loop - so the
most of the gold is held by this "exogenous" moneyed power.
The elite have created a lower-loop depression by design -- they do not
want to stimulate it by restoring dollar purchasing power to the lower
loop. The foreign-held dollar deposits are not coming to America. They
are waiting for us to collapse, loose everything, and be killed off in
war, revolution, man-made weather and plague disasters, and IMF and
other creditor-ordered draining through taxation and give-away
privatization sucking up every pocket of wealth that we have. Now if
you and your family live in the upper loop and don't associate with the
"grapes of wrath" crowd down here -- they do not view this transition
as much of an issue. All of the American elite have that attitude.
They look at boom numbers of the upper loop economic performance and
combine them with the bust of the lower loop -- and the average of the
two aggregates conceal the too-great wealth going to the financial
sector and international corporations and the too-little-and
ever-diminishing means of life of households and domestic production.
This average is the GNP -- one number for value of output of the entire
country (including financial services output) and so the lower-loop
depression is hidden -- as when one man robs another man the sum of
both their assets remains unchanged and that sum is all that is
reported. Now, as I was saying, the money going to the upper-loop gold
sellers is life-blood money drained from the veins of American
commerce. The upper-loop gold sellers have not thought of taking those
dollars and making easy credit available to revive the domestic
economy. In the same way those who got the bailout don't want to invest
in revitalizing an self-sufficient domestic economy. In the same way
too, those upper-loop well-off who get an extension on their tax breaks
also do not put any of that money into the domestic loop. As likely as
not they invest it in foreign industrial growth that will take yet more
of our jobs etc. even as we have no money from exporting with which to
buy this foreign production and even though our credit is all burned up
to keep our families feed with a credit card or the government's credit
All of the above has been inflicted upon us through the robbing of
purchasing power by usury in one form or another. When you buy gold you
are banishing the dollars you had. Those dollars, if there were enough
of them, could save the American people. The gold cannot save anyone
-- it only ensures that when the nation collapses you will be able to
bid food out of the mouths of your starving neighbors -- what I call
can-eat-while-you-starve-brand-of-patriotism." (Why not try asking Beck
or Celente or Ron Paul if he thinks the nation would be better off if
the entire nation took all of their spare cash above what they need for
food, gas and rent and bought gold with it. Ask him who that would help
the economy? Ask him how that would make the country better of in the
collapse it would most certainly instantly precipitate.
Richard (1) . . . the super rich who own the gold . . .
Larry (2): Important correction here.
Please note: The super-rich do not own the gold! They only own their
own gold! Well, they sure don't own my gold! They don't
own my dealer's gold! The super-rich might be able to affect the
markets for a short time. They profit, I believe, from temporary
changes in the prices of gold, which I believe they can affect. But
they do not own other people's gold . . . and the more we all buy, the
less the super-rich will be able to affect the markets.
Richard (2): They control your gold in a great many waves. As I said,
right now they have their salesmen -- Beck, Celente, the Ludwig von
Mises institute and all the gold sellers -- pushing the doom scenario.
The gold dealers back all of the doom sellers -- they are sponsoring
disaster talk. They have the power of reversing that whenever they
choose. They also can create any crisis they want -- and they can
create a crisis and demand that citizens turn over their gold as
happened in 1933. Or they can just wait until the mobs come to your
house and take all of your gold and the food you bought with the gold.
They can always get their gold back -- wedding bands, gold in teeth,
gold buried under the shed, etc. after their war on the middle class is
finally all the way finished. Do your really expect to use your gold to
hire starving street gangs to escort you to safety and to protect the
food your gold has outbid from their families' mouths?
The time to save you skin is now with dollars -- with reform that puts
lots of dollars in the hands of households so that they can go out and
buy creating the effective demand that will put people to work, that
will get us converting the nations resources into goods and services.
Gold in your vault cannot do that -- and it will not be able to do that
after the collapse if you continue to let the collapse happen.
Your statement that "the more gold we buy the less the super rich will
be able to affect the markets" - is the opposite of the truth. The
command of dollars is what effects markets in the economy that matters
to you and me -- the lower loop economy. Gold is for international
transactions and as small compact marketable asset you can run away with
to get out of the country when the predators have brought it down for
plunder. In your mind the country is already destroyed and you are just
thinking of how you can outlive your neighbors, who you can eat while
they starve. Some great neighbor and countryman you are! What you
should be down is telling everyone to shove that gold back up the
Rothschilds' ass and start saving the dollar by the American household
sector and the domestic production sector taking back the power to make
new money and to expand or contact credit from the hostile and
destructive and criminal financial sector which now controls government
and corporations and everything else through the debt system.
Larry: Moreover, since I have yet to see
the price of a whole ounce of gold going back down to $35 an ounce, the
super-rich obviously cannot distort the market more than a tiny fraction
of what they might. Therefore, I remain of the opinion that every
American needs to have positions in at least gold and silver. I
personally have a love for rhodium as well, given that it can be divided
without melting. It comes as a powder, and if only it offered more ease
in trading, I would have already bought some.
Richard: I assure you that you are wrong. When the drain of purchasing
power from the lower loop is complete and the middle and lower classes
that are still alive are completely dispossed of everything they once
owned -- then a new money will be introduced and the gold will become
worthless, if it is not already confiscated. The new currency will be
available by trading in dollars for it. And guess who will have the
dollars? (Hint: Not the people who trusted Glenn Beck and Gerald
Richard (previous): . . . the fact that the household originates the
new money instead of a bank creating a deposit for a borrowing
corporation will . . .
Larry: Hold on a second here. Where did
Lincoln's Greenbacks originate? The Treasury dept? Or "households" as
you put it. Lincoln threw the money into circulation for the war
effort. People accepted it . . . but it wasn't a long-term project
carried into peacetime.
Richard: The Civil War was financed by bonds but also by the printing
press with fiat greenbacks what did not originate in a Rothschild loan.
This is the kind of money I favor. There is no need to borrow from the
Rothschilds to have a currency -- the North just prints up the currency,
make it legal tender to pay debts and taxes, then spends it into
circulation to pay war expenses. And yes, the greenbacks were continued
after the Civil War. It was one of the big issues all the way until
1913 and the passage of the Federal Reserve Act -- along with the issue
of minting free silver. The gold standard and the Robber Barons
actually won. And so we lived in misery, with big depressions in that
era -- only relieved by some gold discoveries. But the greenback
funded the civil war and it could have funded the building of the west
-- but instead Rockefeller-Morgan-Harriman and others exerted monopoly
power in finance and railroad and other corporate trusts to drain the
wealth and life of the nation to fatten Wall Street and the City of
Yes, you are right -- Lincoln did not have the new greenback originate
in the hands of families in the household sector -- that is what I am
proposing (taking the idea from C. H. Douglas and the scattering of his
followers in Canada, Australia and New Zealand.) Just having all new
money created debt-free is not going to cure the problem of dysfunction
stemming from the financial sector dictating who will be first spender.
The financial sector's job is to gather the small savings of people and
pay them a small amount of interest -- and bundling up those savings and
lending them out to businesses to want to produce on a large enough
scale to make a profit selling something householders find to be worth
the price. That honest function does not qualify them to be the ones
who create new money "out of thin air" and then lend it out -- insisting
on your house or car as collateral and then charging you interest until
the day comes when you pay back the principal and remaining balance. It
was a very corrupt deal that set up that arrangement.
New money must be created at no cost by the treasury and it must be made
to originate in the hands of the citizens for their own household
expenditure. That way households direct national production. If people
want public goods, supplied by government, then let them vote for it and
pay for it with taxes -- not with big loans from international lenders
who charge a big interest rate and then take over the whole country when
the sabotage the economy making it impossible for you to keep up your
Larry: Lincoln threw the money into
circulation for the war effort. People accepted it . . . but it wasn't
a long-term project carried into peacetime. Not enough time was
allowed for this, and to watch for devaluation of the paper. So, I am
at a loss here to compare the Greenbacks to gold. Now, if it had
worked, your case would have been demonstrated. Actually, I'm more in
favor of ledger money than paper, since it can be transported without
carrying it. You'll never lose it as you might lose paper. This ledger
money would, naturally, be run by citizens, not banks. And without
debt. But implementing it would involve a lot of trust and integrity.
And how do you place values on different types of work? With gold and
silver, you have an objective market value placed on all of it. While
other systems might fail or get corrupted, gold really "hangs in
Richard: Fiat money has been tested in many periods in the history of
many countries besides the US. I've done a survey more extensive than I
am sure 90 percent of people who teach economics in this country have
undertaken -- and with better sources. But I agree with you that
Greenbacks can be mere electronic data entries. The social credit
payment can simply go on a card -- as can a tax refund or a food stamp
payment. The important thing is that the increase in your account is
not the result of you or anyone else going into debt. Instead of
Goldman-Sachs creating a new spending account for a defense contractor
or other "American" multinational corporation -- the Treasury
department will create the new money in the hands of the people -- who
will spend it on the well-being and development of their families -- so
that the entrepreneur will once again, in order to make money, have to
learn to figure out what the American housewife wants.
It's so simple to me -- and I have a mind that takes in a lot of
complexity when complexity is there. I have seen through the complexity
and found that the real solution is this very simple one. I am a
nobody -- but Kitson, Soddy, Douglas and the rest I have consulted are
for more brilliant than any of the economists who have become famous and
celebrated in my lifetime (Friedman, Galbraith, Samuelson, Stiglitz,
Summers etc.) (Summers is a good mathematician, but he is where he is
because his is one of the most able criminal minds -- as a factual
biography of the man reveals.)
Well, it looks like I have rambled a lot and got too political.
Nevertheless, I hope you will write again. You are the only gold man I
know with the sand to actually stand up for what he believes in. You
have my respect for that, Larry.
Any kind of non-debt currency is impractical right now, unless
citizens generate their own paper barter instruments.
Richard: Non-debt currency "right now" a few years ago could have
prevented the entire collapse. The analogy of a bubble people often use
is false. Respiration is a better one. What is breathed in as loans is
exhaled as principal plus interest. A thousand dollar loan from the
financial sector at 18 percent withdraws a thousand in interest after
four years and two thousand in five. The money multiplier begins
working in reverse upon each interest payment. Only free and clear fiat
money originating in the hands of households can stop the ongoing spiral
of collapse brought on by more lower-loop (M1) credit contraction --
where the liquidation of debt is destroying so much purchasing power
leading to so much deflation that the debt burden actually increases in
the liquidation process. In the end there is more multiplied
contraction than expansion -- since both repayment of principal and
payment of interest are subject to the money multiplier in monetary
contraction. (Remember - the Bernanke helicopter inflation is going to
the elite loop at the top -- not to the domestic economy.) Only
non-debt currency can save the day. So the move is practical.
As for the claim that it is impractical "right now" -- it is impossible
to do right now because the institutions to administer it do not exist
-- but it is most practical to begin creating the legal structure and
agencies to replace the failed system with the workable one. That is
the only practical thing we can be doing right now.
Also, "generating their own paper barter instruments" -- bills
collateralized by our wealth -- cannot sustain a complex economy. A lot
of banks issuing their own currencies must have a metallic standard for
inter-currency transactions. This of course would give the gold
monopolist total control over the banks as in the early 1800s.
The banks backed by gold would insist upon specie payment bankrupting
Western banks which were trying to sustain western development with
fiat. Wildcat banks would create with fiat and then gold banks would
foreclose on all of it and get control by forcing the wildcats to pay in
specie. The banks with easy access to gold - did not compete with the
western banks, they farmed them and they farmed those the wildcats lent
to. In my opinion, we need a national fiat currency.
Larry: If I printed
up a non-debt barter instrument, would Eastman take it from me in return
for something I wanted from him?
Richard: He would take fiat if it was made legal tender. Fiat is
established when it can be used to pay taxes (which everyone knows are,
with death, inevitable). A promise to pay in gold or other wealth to the
bearer by a bank is not necessary for a dollar to have purchasing power.
I am not sure why Larry inserts the word "barter". All money as medium
of exchange facilitates buying and selling -- makes barter - with the
requirement of a double coincidence of wants - unnecessary. Fiat money
is a generalized reinforcer in the language of experimental psychology
-- a token which people are conditioned by reinforcement under the
system to accept. A hundred dollar bill doesn't have to be backed by my
dining room set or my promise to work 10 hours for it to be acceptable
as money -- what matters is what it will buy -- not what backs it if
anything. Currency needs no backing -- it merely needs scarcity and
acceptance. Legal tender makes it acceptable to some and the
acceptability by some makes it acceptable to all.
If you have a "barter instrument' intermediary, then you do not have
barter -- you have a money transaction.
Larry: When was the
last time the bankers tried to destroy the value of gold? They tried to
confiscate it back in 1933 (and succeeded to some extent), but they
never actually jailed or fined anybody, nor can they crash the value.
Richard: Bankers are causing the price of gold to go up or go down all
the time. There is monopoly control in the gold market. If there is
such a thing as the intrinsic value of gold -- I say there is not --
but if there is, then certainly gold has never traded at this value --
the intrinsic value is not an equilibrium price towards which gold
tends. Gold is speculative, and too much relied on as a hedge against
disaster. In fact it is the world thing to spend money on gold when you
see impending financial catastrophe. When financial collapse is being
inflicted upon us -- the thing to do is buy real assets, seed, machines,
staple resources as the best investment to weather the storm. When
people hoard gold in a panic they are contracting actual money in supply
even more -- causing more contraction of money and credit when money and
credit are most needed to keep the economy alive.
Now Roosevelt did not try to destroy the value of gold, he tried to
destroy the purchasing power of the dollar against gold-- while at the
same time taking gold out of the hands of Americans so the government
could have the use of it as collateral in international borrowing. That
amounts to Roosevelt increasing the value of gold held by his rich
friends in Swiss Banks etc. against the dollar. Roosevelt was robbing
the savings of Americans held in dollar denominated deposits. Of course
he did this to help the City, because in 1925 Churchill went back on the
gold standard -- destroying the beautiful fiat system devised to win
World War One -- and he put the pound back at the old pre-WWI weight in
gold. He did this so his friends at the City who now would be collecting
on the war bonds they owned, would be collecting in gold and at the old
pre-war exchange rate. This was a crushing burden upon the British
commoners who had their debt burden greatly expanded by this act. And
of course the currency markets responded to the over-valued pound by
cashing in the pound for gold and using the gold to buy dollars --
giving the US a dollar surplus in the late 1920's which was corrected by
the stock market crashes of Oct 1929 where margin calls contracted the
currency and caused deflation. This was an even stronger dollar and,
thus, a bigger burden for debtors and boon for creditors. This
deflation brought the dollar in line with the pound -- and so the US
commoners suffered the consequences in terms of reduced purchasing power
being earned by production leading to the depression.
Larry: He is
telling us not to rely on precious metals. Since when were such metals
subject to the same problems as paper money, as long as they weren't
Richard: They are subject to different problems. Go to the store and
try to pay with gold. Gold is not the medium of exchange that sustains
the lower loop. The purpose of gold in most portfolios is as a hedge
against lost purchasing power of the dollar. The M1 dollar is in
deflation in the lower loop -- despite the "quantatative easing" of
money from the fed being pumped to wall street sellers of securities in
open market operations at the NY Fed.
Gold prices can be manipulated. Now we have a gold bubble. The gold
monopolists (colluding oligopoly) are selling their gold to the rubes.
In other words the gold monopolists are buying dollars and selling gold
-- and getting Gerald Celente, and Rand Paul and Glenn Beck to hawk gold
for them -- in other words getting them to hoard purchasing power in
the very un-liquid form of gold -- which hording adds to deflation and
deflation adds to the collapse of the US economy. (Remember, we are now
experiencing severe deflation on the lower loop and tremendous dollar
purchasing power on the international loop where the creditor class
invests, borrows, lends, speculates and invent derivatives instruments
for every conceivable need.) The hoarding by buying gold is the last
things Americans should be doing if they want to save their economy and
country from collapse and hostile takeover -- converting the nation to
rent-slaves, debt-slaves, tax-slaves of foreign absentee landlords --
with all the rent going to the elite upper loop and draining the lower
loop of yet more purchasing power.
Larry: True, the
metals will fluctuate in value per market demand, and there is some
manipulation of that market. But the metals were of value even before
the industrial revolution.
Richard: Glad we agree on the most important point. Gold prices are
manipulated. Now as to gold prior to the industrial revolution --
it was of value and the world was dependent upon it for commerce. Gold
always tended towards deflation -- there was always a chronic shortage
of purchasing power -- which kept those who had it in power -- the kings
who taxed and the usurers who lent money to knights for armor and
supplies to capture Jerusalem or Constantinople. Only big discoveries
of sliver and gold in the new world -- silver that would be accepted in
trade by China for example -- increased commerce and created more middle
class wealth. But that is because the metallic system was all anyone
knew. Paper money was simply warehouse receipts for gold. FIAT MONEY
WAS NOT INVENTED, nor the means of making fiat not easily
counterfeited. Even the banks of Amsterdam had 100 percent gold reserve
backing for their notes.
With the Bank of England came fractional reserve banking -- a bank
lending more than it has in its vaults and creating unbacked paper as a
privilege granted by the King.
But gold has always been a deflationary constraint, not a neutral
currency that would expand with the production of goods etc.
That gold "keeps its value" as all other money becomes worthless --
simply means that we revert, not to the commodity currency, but the
metal that people have been told is the only safety in bad times.
I am merely saying that if you bought tools, and seed, and water
purification equipment, and tools and machines that build tools etc. you
would have done a lot more to maintain the standard of living of your
community in a collapse than if everyone in the community took all their
money and bought gold coins and kept them hoarded for buying food and
shelter in the end of the world etc.
The security of gold is for survivalists -- not for people trying to
prevent economic collapse. In fact people who have invested in gold are
selling their country short and are betting on collapse and are hoping
that when the collapse comes their gold will buy food from the mouths of
others who don't have gold. Some market system that is!!!
The gold hoarder starts to reap his rewards just about at the point
where the altruist who would save the situation is defeated by the ruin
that the wish fulfillment of "How you can profit from the coming
collapse" crowd -- save-you-family-by-buying gold brought about.
Suppose everyone took all of their money and bought all the gold they
could with it -- instead of using the money to buy from local producers
to keep the economy going?
Larry: This is a
remarkable fact, when many claim that we need both commercial and
industrial applications for the metals for them to retain their value.
Gold and silver were both used as money, and considered valuable, in
Biblical times. Can't we say, based on historical performance, there
is virtually no chance of any kind, that these metals can ever fail us
for effective use as money (being both portable and holding their
Richard: Gold is for the merchant who can grab it and get out of town,
knowing it will be accepted wherever he goes with some worthwhile level
of purchasing power. Larry is speaking of this undoubted virtue of the
metals. The peasant is the man who grows food and he sells his produce
in barter or for coin. When coin disappears he operates with barter,
informal barter credit and charity and maybe starvation.
For the masses gold is no refuge -- even in Biblical times. Read the
book of Ezekiel -- how gold becomes worthless in war and famine. How
can this be? Simple. Gold is not really wealth. It can command wealth
under given market conditions. And of course the first thing people
look for after guns and food when they raid a house is one's hoard of
gold. Metal detectors make gold easy to locate in their hiding places.
And "intrinsic value" of gold will mean little when gold coin must be
against gold coin for scarce bread. A chicken or a cow will hold their
value in barter for grain in a famine, much more than will sterile and
Larry: Now, the
last question for Eastman and anyone else who puts down gold: Suppose I
want to pay you for something that you want to sell. Which do you want
from me? Gold, or a debt-free barter instrument made out of paper, that
I've run off my inkjet printer?
Richard: That depends on the price of gold in terms of the fiat money
on the markets I utilize. If you ran the money off on your inkjet
printer chances are the money is not legal tender -- which means that
your money is straw rather than paper.
I oppose local currencies as insufficient to sustain a complex society
like ours. I have recommended state and local governments issuing their
own scrip and making that scrip legal tender with which taxes can be
paid. But this is for after a collapse. This is to restart
civilization after the economy is reduced to a gold standard and all of
the gold is up in the hands of a new feudal aristocracy and all credit
is gold based. Civilization under these circumstances could only be
restarted with the creation of fiat currency that could create the
demand that would allow new investment that would actually be profitable
because of sufficient demand. etc.
Fiat is appropriate for sustaining the production and high levels of
consumption of a commonwealth. Gold is appropriate for bringing
deflation on a nation and bringing it to ruin, and giving power to those
who control its supply and lend it out at interest. Gold is
master/slave, effecting redistribution of wealth. Fiat is purchasing
power that brings prosperity, competition and enterprise. And it is
free from collapsing as long as fiat is not made payable in gold --
which gives the gold monopolist power to contract the fiat currency at
will. Inflation does not cause recession. Debt financed inflation that
is afterward eaten up by interest payment on top of repayment of
principal is what causes recession. Collapse is not caused by
mal-investment made in the inflationary phase of a business cycle --
rather recession is caused with interest payments catch up with loan
injections and deflation sets in. The deflation causes recession and
then wars or other government borrowing is resorted to to attempt to
stimulate or reinflate the economy -- but the seeds of the next
inflation are sown by the same act -- and in the end the creditor gets
the interest, the principal and, in foreclosure, the assets themselves.
This system was perfected by the Bank of England as a gold system.(We
also now have it here with the Federal Reserve Bank Act of 1913. The
Bank of France and the German Reichsbank are similarly chartered through
intrigue and bribery. dsk)
Gold causes recessions and works against debtors to the advantage of
creditors. Fiat under a social credit system ends recessions and
distributes new money evenly among households rather than at the
discretion of a banking elite not really mindful of the public good.
Social Creditors have the means of pulling the economy out of its tail
spin. The social credit solution will be viewed negatively by those
looking forward to dominating the world economy through an international
gold system where they control the gold supply and can set its price.
It is altogether reasonable for the creditor class to want a gold system
and a collapse of fiat -- as long as the ruin and misery of the masses
is not a real concern to them.
I hope you will undertake your own examination of the social credit as a
means of ending recessions and the domination of the financial sector
over the household and productive sectors, which domination gold always
is Fiat Money From The People, To The
People and For
The People So the Market and Profit System Serve Us Instead
of Interest, Monopoly and Rent
There is no place for the Rothschild's who get between buyer and seller,
between entrepreneur and manager and labor and insist that before those
people can cooperate to meet each others needs they have to sign an
agreement hiring money -- the market signal tokens -- on a compound
interest arrangement -- with the Rothschilds having the power to change
the terms of the contract -- making the burden of debt on the borrower
bigger -- simply by allowing the system's built in tendency to
deflation and recession to run its course - so Rothschild can take
ownership of all the collateral, all the foreclosed properties and
convert them into rental properties.
Among the thinkers who have contributed to the solution are those named
in the gallery of pictures below.
From Kitson I learned that the gold standard is
deflation and slavery to the gold monopolists and that it doesn't cure
depressions but rather causes them and and makes the cure all but
impossible. Kitson's solution of course was the nationalization of
From Hobson I learned that when wealth is not distributed to the
household and productive sectors but stays with the financier
speculators the result is insufficient demand in domestic markets and
therefore a drive to "invest" abroad, which ends up being imperialism
-- including the funding of revolutions, the provoking of wars, the
plundering of resources -- and yes, what goes around comes around, the
US is now itself being treated as a "developing country," that is as
just another victim of imperialism.
From Douglas we learn that the productive sector pays for production
incomes from which is drained as interest a portion of the payout that
does not go to households and government and from there to buy the
product that has been produced. (This ties in with Hobson, above.) To
produce production factors must be paid and financing (Rothschild,
Goldman-Sachs, Rockefeller etc.) must be paid -- and financiers are not
using the earned interest either to buy domestic economy production or
to invest in domestic economy productive capacity -- allowing the
deflation to wreak havoc on the lower loop, while the cosmopolitan loop
hoards the money and watches it grow in value as deflation proceeds
apace in the domestic economy. In the bankruptcy of the nation the the
Rothschild-Rockefeller interests then dip into their dollar hoard and
buy up the land and all of the improvements on the land -- homes,
factories, airports, timber land, farmland -- until along side debt
slavery there grows rent slavery and monopoly slavery (monopoly slavery
because all of the competition is bankrupted and only the
Rothschild-Rockefeller oligopolies in collusion to share big revenue
from monopoly prices. [This is of course my reading of Douglas and my
reading between the lines of Douglas.] And of course Douglas is the
great provider of the solution -- the ending of the power of the
Financial Sector to create new money, to contract and expand the amount
of loans outstanding at will thereby bringing on relative booms (as long
as they choose to expand credit) so we build more houses etc. followed
by a switch back to normal deflationary mode, so that all of the housing
produced and sold is taken back in foreclosure and turned into rental
homes etc. Instead Douglas would have new money originating in the
household sector, going to each American, so that the household can be
the one to profit from "money out of thin air" -- so that household's
can live by one workers income, so that businesses can earn a profit
from which to meet expenses and expand the business if it really
satisfies the customers in terms of value per dollar. This would end
debt slavery forever.
Soddy is the noble price winning scientist who read Kitson and devoted
the latter part of his life to urging a system that would do away with
slavery to compound interest. His argument was very simple. Whenever
something is built it immediately starts to decay or "go bad" it it is
organic, or fall apart or wear out, or become obsolete if it is an
inorganic machine etc. Loans go to finance the construction of things
that return to dust. But the interest obligation is not part of the
physical world that decays -- it is of the indestructible realm of a
mathematical equations, the eternal abstracts of Plato or Pythagoras.
Compound interest is perpetual motion and perpetual growth and it does
not adjust downward when the world's ability to pay it is diminished as
the world is crushed beneath its demands. Such a harvesting machine in
the exclusive hands of Rothschild-Rockefeller interests spells the
slavery and unending misery of the human race.
Gesell was for free money. He taught that under the usury and rent
system free, fair business competition with equal chances for all is
impossible. He called for the removal of all legal and inherited
privileges so that those who gained most in the world would on do so on
the basis of their personal abilities and contributions. There is no
reason why those who get there first and buy up the land as speculators
should then be masters over all who come after, over all who do the
actual inventing, engineering, entrepreneurship, management, and skilled
workmanship -- where the financier speculator and the landlord take all
of the wealth so that the productive classes must live from hand to
mouth in the land of plenty that they improved and prospered. Gesell
wanted the most talented people to have the highest income, without
distortion by interest and rent charges. The economic status of the less
talented would also improve, because they would not be forced to pay
interest and rent charges. According to Gesell, this would lead to an
equalization between the poor and the rich. Further, there would be more
means available to help the disabled and untalented because the higher
average income would mean that families and friends and churches and
communities would have enough money to happily provide all was necessary
to help -- as people are naturally inclined to do when not under the gun
of rent, interest payments and taxes that go to paying the national
debt. Irving Fisher (see below) said of Gesell's idea: "Free money may
turn out to be the best regulator of the velocity of circulation of
money, which is the most confusing element in the stabilization of the
price level. Applied correctly it could in fact haul us out of the
crisis in a few weeks ... I am a humble servant of the merchant Gesell."
Feder identified the Rothschild and other merchant banking families as
international stock exchange finance that was responsible for "interest
slavery." Hitler discovered the basic truth of Feder's analysis and
rode it to power. The SA were followers of Feder's ideas as they heard
them from Hitler. When Hitler made his deal with the corporations with
ties to the same international finance -- he murdered the SA leaders
(the Strasser brothers were Feder followers -- one was murdered and one
was exiled) and put Feder in an obscure academic post -- where Feder
wrote a letter to Hitler which has recently come to light stating that
Hitler had betrayed the principles he earlier has accepted and
championed. Feder is why international cosmopolitan finance declared
all out war on Hitler and Hitler was who they used to destroy Feder's
economic solution of the nationalization of credit.
Franz Oppenheimer, last of the conflict sociologists, viewed land
conquest is the basis of the state. Originally nomads conquer peasants
and make slaves of them, working the land and paying tribute. The
system is streamlined after the nomads settle as a ruling class and a
money system is developed to make it all run smoother. But large land
holdings -- the rent system -- is the cause of the continued class
distinction and the driving of people from the land into the cities
forces down wages in the factories etc. Government taxes the people,
but to get the tax money into the hands of the real conquerors it is
necessary for government to be heavily in debt.
Henry George -- also held, and and was the first to do so, that land
rent is the key to the impoverishment of all producers and workers who
improve the land for the rent charging landowners. Remember, the
interest system robs the people of the fruits of their productions and
causes their enterprises to fail -- whereby the land is bought up with
the money that was taken in and hoarded -- and so rent on the land --
and you must view "land" as including the "improved land" with houses,
factories, public buildings, roads, crops, mines, transportation lines
etc as part of land in the Henry George sense. The interest system
enables the organized minority to own the land from which rent is
extracted -- rent in the very broadest sense of payment simply from
ownership with the power to lay claim to income from production when in
fact no contribution to the production was made. The speculator simply
has to buy up the land first -- and all of the differential in land
rent earnings from undeveloped land in a wilderness to the rent gained
in a big city accrues to him without any further contribution from
him. It is from Henry George that I now wish to quote extensively
Daly shows us that if investment capital is allowed to migrate from one
country to another then the result of free trade will not be mutual gain
from nations exchanging according to comparative advantage as the
libertarians falsely preach, but rather the result will be that
investment is all go to the nation with the greatest "absolute"
advantage -- for example industry will migrate to China because the
Chinese dictatorship has the power to force the Chinese people to work
for only a few dollars a day and to force them to take in all of the
pollutants of the productive process that once upon a time in the United
States corporations would be fined for creating. Daly exposed all of
the lies by which globalism -- "free trade" -- was foisted upon us.
And the fact is that David Ricardo who developed the "mutual gain from
trade" thesis specifically stated that the important assumption was that
capital must not be allowed to migrate. My economics professor at Texas
A & M Akera Takyama showed mathematically in the Ricardo model, that if
the assumption of immobility of capital is suspended than the nation at
absolute disadvantage in production will not gain but lose, will lose in
a decay of production and standard of living that ends up "at the
origin" (of the graph), i.e., at zero.
Irving Fisher is the real expert on depressions being caused by debt
that eats up purchasing power, by the deflation disease. He had the
solution - "reflate the economy" but the Money Power hired Khan to
manage the production of a book under the name of Keynes, the General
Theory, which advocated debt-financed government spending as the cure
for the depression -- and backed up by men like John Kenneth Galbraith
(the "Alger Hiss" that got away ) who argued for an all-big corporation
economy and blamed inflation on a "wage-price" spiral, as if monetary
policy had nothing to do with it -- and advocated wage controls and
price controls -- but no one saw that all of his recommendations were
favoring the financial elites at the expense of households and
production. Irving Fisher was brushed aside -- even when his
explanation of the depression was the only one that made sense.
We must take the lessons of all of these teachers together to reach a
solution - the solution of American Social Credit.
Now here are key chapters from Henry George's great book Wealth and
Poverty which I hope everyone will read. I am typing out a collection
of key points -- but don't think I will get it finished any time soon.
Understanding More of the Creditor/Predator Class
Through the Two-Tiered Economic System
1. Irving Fisher, the best statistical economist of his time and the
inventor of the price index, wrote that in the 1929 depression period
the total nominal amount of debt outstanding decreased (because of
foreclosures and liquidation) by 20 percent while the "real" debt burden
on Americans (in terms of the purchasing power of the dollar due to
inflation) increased by 70 percent. Debt burden increased even as debts
were liquidated and actual dollars owed become fewer because dollar
supply had diminished. This is happening today. Most people don't
have the incomes to meet their debts as they lose jobs or are cut back
in hours or pay or as their small businesses founder for lack of sales
revenue -- and you will note this please: statisticians do not look at
family debt burden when computing the cost of living index!!! they just
look at the typical things we buy. Remember, deflation hits all prices,
but debt is never adjusted downward to allow for the swelling purchasing
power of the deflated dollar. This is a windfall to the creditor class,
and why they always use their formidable political influence to promote
deflationary policies. And the biggest tragedy is that Americans are so
misinformed that they think the economy is experiencing inflation --
they do not realize that the price of items at Wal Mart are monopolist
administered prices (with most kinds of items supplied by oligopolies in
non-competing collusion, i.e., monopolistic price fixing.
2. One of the biggest weapons of the criminal financial elites in their
war of plunder against non-elite Americans has been the drug war.
Banking families have been profiting from the drug trade since before
the Opium War in China. We know they profit from drug revenue. We know
they rejoice at how drugs destroys our people, how it destroys families,
vocations etc. while filling our jails. But just as big a cost and
completely overlooked and an even more powerful boost to the criminal
financial elites is the fact that all of that cash drug revenue leaving
the country increases deflation in a devastating way. A trillion
dollars leaving the country to be laundered in international banks --
joining the "outer loop" dollar hoardings -- actually has a "money
multiplier" contractionary effect on the money supply -- so that every
penny of debt owed by Americans becomes all the heavier -- one
trillion? two? three? over a number of years just due to the
deflationary effect of drug money leaving the country. The fact that no
one in government or academia addresses this fact -- just tells you who
is running our government and academia and think tanks.
3. My thesis -- in case you haven't been paying attention is that the
Moneyed Elite profit at our expense from deflation more than from
anything else -- that the operate both inside and outside the domestic
economy and they make money by lending money to the domestic economy at
compound interest which ends up in the long run of loan-flow-in and
principal-and-interest-flow out draining purchasing power from the
domestic economy, i.e. deflation, which leads to business losses, more
unemployment, business bankruptcies, home foreclosures etc. all of
which puts these real assets on the market. Now consider this: Did the
Fed or the government act to stop the deflation that was causing the
foreclosures? Did they pump in the billions to counter the deflation so
as to prevent the foreclosures? No they did not. They let the people
default for want of purchasing power -- and only when the homes and
businesses were in receivership -- only when they were in the hands of
the bankers -- did the bailout money start to flow -- and flow only to
the bankers, never getting near the people whom even a fraction of that
bailout money might have saved. You see the bailouts give the banks
the money to sell the houses -- an earlier bailout would only have had
to pay an amount that would have caught up people on their two, three or
four months delinquent payments -- al they would have had to do, was
what I suggested three years ago -- simply lower the reserve
requirement to give banks extra-reserves so they would not have to call
in loans, so they could reflate the economy. But all of you ignored
that -- and if you recipients of my e-mails don't pass on what I write
it goes nowhere -- and certainly none of the Federal Reserve presidents
or governors thought that idea worth considering - certainly non of the
zealous young Jewish staffers of Congressmen or Larry Summers or Barney
Frank, or Geithner or Volker happened to think that a good idea. And
neither did Ron Paul or Glenn Beck or Webster Flocking Tarpley. Bottom
line -- they waited until the damage was done to be sure that none of
the bailout would reach the lower-loop people, i.e., we Eloi. All the
money went to Ruppert 'Morlock' , Soros and their kind.
Social Credit Stands Up to the Most
Rigorous Scholarly Examination,
Whereas the Gold Standard Proposal is Full of Flaws
still obtain under a gold system simply because all economic grown must
come from a gold backed bank loan (whether there is 100 percent backing
or not) and under all such systems it will still be true that the flow
of loans from the financial sector to the household-business sector loop
will be less than the drainage to the financial sector of interest
payment plus principal repayment. This means deflation must be chronic
-- and under deflation, investment will be less attractive meaning fewer
investment loans. And under the gold standard, if a bank tries to
expand credit, the other banks will simply take their redemption
certificates (bank money) and demand the gold -- causing a run on that
bank. There will never be recovery again. (Note: Most recoveries
happen under inflation.) Note too that it is not the bubble, but the
bursting of the bubble that is the real problem. The bubbles burst when
after a bulge in loans for some new industry (electronics, dot com etc.)
the subsequent payments of interest and repayment of principal bring
deflation to a point lower than when the loan bulge was made.
Note too that Fed
open market purchases of securities -- provides money to the
international loop that never reaches the domestic loop except to buy up
foreclosed properties so that businesses become foreign owned businesses
where profits leave the country (deflationary) and houses become foreign
owned rental properties where rent leaves the country (more deflation).
And of course if
there is deflation it profits the creditor at the expense of the debtor
because the dollars buys more and is harder to earn at the time of
repayment than it did at the time of borrowing -- including labor (i.e.
you work more to earn a dollar to make loan payments) so debtors pay
back heavier dollars than what they borrowed. In deflation investment
dries up and bond buying increases.
Only the friends of
the gold monopoly dare think of being entrepreneurs -- but most
entrepreneurs will not get a chance to show what they can do. Gold
fosters speculation, not investment. It fosters international gold
owners to alternate boom and bust by alternately investing their gold
and then withdrawing it again. Easy credit when foreign gold smiles --
and a boom in business and housing -- then interest and principal
payments eat up the sunshine and cause a bust whereupon the gold is
withdrawn and all businesses fail and all households go into bankruptcy
and the internationals re-enter to buy up all assets in distress sales
and bankruptcy auctions.
Also -- the very
notion of "intrinsic value" of gold backing money is a direct
contradiction of the Austrian tenant of value being subjective. The
fact is that the value of money is never its backing and the intrinsic
value of what backs it -- but is rather the subjective present
evaluation of what an amount of money will purchase. The intrinsic
value argument and the subjective value theory are totally at odds.
(The subjective value theory is the correct one -- and thus the
intrinsic value argument for gold falls flat.
I ask you to consider
this exposition of the Social Credit answer for the current economic
crises as an alternative to the Austrian view and the Keynes,
Neoclassical etc views.
– Dick Eastman
Identifying the Wrong Part in our Malfunctioning National
and the Right Part Needed to Replace It
"Calling investment "a bubble" is simply a rhetorical trick to place the
blame of recession and depression on the investment, and not on the
deflationary interest and principal payments that exceed the amount of
the loan -- which is the real cause of the crash and collapse.
Creditors always want deflation and they always want to blame all of the
damage done by deflation on inflation, that is on our investments and
enterprise. It is time for that process to be clearly spelled out for
the average citizen. --
Let's assume we beat
the international organized crime conspiracy and are not quick frozen in
the new ice age, so that we actually do become free to change our
system of money and credit to better satisfy our needs. Immediately two
questions arise. What part of the current system is causing the
middle-class destroying depressions and what is a true cure that would
set us free to build a great and good future free of debt and high
taxes and where the household sector is sovereign and government serves
This note focuses on
the one problem from which all other national economic problems flow -
and on the solution which will eliminate that problem for good and open
the door to the kind of happy future for all mankind which most of us
have stopped thinking would ever be possible.
You all have read a
thousand articles about the Fed and the crimes of the financial elites
-- but this message identifies the flaw in our lending system, the flaw
which gives birth to all of the evils that inflict us.
If it is still
worthwhile to know what part of our malfunctioning economy is the wrong
part for the engine and to know what kind of part the economic engine
really needs -- then this article people need to read.
* * *
Ardeshir Mehta:If Tom loans Dick $100 today, and
then Harry loans Dick $100 tomorrow which Dick then uses to repay
Tom, would not the original $100 Tom lent Dick remain in the system? Or
do you think it will all vanish into thin air somehow?
Nothing will happen to money in circulation if they all use their
checkbooks and Tom is not a bank.
let us ask the right question: Where does our debt-money system fail us
and what can we do about it.
First understand what is meant by money remaining in the system and by
money being withdrawn from from the system.
remaining in the system" means either:
principal and interest being paid into the black box of the financial
sector and never coming out again. Say for example, if Dick pays back
principal on a zero-interest $100 bank loan and the bank does not make a
new loan to anyone to replace the debt retired.
may have a $100 bill in her old mattress which has been there for years
and she lends it to Dick who after two weeks pays it back to her and she
sews it back into her mattress where it is buried in a landfill 8 years
And the final one -- the bank lends Dick $100 which he puts in a Swiss
bank account or uses to buy an import from a country where people keep
dollars in safes to hedge against inflation of their own
Now let us take a look at money coming and going into "thin air"
versus money being "in the system or not in the system"
Money "in the system," I suggest, should be considered as being a
deposit in a checking account or being currency in a pocket or handbag
or grocery store til, or in a company's payroll safe, but not currency
in a bank (financial sector).
Now we need to consider the important notion of "first spender" and
A man is a first spender when he writes a check on a new bank loan. He
is also a first spender when grandma gives him a dollar that has been in
her mattress. In either case the that new money entering circulation
(entering the system of buying and selling among households, businesses
and government (consider government as a branch of the household
sector -- collective buying and selling - however poorly managed) -
that new money when first spent -- is then deposited in the bank of the
seller who first accepted it -- from then on it will always be in
someone's checking account -- jumping from person to person as check
That money as a rise in the water line of total checking deposits in the
economy will only exit the system when the bank loan is repaid.
"last seller" is a man who gets money and then exits it from
circulation -- either by using it to pay interest or principal on a
loan or by depositing it outside the country or into a mattress where it
will not be spent for a long indefinite period.
Now we come to the source of our troubles.
New money entering total national checking deposits tends to multiply
after it is deposited. How much it multiplies depends on banking rules
about how much deposited money must be held in reserve against the
loans a bank makes. Let us look at the so-called "money multiplier"
which determines how much "thin air" money will be created under
fractional reserve banking rules.
Say $100 in new money is added to total checking deposits in the
country. Because that $100 has risen the water line in the great tub of
deposits (remember the new first spent $100 is always either one one
persons checking account or another -- our real money is not "checks"
but rather "transfers of balances from one account to another") -- now
the fractional reserve system allows that however high the tub of
deposits in the bank a certain fraction of that total can be lent. It
is easier and quicker to understand when we forget individual banks and
talk about the water line of all deposits in all banks.
Start with new banks that have no money deposited. Then Tom, Dick and
Harry get a sum of money from their grandmothers' mattresses as birthday
presents and deposit them in these banks. Now the water level on all
this banks together has risen to a certain level. And as Tom, Dick and
Harry work taking in each other laundry paying with checks - the amount
of money in checking deposits does not change. But low and behold!
the bank has been given power to issue loans up to a fraction of their
bank deposits. (This is a safe bet since Tom, Dick and Harry are not
likely to withdraw their money from their accounts and put them in their
own mattresses or to deposit them in a Swiss Bank or Cayman Island
offshore bank.) If the fractional reserve ratio is 10 percent that
means that the system can lend -- that is create new "thin air" deposits
for borrowers up to 90 percent of what they have on hand. This of
course will increase the water line in the total deposits tub by 90
percent. Now this rise in the water line from the old level to the new
level is new deposit that can also be considered new reserves against
which new loans can be made -- so 90 percent of that 90 percent of the
original Tom Dick and Harry can be loaned by those banks, loaned to Tom
Dick and Harry to expand their laundry facilities. But this 90 percent
of 90 percent itself raises the water line of total deposits -- and the
additional deposits from the old water line to the newest line is also
new deposits which can by the fractional reserve banking rules can back
new loans up to 90 percent of that rise in the water line. And this is
the money multiplier effect. Each new loan gives birth to new deposits
that have a life of their own being transferred between Tom, Dick and
But we are forgetting that each of these loans must eventually be paid
back to the bank. Which means taken out of the system. And that lowers
the water line -- and of course the total amount of loans cannot reach
higher than 90 percent of water line of total deposits. So if a loan is
repaid, then all of the fractional-reserve-based loans that came from
thin air because of that loan must now go back into thin air because
that loan is being retired. Now we have a money multiplier of
contraction. Because as the reverting back to thin air of 90 percent of
the repaid loan, will force loan calls of 90 percent of that amount --
which in turn will lower the level of the total deposits tub once again
requiring yet more loan calls. And so it goes -- except it is goes
even further than that -- because we have so far not mentioned the
interest payments that also are draining the tub.
Tom, Dick and Harry must end up turning their laundries over to the
bank because while they started with their grandmas' mattress money to
stake them in their laundry business -- they took out loans that were
far more than that to build their laundry's.
Each 100 from a grandma led to a 90 dollar loan which led to a .9 of 90
loan which led to a .9 of .9 of the 90 dollar loan and so on, until
Tom, Dick and Harry are owing the bank far more than $100 for each $100
of grandma money they deposited. And on top of all of this that is owed
in principal on multiple loans there is also interest on each of these
loans. So if the bank after it is all loaned out simply collects the
interest and the repayment of principal Tom, Dick and Harry will loose
all of their checkbook money and their laundries will be foreclosed too
-- grandma's stake and all of the work they have put into it.
And of course the bankers will own the laundries and the land they are
But the bankers have to save their reputations in all this -- so they
offer to loan the government of Tom Dick and Harry that will be used to
put Tom Dick and Harry to work building wind generators to power the
laundries now belonging to the banks. Of course the money loaned to the
Government of Tom, Dick and Harry will have to be repaid with interest.
Now since the government of Tom, Dick and Harry has no laundries what
it can do is tax all of the work that Tom, Dick and Harry do as they try
to dig themselves out of their hole. But as more and more interest is
needed and more and more loans to make up for the net drain on money
from the system -- the debt slavery and tax slavery of Tom, Dick and
Harry consumes all of their lives -- they and their children and grand
children will inherit the slavery in the form of the Government of Tom,
Dick and Harry and their progeny forever.
And notice this about what has been explained above. Inflation was not
the cause of the problem. Inflation is simply another word for
investment. In fact "economic bubble" is just another word for people
investing (smart or stupid) with borrowed money. The trouble enters in
when "anti-inflation" that taking back of that loan money and yet more
than the amount of the loan in the form of payment to the banks of
principal and interest causes deflation -- causes the money multiplier
of contraction (collapse) of loans. Actually inflation is not bad at
all. It is deflation that kills us. Only the holders of financial
wealth, the lords of the financial sector, like deflation because it is
when they take back what they created out of thin air and then more --
which is a drain that is multiplied so that the lender/creditor ends up
owning everything the borrower had before he came seeking a loan and the
business that the borrower built up with the loan. Borrowers are farmed
and fleeced and so are entire nations.
Now of course the answer to this is social credit -- which just gives
every person money debt free to go out and spend and build an economy
without fractional reserve banking building up their debt and then, by
deflation because of interest drain, taking away everything they build
and then some.
If Social Credit is the real answer, shouldn't you learn more about it?
Everything you and I have been taught about the importance of interest
rates in helping or hurting the economy is wrong.
We were told that when interest rates are low the cost of investment
will be less and economic growth will result and so forth.
But this is not how Big Finance and the Central Bankers think at all.
For them high and low interest rates are set merely to time the onset of
recessions. For them the interest rate is the control variable that
determines how fast the new purchasing power from a loan will decay to
zero purchasing power and continue decaying other purchasing power as an
"anti-loan." Setting interest rates is merely setting the time release
of the poison pill of deflation that is hidden in every loan.
People are in a depression caused by lack of purchasing power. Loans
are extended by creating a checking deposit and at that moment
purchasing power is jumped up by the amount of the loan (with money
multiplier effects.) Now the question is how soon -- how fast -- will
that jump be eaten up by interest payments and the eating continue until
where the jump in purchasing power was there is now a drop lower than
before the loan? It is by setting interest rates the rate of decay of
purchasing power is determined.
Our economic depression is being treated by quacks to with precision
keep us just as sick as they want us, so we will always be needing to
buy more financial medicine from them.
You are told that easy money and low interest rates create booms or
bubbles and that these bubbles must collapse and that all of that
investment that took place was a mistake -- called "mal-investment" --
and that it all must be liquidated (which means possession or proceeds
from a distress sale must go to the creditors (who are also the buyers
in the distress sales.)
Interest rates, therefore, are either short or long at at any given time
so that Big Finance can time the onset of periods of recession (of asset
acquisition -- their "harvest season") against the onset of periods of
capital investment that creates new assets (the "planting" season of
bankers when they let borrowers develop the businesses and build the
homes) which the bankers will grab for themselves bankers later on
during the "harvest time" of depression which they have scheduled with
precision through their setting of interest rates.
Not until now has the true function of the Fed -- the function of
interest rate coordination to generate the seasons of sowing and harvest
of the banker-imposed business cycle.
To summarize: Purchasing power has
an adjustable half-life and interest-rate level is the knob by which it
is set. Interest rate determines the speed at which a loan or
debt-financed stimulus decays to nothing and then drops past nothing as
it becomes becomes an "anti-loan" - the deflationary power behind
Inflation is Being Blamed for the Crimes
of Interest and Deflation
and Bankers who Create New Money but Don't Let Any of it Reach Us
I received this email:
Subject: Re: You have read a thousand posts about the economy. Now try
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010
"It's all in the artificial boom & bust cycles. In the bust cycles it's
like playing musical chairs for people and business. People and
business end up going bankrupt as they end up with no chair (no money to
pay their debts.) Banks then are able to come in and buy up their
assets for pennies and if they were in debt the banks already own their
assets. All from thin air. Or like now it's so bad, debt or no debt,
they just end up with no money or not enough money to carry on business
as usual. This is why inflation needs to be kept in check.
"With each artificial bust cycle the banksters end up owning &
controlling more & more."
Here is my reply to
this old friend of mine and to everyone else tricked into thinking that
"inflation" is the problem.
I followed you nodding my head in agreement all the way until you
reached exactly the wrong conclusion saying: "This is why inflation
needs to be kept in check."
You gave an excellent diagnosis and prognoses -- and then call for
"bleeding" the patient whose problem in the first place is loss of
blood. This puts you in the the company of Celente, Ron Paul, Beck,
Tarpley, Keiser etc.
Once more let me give you the inflationist view -- the social creditor
The Financial Sector is selling you deflation that is sugar-coated with
fast-dissolving purchasing power -- some money up front that immediately
begins to be taken away again in compound interest payments over and
above the principal that must be paid back. Financial Sector loans are
not really net injections of purchasing power. When you look at flows
of loans into the economy and interest payments and principal payments
out of the economy you see that their favor is really a theft. And they
collect both on the interest -- which they really paid out nothing of
their own to receive -- and they collect the equally considerable gain
from the deflation (lower prices for the things bankers like to buy -
like foreclosed properties that they turn into rental properties or
simply liquidate thereby getting rid of a pesky small-guy competitor of
Inflation is being blamed for the crimes of interest and deflation.
Inflation is investment, it is ample money -- bubbles are not bad
because they are easy money spending, they are bad because it is the
speculators who direct what is being spent. But bubbles would not lead
to busts if it were not for the real problem -- deflation. What is
deflation? Deflation is when there is too little money for current
price levels which is caused by the leakage of payment of interest and
principal being a flow that over time greatly exceeds the flow of
investment loans going in.
So the problem is not injection of too much money chasing too few goods
-- because the problem of our economy is not enough money to buy the
good we could and would be making for ourselves given our labor force
and our resources.
The bust does not step from the bubble -- remember a bubble is just new
money all going to a few types of investment that is directed by the
financial sector. For someone to say that the problem is "inflation"
is making a big mistake. Inflation is adding money to circulation.
There is no money in the loop of transactions between households
(consumers and labor suppliers) and the domestic production sector
(entrepreneurs, engineers, managers, skilled labor producing goods and
providing services). That is what is causing our problem.
Furthermore the high prices you see are not the result of monetary
inflation -- since there is not monetary inflation. The high prices
result not not not from too many dollars chasing too few goods, but
rather from the fact that America is producing a smaller economic pie
and because we have been buying from abroad from monopolists who charge
monopoly prices -- by monopolizing supply and setting administered
prices, destroying competition ensuring that price is raised enough
and quantity (which it costs them to provide) is small enough that their
profit is maximized -- whereas in free competition driven by ample
demand and purchasing power and no monopoly the sellers/producers
cannot get together to control output etc. Prices are high because
the hostile foreign monopolists and bankers are actually working to
starve us off the land -- they have done this in a hundred ways we have
discussed over the years -- weather disasters, genetically modified
sterile seed, various regulations, putting our agriculture out of
business with monopoly agribusiness etc -- The fact being that all of
these factors lead to high prices for certain articles even as there is
deflation in the land -- if you look at wages, and at the prices of
foreclosed properties, bankrupt businesses and distress sales in both
the household and the productive sectors. Only the things the poor
commoners, the average citizen buys are priced high -- gasoline, rent,
food, fuel, public services, education etc. -- look what people pay
for DVD's of old movies that cost 2 cents to mass produce, look what we
pay for prescription drugs almost as cheap -- and do any of these
royalties and copyrights actually profit the scientists who develop them
or foster writers and artists to undertake more and better productions?
Not at all.
Anyway, as I was saying. Inflation is good. Only inflation ends
recessions and depressions.
What is wrong is not the injection of money into production -- but
1) each injection loan goes to the wrong place -- to the "bubble"
investment chosen by Big Finance -- instead of to the consumer for him
to spend, putting the American family ahead of the creditor class whose
wealth is measured in our indebtedness;
2) each injection of money wherever it is being misdirected always
eventually ends in a leakage of purchasing power that is bigger than the
initial injection -- because both the initial injection must be paid
back to the bank and compound interest on the loan. So every
transfusion results in a "bleeding of the patient" that removes more
blood than the transfusion provided. This kills the patient.
I am an inflationist -- I am pouring my time and health in promoting
inflation -- but it must be fiat inflation, not debt inflation. My
money is not there only a short while and then taken away by interest
payments and principal repayment that leaves the economy with less money
than before the loan was made. I am for reflating the economy with
money to households which does not have to be paid back -- which can be
spent and will stay in circulation allowing American businesses to
profitable so they do not require loans and more loans to keep the
inevitable from happening. The first thing that C. H. Douglas discovered
during world war one was that firms are always failing, their cannot
earn enough from sales to pay all of their input costs and financing
What you are calling Finance Capitalism inflation is exactly the
opposite -- it is deflation with a short-lived inflationary sugar
coating that melts away very quickly and then begins to work recession
on us through big deflation from interest payment plus principal payment
leaving the economy.
In other words, Finance Capital Investment is not inflationary over
time, it is deflationary. The initial loan gives a boost and you build
a business or a house, then that initial jolt of injection is reversed
by the steady drain of compound interest over and above repayment of the
Inflation is what we need. It is not what we are getting.
Quantitative Easing is not money going to households or the business
sector. They are not even investing here any more. The rule of
international Jewish finance which is allied with the Chinese
dictatorship and Zionist Moneyed Creditor classes is very clear to the
intelligent observer: THERE CAN BE NO INVESTMENTS IN AMERICA THAT WILL
INCREASE AMERICAN PRODUCTIVITY, THAT WILL ADD MACHINES TO LABOR TO MAKE
LABOR MORE VALUABLE - THERE WILL BE NOTHING TO ADD TO AMERICAN OUTPUT.
EVERY SO-CALLED INVESTMENT WILL REALLY BE A PURCHASE OF JUNK THAT
REPLACES SYSTEMS OF STRENGTH. Instead of new hydroelectric dams or
atomic power, all of that will be torn down and inferior wind power will
replace it -- or a big railroad (19th century technology) will be
built only to facilitate getting Chinese made goods from the West Coast
to the East Coast -- without trucks that bring business to the starving
towns in between, etc. Quantitative Easing is going to the bankers --
to the elites who operate in the international sphere -- where there
already many times more dollars than exist in circulation in the US -
many more dollar denominated deposits than exist in the domestic
economy. Not a penny goes to stimulate out economy. And of course the
bailouts -- the trillions given to the financial sector before
Quantitative Easing giveaway -- the bailouts were debt financed - which
means the tax payer later on must pay in taxes the amount of the bailout
plus compound interest on the bailout.
And what do you say after all that happens? What is your brilliant
solution to the continuing holocausting of the American people and the
people of Greece, Ireland, and a hundred other countries? You say that
we have to keep money away from the people! You agree with Rockefeller
and Rothschild and Greenspan and Bernanke that inflation is the bad
thing and that we have to keep consumption down with austerity monetary
And you are also one of those who want to convert to a gold standard --
so that the loans that were made to us in thin air will, after
conversion, have to be paid back plus interest in gold -- gold that is
monopolized by the gold cartel -- gold we must borrow from the
Rothschilds to get. Gold that gives the gold monopolists far better
control over the world banking system than control of all the central
banks -- because gold supply cannot be expanded to provide more
purchasing power for the common man -- which means that the burden of
paying debt will get heavier and heavier due to deflation -- because
of principal and interest causing deflation, but also because of added
costs of having to obtain gold from Rothschild at Rothschild's price
before any expansion of purchasing power is possible. (And of course
the expansion of purchasing power will only be temporary -- as the
interest payments begin right away. etc.
But the more I talk the less people read.
And you, I fear, will never learn that REAL inflation is our only hope
--inflation not tied to the vampire of interest.
You have received a thousand posts from me -- and have occasionally
discussed some of them with me -- but here you are saying that money
to the people is the cause of our problem, that "inflation needs to be
kept in check". What you should have said is that we need more money in
the hands of households so they can through effective demand call forth
more American pie from American production.
Inflation is the only thing that can save us. You and Ron Paul and
Celente and Beck and every other brainwashed or Rockefeller owned --
are giving the people poison. You are giving them deflation that is
what is sucking every community of all its life. Big thanks, for
Under Social Credit the new money appears in households free and clear
so the household sector will be the economic sovereign who gives the
dollar signals to the entrepreneur, so he will organize production for
Americans, production that is profitable because Americans have the
money to pay for it -- so our businesses can expand on the basis of
ample profit -- and can use that profit to expand production without
being tied to the vampire zombie corpse of compound interest loans.
Let me put it to you straight. By rejecting social credit as you do you
are killing America and allowing the continued destruction and murder of
every community, every family, of everyone's future. These are just
written words -- but if you engage your brain and your courage and your
energy -- we can stop win the war that Big Finance is waging against
So do you see 1) that deflation rather than inflation is the problem,
2) that the Monetary Power is not now "inflating" the domestic economy
of households and producers in any way shape or form; and that the
solution is debt-free fiat money created out of thin air in the hands of
the people, to the household sector which buys from the American
production sector - rather having the money originate in the financial
sector which is then loaned at interest go foreigners and to our
government for its bailouts and non-productive stupid investments in
giant pinwheels and bombs for murdering any and all Moslems living too
close to Israel, China and India.
The History of the House of Rothschild Part I
The Rothschilds have, with their founding of Zionism, betrayed the
principles of the Torah and as you will see in this timeline, the people
who have suffered the most at the hands of these Zionists are the Jews.
The History of the House of Rothschild
The Rothschilds claim that they are Jewish, when in fact they are
Khazars. They are from a country called Khazaria, which occupied the
land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea which is now
predominantly occupied by Georgia . The reason the Rothschilds claim to
be Jewish is that the Khazars under the instruction of the King,
converted to the Jewish faith in 740 A.D., but of course that did not
include converting their Asiatic Mongolian genes to the genes of the
Secrets of the Federal Reserve It is now apparent that
there might have been no World War without the Federal Reserve System.
"The effect of the war upon the business of the Federal Reserve Banks
has required an immense development of the staffs of these banks, with a
corresponding increase in expenses. Without, of course, being able to
anticipate so early and extensive a demand for their services in this
connection, the framers of the Federal Reserve Act had provided that the
Federal Reserve Banksshould act as fiscal agents of the Government."
is the Worship of Rothschild Ownership of the World?
Or is there a secret society that is still on the gold bullion standard
-- who are behind all of the chaos so they can re-impose the gold
standard. Exactly that is what is described by these two Lords in their
speech to the house of Lords -- which I (Eastman) have transcribed below
from the video linked below. It seems that the House of Lords are in
the Dark and many in the City of London are in the dark as two who this
gold-standard clique of super wealthy people may be and what their plans
are or whether they can be trusted not to be the words biggest rotters.
Listen to the video as you read along. The curtain is pulled back --
only to see that there are more curtains that those on the other side of
the curtain we have just penetrated are wondering about with, as the
British are always very good at, concealed great concern.
First , Lord James of Blackheath, addressing the UK House of Lords,
November 1 -- was dead within 21 days of when this address was
Dick Eastman quick transcription (in case it disappears from youtube):
"...simply because I've been engaged in some rather delicate work on
behalf of our cousins in the United States and it's been quite the
dangerous work, uh, is that we have been exposing the biggest corruption
story in the history of the world uh which is basically surrounded uh
it concerns the derivatives operation uh all derivatives are fraudulent
finance activities - the United States moved this week unto the Bazel 2
norms which means that all off-balance-sheet transactions are illegal
and uh which means that the entire derivatives sector is worth zilch.
Now the reason that the pound in your pocket is a piddly little little
coin which you can't even buy the Daily Telegraph with is precisely
because this leveraging and hypothecation of fraudulent finance activity
has been taking place. Now it um was originated in the bowels of the -
what are called the US intelligence power um and the proxy name for
that is the CIA but actually we're referring to 16, possibly 18 uh
agencies which are subsidiaries of the CIA including the FBI um The
brains behind this is Doctor Henie Kissinger, also known as Heins, he is
a triple agent. His Soviet code name is BOR - quite well known. We
don't know what his uh pan German code name is. [break in video
continuity] We did not win the war. What happened was we finished
Hitler off, we personalized the war, so we thought that when Hitler
ceased to exist ... [break in video continuity] . . . at the Ramsey (Lamsey?)
Conference the Nazi intelligentsia realized that there must be a 50-50
chance that the Germans would lose the war.
And so what they did was
that they exported their big brains to Madrid and in 1942 they set up
what it what they called the German political center. [break in
continuity of video] Now, the German geopolitical center does nothing
but think about what would happen if Germany didn't succeed in taking
over Europe. And - in other words it was a long-term think tank and they
developed a long range deception strategy called (??? Elherkashaverlschaftzskermeinschaft ??? European Economic Community
published in 1942 in Berlin [discontinutiy in video] ... is enemy of
its member states.
The European Union is, of course, not our friend, it
is our enemy and has been over a long [discontinuity in video] It's
purpose is to usurp our sovereignty and take us over. [applause] And
in fact what we now have now have [break in continuity] under feif (?)
we handed over general powers to an unelected group in Brussels which is
a self-perpetuating situation. And the real problem with this enemy of
ours is that it is on auto-pilot. The problem was or has been that a)
the people running the criminal finance including of course the criminal
enterprises and by the way I have referred to Citibank and other very
large uh banks in the United States as criminal enterprises for the last
two and a half years and I am still walking and the reason for that is
if you go into the main court house in New York and you pull out
Citibank you would have to spend about three weeks taking down
information about the court cases concerning Citibank and fraud which
are still before the court and that's just one one court.
happened this week is that the Chinese have made available to the United
States or to the Federal Reserve ten metric tons of gold. It's been
loaned to them. -- it's a sort of loan, but of course there are huge
strings attached and it's no coincidence that Hillary Clinton, who is up
to her neck in this corruption, as you well know from the Clinton
background [break in video continuity] ... In fact what we are talking
about is a two pronged attack on the main enemy. The main enemy,
according to the Germans and the Soviets is Britain and the United
States. [video cuts to a picture that cannot be read -- then the
video switches to a new speaker -- who addressing some formal gathering,
perhaps also the House of Lords)
Second speaker (identified across the screen as Lord James):
Lord James: I'm going to have to make a very big apology to my noble
friend, ?noble lord so soon?? because I'm about to raise a subject which
I shouldn't raise which is going to be one which I think is now time to
put on the higher awareness and to explain to the House as a whole as I
don't think they have any ?? as sorry ??? of pride is not ??in them
because it deeply concerns him also . For the last 20 weeks since
yesterday afternoon I have been engaged in a very strange dialog with
the two noble lords, in the course of which I have been trying to bring
to their attention the willing availability of a strange organization
which is to make a great deal of money available to assist the recovery
of the economy in this country.
For want of a better description of
their names I will call them Foundation X, that's not their real name,
but it will do for the moment. Foundation X was introduced to me
20 weeks ago last week by a very eminent ah City firm, FSA controlled,
that chairman came to me and its Chairman said "we have this
extraordinary request assistant doing this extraordinary reconstruction,
it's mega bucks, but we need your help to assist us in understanding
whether this business is legitimate." Uh, I had the biggest put-down of
my life from the noble Lord ?? Strath-Clighborn?? when I told him
this story first. He said, "Why you? Your not important enough to have
the answer to a question like that." And he's quite right. Number one,
I'm not important enough -- but the answer to the next question, "you
haven't got the experience for it" -- yes I do.
I have had one of the
biggest experiences in the laundering of terrorist money and of funny
money that anybody's had in the City. I've handled billions of
terrorist money. Not into my pocket. Ah, the biggest terrorist client
I had was the IRA and I'm pleased to say that I was able to write off
about a billion pounds of their money. I've also had extensive
connections with North African terrorists but that's of a far nastier
nature and I don't want to talk about that as that's still a security
issue. Um, I also hasten to add that there's no use in getting the
police in for me because I shall immediately call the bank of England as
my defense witnesses, they put me in to deal with these problems. So
the point is I was in the course of doing this very strange activity --
I got a very interesting set of phone numbers and references which I
could go to for help when I needed it -- and so people in the City have
known that if they want to check out anything that looks at all odd they
can come to me and I can press a few phone numbers and get a reference,
and so it came to me and asked me whether I would get them - reference
of the clearance of Foundation X and for 20 weeks I have been
endeavoring to do so.
I myself have come to the absolute conclusion
that they are completely genuine and sincere and that they are quite
directly wishing to make the United Kingdom one of the principal points
for which they will use to disseminate their extraordinary great wealth
into the world at this present moment as part of an attempt to seek the
economic recovery of the global economy. And so I made the phone call
to my noble friend Lord ???Strath-Clyde??? on a Sunday afternoon - I
think he was sitting on his lawn?? pol?? lan and he did the quickest
ball pass I've ever seen, -- if England can do anything like it at ??
trick?? in? a? mons on Saturday we have a chance against the all blacks
-- and the next thing I knew I got the noble Lord Sasoon on the phone
and he from the outset took the quite right proper defensive attitude of
total skepticism and said this is ?? can't possibly be right. In the
course of the following weeks I had -- first of all, the noble lord
Sasoon said go and talk to the Bank of England, so I phoned the governor
of the bank of England and said could you please check this out for me.
And he came back after about three days and said, "you can get lost
I'm not touching this with a ??barge ??pole?, it's far too difficult.
Take it back to the treasury. So I did. I waited another day , the
noble Lord Sassoon come back and said "this is rubbish, it can't
possibly be right." So I said, I'm going to work more on it. And then
I had another meeting with the noble lord Strath-Clyde and I brought one
of the senior executives from Foundation X to meet Lord Strath-Clyde. I
have to say that as first dates go, it was not a great success. They
neither one of them ended up inviting the other up for a coffee or a
drink at the end of the evening and they didn't exchange telephone
numbers in order to follow up the ?? col?? In fact I found myself
between a rock and a hard place represented by both a rock and a hard
place which were totally paranoid about each other. Because the
Foundation X people have got an amazing obsession with their insecurity
-- uh, they are expecting only to be contacted by somebody equal to head
of states status or somebody who has an international security rating
equal to the top six people in the world. And this is such a strange
situation . So that both the noble Lord Sassoon and the noble Lord
Strath-Clyde both came up with what should have been an absolute killer
argument as to why this could not be true and should forget it.
Lord Sassoon's argument , first , was that these people were offering
evidence or they claimed evidence that they had lodged five billion
pounds with British banks last year and they gave dates and they gave
transfer dates and the details of these transfers as noble Lord Sassoon
said, if that was true it would stick out like a sore thumb. You
couldn't have five billion popping out of a bank account without it
destroying disrupting the balance sheet completely. But I remember that
at about the same time those transfers were being made the noble Lord
??Minus?? was indulging in his game of rearranging the deck chairs on
the Titanic with the British banking community and if he had had three
banks at that time which had, say, a deficiency of, say, one and a half
billion each, then you pretty we have absorbed the entire five billion
and you wouldn't the sore-thumb stick-out of this at that time because
you would have had one and a half billion into each of three banks and
you would have lost the lot -- or absorbed the lot. That would be a
logical explanation -- I don't know.
Then Lord ?Strath-Clyde? came up
with a much different argument. He said cannot be right this cannot be
right because these people said at the meeting with him that they were
still effectively on the gold standard from back in the 1920's. And
that their entire currency holdings throughout the world, which were
very large, uh, were backed by bullion. And then Lord Strath-Clyde came
back and said to me he had his analyst working on it and this has to be
stuff and nonsense because he says they have come up with a figure for
the amount of bullion that would be needed to cover their currency
reserves as claimed which would be more than the entire value of bullion
that had ever been mined in the history of the world. I am sorry but
the noble Lord Strath-Clyde is wrong -- his analysts are wrong
-- because what he had done was tapped into the sources which are
available -- there is only one definitive source for the amount of
bullion. -- I have to quit here -- wife wants me to watch TV with
her before she goes to bed. -- will finish but want to get this much out
in case there is a power outage or something --
Answering the Most
Important Question a 21st Century Nation Can Ask
What is the core knowledge the world must have to overthrow debt slavery
and chronic economic depressions and such extreme redistributions of
wealth to financiers, speculators and monopoly corporations?
Each class, creditor and debtor, operates in a different economy. The
creditor class regulates both. In the lower class -- consisting of the
household and production sectors of the domestic economy -- is
constrained to operating in the lower loop. Banks and government are
the means whereby the upper loop regulates and "farms" the lower loop.
the lower loop money exists only as loans made by banks. Every loan for
a time reflates purchasing power to the lower loop, but every loan
eventually ends up deflating more purchasing power than was added for
the simple reason that both the principal of the loan and compound
interest on the loan must be paid back.
upper loop provides the lower loop with a flow of loans but it takes
back over time a larger flow than it takes in. Since the lower loop of
households and domestic businesses of the domestic economy cannot pay
back the loan with money, it must pay with assets.
the upper loop wants to own new industries that exploit new technologies
they extend loans to lower loop businesses so that the lower loop
entrepreneurs, engineers and skilled workers will have the tools and
payment to develop and build this new industry. Then the upper loop
simply stops making loans until the drainage of principal and interest
bring on deflation and depression. The new businesses will fail due to
lack of demand for their products which in turn is due to the drain of
purchasing power. The new businesses will go bankrupt and will be
bought up cheaply by the upper loop with their large reserve of
accumulated interest which they have been withholding.
However the upper loop does not by the failed businesses directly from
the people who started the businesses and built them. Rather they wait
until the businesses have gone into receivership -- so that the money
they pay for the bankrupt properties will not go to lower loop people.
The upper loop loses power if every the lower loop people ever have
purchasing power free and clear.
the upper loop money is not loans. The money of the upper loop is
bets. It is a money of pure speculation. When speculators gamble in
the derivatives market they create marketable bets called derivatives,
but also commodities futures, swap options or whatever bet they choose
to make. The upper loop is completely unregulated. The upper loop is
all about gaining assets from values they have created "out of thin
air" -- they find that "thin air" moves and physical matter and
controls human behavior. The upper loop uses "thin air" to gain the
assets of the earth.
One more thing. If a nation should try to run its own purchasing power
system, the upper loop creditor class will us some of their accumulated
interest or just their great "thin-air" event-shaping power to buy
politicians or revolutionaries or other trouble makers to bring those
nations down. (See
the article on Khondorkovsky)
It is my hope that if enough people knew what was going on, that they
could band together and capture the thin=air machine and modify it so
that it provides thin-air purchasing power exclusively to the household
sector of the lower loop. There would be no more upper loop. Each
household would receive new purchasing power free and clear with which
to spend as he or she sees fit. (Children's social credit can be saved
for an education and a house or spent on present family expenditure.)
This new money appearing in households would be the only source of new
money in the economy. Thus all economic power and political power would
stem from the household sector. Household demand would direct
There would be a financial sector, but it would no longer create our
money. Banking would be a simple matter of paying savers for the use of
their savings so that money can be given to entrepreneurs, engineers and
skilled workmen to meet the needs of the country.
With Social Credit we
Have a Smooth Running and Prosperous
without Deflation or Over-inflation
First, let us define the words “social credit”:
instead of having money created by the banks at interest – a banking credit,
one would have money created within the household sector by a check from
the HRS (Household Revenue Service) – money
credited to society by society for society's use. The
Social Credit system aims at nothing but to have American households and
the entrepreneurs who organize production to satisfy their demand for
goods to direct the economy.
bogus financial sector which is supposed to take our savings and lend
them for investment in producers goods. That never did work. Under the
present usury system savings out and investment in never did match up so
that purchasing power remained constant. And certainly interest rates,
whether market determined or manipulated by central banks or speculators
never did give us a proper balance between the production of investment
goods and producers goods. And absolutely positively never did the
system not end up with all wealth being redistributed from working
households to the financiers and corporations providing producers goods,
war "export" goods and "reconstruction" goods. Deflation was chronic
-- interest payments pouring into the hands of the financial sector (the
creditor class) leading to under consumption by households and thus
unsold consumer goods. But of course with depressed demand, investment
would stop. And it has. And disappearing purchasing power would lead
to defaults on loans and a recession, leading to bankruptcies and loan
calls and more bankruptcies and austerity and less wages and less
purchasing power and more bankruptcies and busted budgets leading to
foreclosures. And then the phony stimulus -- which usually never
reaches the domestic householders.
above all we do not need the creditor class -- which having all of that
interest owed to it -- all of those payments the households and domestic
businesses must keep making to them far into the future -- so that they
become so vitally interested in seeing to it that there is monstrous
deflation to ensure that the money we will have to pay them as interest
has the maximum purchasing power possible -- so it will require the
maximum of our working time and our earnings to make the payments. No
more will this class direct monetary policy in their own pre-deflation
Social Credit the households would lay out cash for the products they
want, making profits for the entrepreneurs who provided those goods and
losses for those who did not produce what the sovereign household demand
was looking for. From the profit the successful entrepreneurs would
have money to expand or to move into other fields where their business
acumen indicates that more profits can be made serving households. No
more would bankers decide where corporations invest. No more would
bankers create wars or man-made natural disasters (hurricanes,
earthquakes, tsunamis) to create demand for their industrial complexes.
No more would we have big stimulation in the construction industry --
which is the only industry that big finance allows, because construction
contracts is how political payoffs are made to ruling elites in the
smaller communities throughout the country.
Moreover, because wages are not sufficient to purchase all of existing
production (wages being just one part of the production cost of any
item), the Household Revenue Service would give every citizen a monthly
dividend, a sum of money to fill the gap in the purchasing power (and
make it equal to the collective prices for consumable goods for sale),
and to ensure each and all a share in the goods of the nation. Those
who would be employed in production would still receive a salary, but
everyone, employed as well as unemployed, would receive his or her
The dividend formula would be infinitely better than the present social
programs like welfare, unemployment insurance, etc., since the dividend
would not be financed by the taxes of those who are employed, but by new
money created by the National Credit Office. No one would therefore live
at the expense of the taxpayers; the dividend would be a heritage that
is due to all citizens, who are all stockholders in the human race in
the United States.
The beauty of a portion of income going to everyone that is not tied to
loans or tied to labor, it gives people power to bargain for wages.
Social credit is a "strike fund" for everyone that makes labor unions
unnecessary. No longer would the Creditor and Corporate Ownership
classes have bargaining superiority in setting wages. There would
always be demand enough for people to got into business for themselves
or to find another employer of their particular skills so that they do
not have to tolerate low wages or injustice in the workplace. Social
credit ends not only wage slavery but also debt slavery. Machines were
invented to increase productivity from labor and to increase leisure
available to man. With modern factories all mankind should be enjoying
great leisure, except that the usury system has taken all of the the
gain for the financial sector at the expense of working households.
Under social credit the household will be the main thing -- where
families are raised and where culture is improved through leisure and
the means of self-development and community improvement.
It was St. Paul who wrote that the love of money is the root of all
evil. Money is an invention that is not inherently evil in or of
itself. It is simply a tool that can be used for evil purposes. It can
also be used to accomplish good. It was written in Acts that the early
Christians sold their possessions to feed and clothe the poor. They
used their money also for Christian community purposes. If a morally
responsible government administered the usury free creation and payment
into circulation of honest money, these deliberately contrived boom and
bust cycles that the bankers use to acquire property through foreclosure
need not exist at all.
As it stands right now, we have usury based/private issue of all
currency for circulation and we have had it mostly for 316 years running
now except for a few attempts by some intrepid elected officials which
ended in their demise. Tony Blizzard's article below is honest and
factual. If a government would indeed observe Christian moral standards
in an honest fiat monetary system, the money supply would be issued
scientifically with the people getting its first use usury free. We
could expect general prosperity to follow. In the Sermon on the Mount,
Jesus upheld the Law and the Prophets (Law of Moses). This Law of Moses
calls for the abolition of usury. And this is the primary source of our
economic consternation. When we reject the Old Testament laws on usury,
we consequently reject Laws that Jesus has approved of.
Listen closely to Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Ron Paul, for example, who
wrote the book "End the Fed" never
analyzes the actual definition of fiat
money as Blizzard does below. Out of Ron Paul's affiliations comes
a professor named Gary North. Mr. North is very good at doing hatchet
jobs against all who would dare suggest that his precious gold is not
necessary as a base for a monetary system to chug along successfully.
Well, Mr. Paul, Mr. Kucinich, Mr. North and Mr. Rockwell, have not the
bankers already proved that fiat money works well as a medium of
exchange? And they have done so even though the present form is usury
based. Furthermore, it will work once again when they restore the money
supply to sufficient levels.
Let us look at a simplified example. This example recognizes that
since mid-2007 banks stopped extending credit to small to mid sized
businesses and major corporations like GM, Ford and Chrysler. Layoffs
followed and unemployment rose to mountainous heights. Our present
national debt stands at about $15 Trillion. If we round off some of
this as $5 Trillion owed to foreign central banks, we have the remainder
of $10 Trillion owed to the Federal Reserve. Now with $10 Trillion of
T-Bonds held as assets by the Fed, an actual $300 Trillion of bank
credit could be easily pumped into the economy to stimulate hiring in
the industrial sector. This is based on the fact that fractional
reserve banking laws allow banks (Federal Reserve Banks, national banks
and community banks) to leverage their loans against deposits at a 30 to
one ratio. They really do create new usury based money when they extend
bank credit as loans. But the bankers' agenda is different than what
the people perceive. And the bankers control the beltway because they
have and control most of the money. Ron Paul and his entourage do not
discuss these facts in their books at all. Their agenda is gold backed
currency. All their discussion is negative toward all who suggest
North wrote a 38 Page essay called "Gertrude Coogan's Bluff".
read it and I read Gertrude Coogan's "Money Creators".
Ms Coogan was keenly aware of the boom and bust cycles caused by
manipulations of high-finance from the international banking cartels.
Her dissertation was thorough. In 344 pages she covered the mechanics
of Fractional Reserve Banking and precisely how they use this power to
control the economy. She also presented historical data in a final
chapter. If one would read Mr. North's final page, he would understand
that nothing Ms Coogan wrote in her bool has any value at all. North's
essay is nothing but a hatchet job. This is the school of thought that
Ron Paul subscribes to, all criticism with no answers. Ms Coogan
provides one possible solution. Others suggest several more. Anyone
who wants to learn more should start paying attention to Richard
No dividend for any household will be based on aproportion
of their income. Everyone will get the same sized dividend. The
purposes of this dividend for every household are --- to establish a
money supply in sufficient quantity so that what is available from
production will be moved at satisfactory speed --- and --- to insure
that no one in the nation lacks food, shelter and heat especially in the
winter --- and --- to remove the ravages of usury and fractional reserve
banking forever from the life of our nation. The dividend in Alaska
goes not just to households, but to every individual in every household
that are legal citizens and have established residency after one year.
It works well there, but it is based on quantity of oil sold. They do
have a very harsh climate and surely need it to survive.
Nationally, within our borders and among domestic corporations, domestic
proprietorships and partnerships, farmers, students and home owner
citizens we have the ability to see to it that none of them pay interest
for front money that is needed in production and a few other critical
needs. Interest free fiat money that would disappear from the money
supply as it is paid back would not contribute to inflation at all. If
poor decisions were made by parents while their children were young and
nothing was saved for the child's higher education --- but after
maturity the child decides to attempt higher learning --- what recourse
have you left them if they cannot pay for it? Banks need only exist to
facilitate the movement of money, for which fees should be paid.
Interest free loans from fiat issue is not off the table yet.
This is where solid Bible study and the belief that the Lord
instructed Moses wisely regarding usury enters the picture. In the New
Testament we find the admonition, "A bishop then must be blameless, the
husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior,
hospitable, able to teach; not given to wine, not violent,not
greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not
covetous; one who rules his own house well". This
bishop is one who would make a great monetary administrator.
He would also be able to see through anglers, including those who
the Old Testament, the priests were the civil administrators. It is not
too much of a stretch for me to realize that if we don't revert back to
our Christian roots which includes the Law and the Prophets, we are
doomed to failure.
Daniel S. Krynicki
St. Clair Shores, Michigan
De-Coupling Social Credit from
and Other Charlatans
How can social credit be a scam when the people get first use of the
money created and when there is no usury involved? The next step in the
flow of this currency goes to the business owners who work for their
keep. Additionally, the business owners and their family members
individually receive an equal dividend from the social credit fiat
issue. If some choose to remain poor by not working that is their
problem. Others, who do not have the ability to work, will at least have
food and heat. The only ones not benefitting from this scheme would be
Wall Street and the Lord Mayor in his little one square mile sovereign
state across the pond.
Ron Paul is the scammer. He is indeed a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Follow the gold. Who owns most of it? Is there enough of it to
provide 100% of the backing needed to back their currency scheme? Do
you think the Rothschild's and Rockefellers will not have enough gold to
wield influence in what he is peddling?
Here is the real problem. The heart of man is desperately wicked.
Who can know it? TW Hughes wrote in "Forty Years of Roosevelt" back
in 1944 that two laws presently prevail in human existence: (1)
the desire to survive, and (2) the desire to exploit. This real problem
of exploitation can only be overcome when the use of the money created
benefits all the people. The money lovers must be cut out of an elite
loop controlling it. Lew Rockwell's scheme hasn't solved this problem.
Before you decide which economic faction to support, study the matter
thoroughly. And don't think because a man purports to be a teacher of
Christian economics like Gary North of the Ludwig von Mises Institute
that he is in fact what he says he is.
Bonds and Banking
the Biggest Conflict of Interest
The biggest conflict of interest and moral hazard in the US -- the root
of all corruption, the source and empowering of conspiracy is the fact
that the intermediaries who supposedly take peoples savings and then
lend them out to entrepreneurs are also the bond holders, the creditors
to whom all debt is owed. Intermediaries are supposed to make money on
the spread between depositors savings accounts and the rate at which
business loans are made. Bond holders simply own IOUs and can only gain
in wealth if they can engineer deflation. When the bond holders and the
intermediaries are the same persons, investment will simply not be made
-- because creditors have much more to gain from engineering deflation
than intermediaries have from lending savers' savings to entrepreneurs.
That is why American bankers have quit providing money for domestic
economy entrepreneurs. They much rather profit by deflation, with
occasional refilling of the pot to drain by extending easy home-equity
credit which they know will be soon eaten up again in deflation by
virtue of the fact that no matter how much new money they create in the
form of home equity loans will be taken back again with a vengeance when
both principal and compound interest must be repaid. The deflation
continues apace, but with each short period of boom, more assets are
created that will be captured by the creditor class in foreclosure.
Bank intermediaries simply should not be allowed to own bonds. It is a
conflict of interest and a crime.
Look at the debt that the people are in - all owed to bankers, i.e., to
the intermediaries who are supposed to bundle savings and lend it out to
producers but never do.
If I could be Führerfor a day the first thing I would do after a) repudiating
all debt to the international bankers, 2) initiating social credit
dividends for the creation of all new money in the household
sector exclusively, 3) making money US treasury "thin air" debt-free
fiat and 4) ending fractional reserve banking would be to 5) impose a
law separating bonds from banking so that Businesses selling bonds and
Government selling bonds - will be kept a quadrillion light years from
the banks which I would limit exclusively to lending savers' time
savings deposits to businessman borrowers and home buyers.
Once the human race separates bonds and banking every day will be the
first day of spring.
matter how bad the lemon you drive, there is always someone willing to
sell you a worse lemon.
These men when they call for a gold standard and the abolition of the
Fed are actually proposing that all of the assets held by the Fed be
turned over to the National Banks, that is turning over all of the US
debt they hold -- the securities the Fed has been buying in its "Quantative
Easing" program (the name was invented to keep the open market
operations mechanism hidden from the public) giving the securities to
the Rothschild controlled banks that own they system.
These Rothschild owned regional banks and big New York banks will simply
get all of those securities for their own portfolios -- that is why the
investment banks changed the rules allowing them to merge with the Fed
owning national banks. And under this plan, the "nationally chartered"
banks -- probably just the biggest ones, will get to issue the money if
they have the gold reserves. Thus they are putting Rothschild's gold
holdings in total control of money and credit in the US. Its the most
stupid thing the American people can do -- but all of you folks love
to dance to Paul and Celente and Schiff because they have learned what
songs make you laugh or cry, or stand up and salute, or scare you into
doing stupid things without even starting to think about the
I think that, in its prime, the Birch Society was the biggest controlled
opposition organization that ever existed in the "patriot community."
Years ago I accused it of being the first outfit to spread the lie that
monopoly capitalism (which is the ONLY kind of capitalism) and free
enterprise are the same thing when, in fact, they are 180 degrees
opposed. No one ever responded. Also I constantly described its policy
as "forever learning and never coming to the truth." I know for a fact
that two chapters in So. Cal. were shut down by headquarters because
they were studying the Jewish involvement in just about everything that
the society was supposedly trying to correct.
The gold panic is suicidal. Americans are being stampeded of a cliff by
the gold monopoly. Stop the panic to gold. You are bleeding this
country to death when you buy gold -- and there isn't any monetary
inflation. You are being had and it will cost us all everything.
Our dollars are our only economic salvation.
There is no monetary inflation, only the worst monetary deflation in our
Only inflation ends depressions. American's must know that under the
present system all bank loans are inflation. All investment is
inflation. This economy needs inflation just as much you need to inhale
your next breath.
are not inflating. We need to inflate.
You object, do you? You say that any fool can see by the rising prices
of gasoline and food that we are in an inflation.
Yes, I agree. All fools can see that. But it is false nonetheless.
Fuel prices rise because they are administered prices of an oil cartel
and the deliberate restriction of supply at the well and at the refinery
by monopolist producers. Food prices rise in part because of fuel
prices, but mostly because of a global effort of the Rothschild Power to
make food scare all around the world in 2011. This is monopoly pricing
and it is also Rockefellerian Population Control at work. The prices
are also due to the destruction of small competitors against which the
big corporations, including Wal Mart, had been attempting to drive from
the market with their Chinese-labor competitive edge. But now that they
have the markets to themselves, they can now raise prices as an ordinary
retail monopolist without fear of new entry. No new entry is possible
in this deflation depression.
The Rothschild mouthpieces say that the US must pay down the debt by
cutting government services and transfers, but cutting wages, by
privatizing and selling off public assets, by cutting the American
standard of living -- ostensibly because we were "too pigish" in
borrowing rather than working for a living - because we are liberal
hippies who avoid hard work like the rich people do " etc.
That is not true. The economy is failing because of excessive debt that
was inevitable simply from the fact that all of our money is bank-loan
money that always must be paid back 100 percent and with compound
interest. The more we stimulate with debt-financed stimulus, and the
more we pay off our debt by undertaking new debt in the form of a newer
home equity loan -- the more we will pay later on -- principal plus
interest -- putting us into an even worse spot. And it has to end,
because the system is not geared up for banks to offer less than zero
interest rates -- and only lower interest rates induces homeowners
drowning in debt to take out yet one more equity loan to keep their
noses above water. The interest gets lower but the principal gets
bigger. There is only one way it all can end without tossing out the
rules -- and that is in Rothschild owning everyone's house, everyone's
gold hoard and everyone's bonded servitude as debt slaves for all
Comprehensive Links on Social Credit —
Featuring Louis Even (French Canadian social
creditor from the days of CH Douglas)
system uses officially imprinted money that is universally accepted for
all commercial transactions and for taxes. Social Credit would operate
in the same way but with the general welfare being the primary objective
as required in the Preamble [of the Constitution]. There will still be
free market capitalism (minus fractional reserve banking), property
ownership and even gold and silver exchanges. It is your and Dr. Paul's
system that will fail to perform its promised libertopia since there
will be no uniform way to inject money into the currency stream fairly
and justly. At present, and under your system, only the money creators
(a select few) are allowed to inject the money into the currency stream
-- thereby being first users of the money and directly benefiting from
its creation." -- Daniel Krynicki
THE VERY CREATION OF MONEY BY THE BANKERS -- BE
THEY COMMERCIAL, FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL BANKERS in the form of debt,
out of nothing and demand payments of original loan plus interest or
usury is the prima facie evidence of the
The bitter fight would be between PEOPLES VERSUS THE BANKERS. "The issue
which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought
sooner or later is the people versus the banks." – Lord Action.
ONLY HIDDEN ASSET OF THE BANKING SYSTEM is the creation of money out of
nothing – the fractional reserve banking system, otherwise, bankers do
not have any real assets of their own at all.
can peoples in this planet file lawsuits against the bankers when
peoples are controlled by the very system without which they cannot seem
to tackle to survive? How can we break it off?
Do the people need to change first before we can change the banking
Money problem is like a Mt. Everest-sized problem. About 90% of the
global population is in chronic money problems.
It is a daily
torture for most, and squeezing everyone to the bone to death. All
peoples in all walks of life are extremely damaged spiritually, morally
and physically by money problems without exception.
and families are burning the candle at both ends trying to stretch out
the money to the very limit in extreme austerity measures to keep them
surviving and thriving daily. Young and old, single and married,
divorced and separated, retired peoples are on the same plight.
Homeowners, property owners, landlords are held off by the bankers to
pay interest for their interest-bearing loans. Failure to fail loans at
scheduled time means compounding interest. Taxpayers are hosed off,
pressed upon, squeezed on to pay their dues. Taxes are collected by
adroit methods by which peoples would be intimidated and forced upon by
the Governments to comply with the conditions and requirements of the
financiers, bankers and economists.
Hundreds of millions to billions of people across the planet are
hog-tied, chained, shackled and enslaved by debt finance irrespective
whether they are the lenders or the borrowers. The very fact that money
is created as a debt by the banking system through the scam of
fractional reserve banking, and criminally ~ out of nothing, in a ponzi
scheme, is a prima facie evidence of addiction of the money lenders,
money creators and money controllers.
All nations, continents, communities, and inhabitants are under the
savage cruelty of the cobweb of debts. And in view of the gravity of the
debt problems, it appears that both the lenders and the borrowers are
addictive to the money and wealth. Government is debt-addict and most
government officials, politicians and their political parties are
addicted to money down to being poisoned by money. Corporations and all
various institutions are also debt-addict through massive expansion of
wealth, or profit-oriented-money addict just as their incorporators,
investors and workers and members are addicted to money and wealth.
I am convinced that
WORLD DEBTS OF NATIONS to banking system cartel are all odious by adroit
conspiracy, based on “ex nihilo” creation of money. And on this premise,
it is genetically criminal, and therefore must not be repaid. On the Law
of Reparation, the Bankers must return what they have stolen, extorted,
scammed, racketed both by legal and illegal means, and thus countries
must take initiatives to establish a new financial-economic system for
justice, equality and financial security for all.
Debt Moratorium isn’t enough!
Moratorium is a sham and therefore, futile by principles. Debt
Management is futile by its rubbish theories of voodoo economics. WHAT
WE NEED IS WRITING OFF DEBTS ALTOGETHER AND CREATE MONEY DEBT-FREE BY
THE PUBLIC BANKING SYSTEM BY LEGISLATION, BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE
GOVERNMENT AND BACKED UP BY THE PEOPLE.
What about the
heinous crimes by which the root-cause of such is the present banking
system –THE DEADLY SYMPTOMS OF CHRONIC MONEY,
WEALTH AND...“Ex Nihilo Money
Creation” – out of nothing. Please see the attached as extremely
important for all people to understand how money is created. But money is only
available for bail-out to bankers and there isn’t any bail-out for the
people. Can we clamor for bail-out for the people?
Also this one below:
SPECULATORS MAKE MONEY ON FOOD WHILE MILLIONS GO HUNGRY? Let us be
lashed out to be damned.
Here how we budget
our food stretched out to the very limit in complete austerity just to
survive with our money losing its value in front of the rising and
heavily-taxed prices of food, commodities and services, and yet the
suckers make money out of greed!
Chosen speculators make money on food while
millions go hungry Speculation and
hoarding are criminals acts perpetrated by US/UK commodity markets. The
speculators do nothing useful. They neither grow the food or process it
or transport it or sell it or feed people. Simply make money from money.
and that is why Allah has banned speculation and hoarding.
We're all being tapped, swamped and squeezed to the bone by the present
financial crisis but it is a consolation to think what is right although
we're being held up by the very system under which we live.
I think even if the bankers continue into their lawsuits, they're still
the winners, and the peoples, the losers at the end. Lawsuits, by using
people's money. Taxes would continue to be siphoned off from folks and
used for such financial-economic lawsuit gimmicks.
FHA Files a $196 Billion Lawsuit Against 17 Banks
The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), as conservator for Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises), today filed lawsuits against 17
financial institutions, certain of their officers and various
unaffiliated lead underwriters. The suits allege violations of federal
securities laws and common law in the sale of residential private-label
mortgage-backed securities (PLS) to the Enterprises.
Complaints have been filed against the following lead defendants, in
1. Ally Financial Inc. f/k/a GMAC, LLC – $6 billion
2. Bank of America Corporation – $6 billion
3. Barclays Bank PLC – $4.9 billion
4. Citigroup, Inc. – $3.5 billion
5. Countrywide Financial Corporation -$26.6 billion
6. Credit Suisse Holdings (USA), Inc. – $14.1 billion
7. Deutsche Bank AG – $14.2 billion
8. First Horizon National Corporation – $883 million
9. General Electric Company – $549 million
10. Goldman Sachs & Co. – $11.1 billion
11. HSBC North America Holdings, Inc. – $6.2 billion
12. JPMorgan Chase & Co. – $33 billion
13. Merrill Lynch & Co. / First Franklin Financial Corp. – $24.8 billion
14. Morgan Stanley – $10.6 billion
15. Nomura Holding America Inc. – $2 billion
16. The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC – $30.4 billion
17. Société Générale – $1.3 billion DEBT
MONEY SYSTEM is an ultimate arithmetic of scam and mass destruction.
Debt money is not mathematics but a voodoo hocus-pocus abra kadabra
manipulation of numbers for controlling money, food, wealth and
resources of the planet and ultimately controlling human life mainly
targeting the innocents.
usury is the real frightful monster, not debt-free money creation. Money
supply is not actually finite as it could always be increased on demand
by the facility of the central bank through Government’s legislation as
debt-free, not debt-based.
We’re all bamboozled by the bankers with their adroit way of robbing the
money that belongs to the people. The bankers arrogate themselves of the
the People’s Credit.Now,
we’re shackled with chains of horrendous debt with skyrocketing interest
payments. There is no end of miseries and sufferings.
real solution of Government’s debt-free money creation, without any debt
from any bankers, the DEBT FREE MONEY, that must be circulatedin
the land for economic democracy provision to every citizen as a matter
of economic and divine right and of citizenshipmust
be implemented without delay.
What we also urgently need in the 21st century is the mechanism of
distribution, not accumulations of wealth at the expenses of others.
And if all peoples across the planet will have sincere unity andwill
agree on MONETARY REFORM DEBT-FREE MONEY SCHEME -- PROPOSAL TO EACH AND
EVERY LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT in the world, then we can iron out century
oldproblems of money,
debt, interest, poverty and hunger all over the world.
The extraordinary remedy, after all our tremendous exhaustion, is to
make the system collapse by its fatal course, and as such, change the
ENGINE OF DESTRUCTIVE FINANCE. This must be exigible, not just by
exigency, by people’s mandate and legitimate demands in the 21st
Social Crediters and Monetary Reformers should be tough enough. But how
long this debt money system last? There are tremendous roadblocks to
financial-economic reform for the benefit of all people. THE BANKERS DO
NOT WANT US SUCCESS. We see over the years the dirty hocus-pocus of the
bankers to adroitly discourage and even destroy the monetary reform
proposals. The bankers discourage the distribution of income in the form
of extra basic income.
We have to find a new level of pragmatic insight. Money-reform seeking
campaigners must continue to assert the truths and the facts in spite of
incredible hardships. In Hebrew 12:1 - it says: "Let us run with
perseverance the race marked for us."
V. Encina Filipino Social
Crediter/ Monetary Reformer
Ron Paul's System of
Money Creation through Gold-Backed Loans
only Perpetuates the Debt/Usury Cycle.
We can think of several ways in which capital
can be created. But social credit is the only fair way to create
capital. Others can be fair; but social credit is the only foolproof
system able to prevent manipulation and cronyism.
What libertarians identify as "force to make all people equal"
misrepresents what social creditors offer. Social Creditors propose that
all receive an equal National Credit Dividend as the only means to
establish a money supply fairly. No one shall be forced to receive it;
and we are certain that a money supply that is not established through a
debt/usury system can benefit the nation. By contrast, Ron Paul's system
of money creation through gold-backed loans only perpetuates the
debt/usury cycle. Except for a few injections of publicly created money
into the currency stream, almost all of the existing money in the world
has for 417 years been created by privately owned cartels.
Now here is the crux of what the social creditors observe. Privately
created money has always resulted in high-handed manipulation of the
money supply. Better economists than myself predict there will continue
to be a chronic shortage of currency under a Ron Paul administration. It
will be the same as when Herbert Hoover and FDR were presidents. Money
was very scarce during the 1930s because the international bankers made
The “liberty” to privately create money that libertarians speak of will
only continue to allow Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans and Melons to
withdraw their gold from being deposited at banks. Available credit will
be curtailed greatly, because the liberty they desired gave the money
creators (capitalists) the power to stifle commercial activity. We have
all been eyewitnesses to the symptoms of chronic shortage of money for
three years running now. It should not be necessary to cite our speckled
past of all the panics, recessions and depressions mirroring these past
three years. These all have been orchestrated by the money creators, so
they can take a spoil from the assets others have worked for all their
lives. The Austrian Schoolers will only continue what already has been
accomplished by the private creation of money for centuries, most of
which was accomplished under the guise of being backed by gold.
It is good to hear Mr. Paul debate on a broad spectrum of issues. But in
economics he is woefully inadequate - not properly relating historic
data to how he perceives gold as being an acceptable form of backing for
money. He and the Austrian Schoolers are flat-out wrong. Fiat money of a
realm has already replaced gold as a standard since 1974. It works for
commerce and it works for taxes because it bears the imprint of the
United States Government. His arguments against fiat money do not even
tread water: it is the usury obtained during its creation that causes
Our Constitution by Unanimous Order of the Convention on September 17th,
1787 gave Congress the authority to 'coin money and regulate the value
thereof'. This authority is much misunderstood by the People. As our
understanding evolved of how a monetary system operates in practice,
some of us who are the honest enough sorts came to see how opportunities
emerged for the capital creators to abuse the good will of the people
and their economic welfare.
The most apparent pitfall, one not even contemplated by almost everyone,
is inherent in the private creation of money through debt/usury. When
gold purportedly is used as collateral to back the money certificates
private banks issue, two sets of money exist simultaneously: (1) the
gold that the issuer never cedes his ownership to and (2) the paper
representation (and it is fiat) that enters the currency stream. The
moneylenders require it to be paid back with compound interest, and they
never give up possession of their gold. But the interest doesn't even
exist yet. Where will it come from if it isn't even created yet? Yes,
more must be borrowed in order to pay the interest, because this is the
only way money can be created under the present system.
Also, in this system we have private issuers of currency who always - as
proven time after time throughout this 417-year history - rig the system
for personal gain. Public utilities as well as defense manufacturers and
contractors are now owned by institutional shell corporations tracing
back to the banking-cartel families. These represent the assets over
which they have obtained control during this named 417-period of
history. Let us call it the "International Bankers' Epoch".
Additionally, they fund almost all of the foundations and the campaign
war chests in Washington DC.
I have never heard Ron Paul speak out against the money powers. In fact
his Austrian School solutions would only entrench the cartels even more,
because they own most of the world’s gold. I have read estimates of
between 60% and 80%. We should be asking, 'Who is Ron Paul actually
All of us have to put on our thinking caps. If the Republicans win in
2012 and the national rally cry is austerity, live within one’s means,
spend less - and nothing is done to change the system back to public
control as the Constitution mandates - then the banking cartels will
jump for joy and dry up the money supply even further. And a depression
even greater than in the 1930s will ensue.
Social credit takes this power to create money away from the banking
cartels and makes a capitalist out of every American citizen through a
National Credit Dividend. With this system, there will be an adequate
money supply for commercial activity and full employment, because the
power laid at the feet of Congress through the Constitution could be
used to do what is right.
But it won't happen that way, because the sheeple will listen to Ron
Paul and his morally bankrupt Austrian School. And the rest will be led
to slaughter by the morally depraved Republicans and Democrats alike.
"And since this money is based on the production capacity of society, this
money also belongs to society. Then, why should society pay the bankers for
the use of its own money? Why pay for the use of our own goods? Why doesn’t
the Government issue its own money directly, without going through the