Calling The Federal Reserve

[PolyNewbie]

A Phone Call To The Federal Reserve Bank in San Francisco

- from Dan Benham, Nov 24, 2005

(Posted here: Dec 04, 2005)

http://www.illuminati-news.com/phone-call-to-fed-reserve.htm

see text in bold

The following is a conversation with Mr. Ron Supinski of the Public Information Department of the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank. This is an account of that conversation.

CALLER - Mr. Supinski, does my country own the Federal Reserve System?

MR. SUPINSKI - We are an agency of the government.

CALLER - That's not my question. Is it owned by my country?

MR. SUPINSKI - It is an agency of the government created by congress.

CALLER - Is the Federal Reserve a Corporation?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Does my government own any of the stock in the Federal Reserve?

MR. SUPINSKI - No, it is owned by the member banks.

CALLER - Are the member banks private corporations?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Are Federal Reserve Notes backed by anything?

MR. SUPINSKI-Yes, by the assets of the Federal Reserve but, primarily by the power of congress to lay tax on the people.

CALLER - Did you say, by the power to collect taxes is what backs Federal Reserve Notes?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - What are the total assets of the Federal Reserve?

MR. SUPINSKI - The San Francisco Bank has $36 Billion in assets.

CALLER - What are these assets composed of?

MR. SUPINSKI - Gold, the Federal Reserve Bank itself and government securities.

CALLER - What value does the Federal Reserve Bank carry gold per oz. on their books?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't have that information but the San Francisco Bank has $1.6 billion in gold.

CALLER - Are you saying the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco has $1.6 billion in gold, the bank itself and the balance of the assets is government securities?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes.

CALLER - Where does the Federal Reserve get Federal Reserve Notes from?

MR. SUPINSKI - They are authorized by the Treasury.

CALLER - How much does the Federal Reserve pay for a $10 Federal Reserve Note?

MR. SUPINSKI - Fifty to seventy cents.

CALLER - How much do they pay for a $100.00 Federal Reserve Note?

MR. SUPINSKI - The same fifty to seventy cents.

CALLER - To pay only fifty cents for a $100.00 is a tremendous gain, isn't it?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - According to the US Treasury, the Federal Reserve pays $20.60 per 1,000 denomination or a little over two cents for a $100.00 bill, is that correct?

MR. SUPINSKI - That is probably close.

CALLER - Doesn't the Federal Reserve use the Federal Reserve Notes that cost about two cents each to purchase US Bonds from the government?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes, but there is more to it than that.

CALLER - Basically, that is what happens?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes, basically you are correct.

CALLER - How many Federal Reserve Notes are in circulation?

MR. SUPINSKI - $263 billion and we can only account for a small percentage.

CALLER - Where did they go?

MR. SUPINSKI - Peoples mattress, buried in their back yards and illegal drug money.

CALLER - Since the debt is payable in Federal Reserve Notes, how can the $4 trillion national debt be paid-off with the total Federal Reserve Notes in circulation?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't know.

CALLER - If the Federal Government would collect every Federal Reserve Note in circulation would it be mathematically possible to pay the $4 trillion national debt?

MR. SUPINSKI - No

CALLER - Am I correct when I say, $1 deposited in a member bank $8 can be lent out through Fractional Reserve Policy?

MR. SUPINSKI - About $7.

CALLER - Correct me if I am wrong but, $7 of additional Federal Reserve Notes were never put in circulation. But, for lack of better words were "created out of thin air " in the form of credits and the two cents per denomination were not paid either. In other words, the Federal Reserve Notes were not physically printed but, in reality were created by a journal entry and lent at interest. Is that correct?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Is that the reason there are only $263 billion Federal Reserve Notes in circulation?

MR. SUPINSKI - That is part of the reason.

CALLER - Am I mistaking that when the Federal Reserve Act was passed (on Christmas Eve) in 1913, it transferred the power to coin and issue our nation's money and to regulate the value thereof from Congress to a Private corporation. And my country now borrows what should be our own money from the Federal Reserve (a private corporation) plus interest. Is that correct and the debt can never be paid off under the current money system of country?

MR. SUPINSKI - Basically, yes.

CALLER - I smell a rat, do you?

MR. SUPINSKI - I am sorry, I can't answer that, I work here.

CALLER - Has the Federal Reserve ever been independently audited?

MR. SUPINSKI - We are audited.

CALLER - Why is there a current House Resolution 1486 calling for a complete audit of the Federal Reserve by the GAO and why is the Federal Reserve resisting?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't know.

CALLER - Does the Federal Reserve regulate the value of Federal Reserve Notes and interest rates?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Explain how the Federal Reserve System can be Constitutional if, only the Congress of the US, which comprises of the Senate and the House of representatives has the power to coin and issue our money supply and regulate the value thereof? Nowhere, in the Constitution does it give Congress the power or authority to transfer any powers granted under the Constitution to a private corporation or, does it?

MR. SUPINSKI - I am not an expert on constitutional law. I can refer you to our legal department.

CALLER - I can tell you I have read the Constitution. It does NOT provide that any power granted can be transferred to a private corporation. Doesn't it specifically state, all other powers not granted are reserved to the States and to the citizens? Does that mean to a private corporation?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't think so, but we were created by Congress.

CALLER - Would you agree it is our country and it should be our money as provided by our Constitution?

MR. SUPINSKI - I understand what you are saying.

CALLER - Why should we borrow our own money from a private consortium of bankers? Isn't this why we had a revolution, created a separate sovereign nation and a Bill of Rights?

MR. SUPINSKI - (Declined to answer).

CALLER - Has the Federal Reserve ever been declared constitutional by the Supreme Court?

MR. SUPINSKI - I believe there has been court cases on the matter.

/www.freedomfinancialconsultants.com/declaration.ht...

CALLER - Have there been Supreme Court Cases?

MR. SUPINSKI - I think so, but I am not sure.

CALLER - Didn't the Supreme Court declare unanimously in A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. vs. US and Carter vs. Carter Coal Co. the corporative-state arrangement an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power? <"The power conferred is the power to regulate. This is legislative delegation in its most obnoxious form; for it is not even delegation to an official or an official body, presumptively disinterested, but to private persons." Carter vs. Carter Coal Co...>

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't know, I can refer you to our legal department.

CALLER - Isn't the current money system a house of cards that must fall because, the debt can mathematically never be paid-off?

MR. SUPINSKI - It appears that way. I can tell you have been looking into this matter and are very knowledgeable. However, we do have a solution.

CALLER - What is the solution?

MR. SUPINSKI - The Debit Card.

CALLER - Do you mean under the EFT Act (Electronic Funds Transfer)? Isn't that very frightening, when one considers the capabilities of computers? It would provide the government and all it's agencies, including the Federal Reserve such information as: You went to the gas station @ 2:30 and bought $20.00 of unleaded gas @ $3.41 per gallon and then you went to the grocery store @ 2:58 and bought bread, lunch meat and milk for $12.32 and then went to the drug store @ 3:30 and bought cold medicine for $5.62. In other words, they would know where we go, when we went, how much we paid, how much the merchant paid and how much profit he made. Under the EFT they will literally know everything about us. Isn't that kind of scary?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes, it makes you wonder.

CALLER - I smell a GIANT RAT that has overthrown my constitution. Aren't we paying tribute in the form of income taxes to a consortium of private bankers?

MR. SUPINSKI - I can't call it tribute, it is interest.

CALLER - Haven't all elected officials taken an oath of office to preserve and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic? Isn't the Federal Reserve a domestic enemy?

MR. SUPINSKI - I can't say that.

CALLER - Our elected officials and members of the Federal Reserve are guilty of aiding and abetting the overthrowing of my Constitution and that is treason. Isn't the punishment of treason death?

MR. SUPINSKI - I believe so.

CALLER - Thank you for your time and information and if I may say so, I think you should take the necessary steps to protect you and your family and withdraw your money from the banks before the collapse, I am.

MR. SUPINSKI - It doesn't look good.

CALLER - May God have mercy on the souls who are behind this unconstitutional and criminal act called the Federal Reserve. When the ALMIGHTY MASS awakens to this giant hoax, they will not take it with a grain of salt. It has been a pleasure talking to you and I thank you for your time. I hope you will take my advice before it does collapse.

MR. SUPINSKI - Unfortunately, it does not look good.

CALLER - Have a good day and thanks for your time.

MR. SUPINSKI - Thanks for calling.

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

Stop Electing Lawyers

http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/jfk_s...iety_speech.htm

911 means emergency inside job in any language. The thing we have to fear is fear government itself. It is easier to get a man to hate than it is to get him to think. Illegalize Presstitution.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Now that was entertaining!

[M.Dancer]

Tin Foil Hat at full power.......

[PolyNewbie]

You guys should wake up instead of making stupid comments because everything in that post is 100 % true and I have around ten books about money that will tell you the same thing- some by mainstream economists and historians. There are also multiple videos.

None are so stupid as to be in favour of their own slavery.

[Riverwind]

You guys should wake up instead of making stupid comments because everything in that post is 100 % true and I have around ten books about money that will tell you the same thing- some by mainstream economists and historians.

All modern economies operate with 'fiat' currencies which are currencies with no intrinsic value other than the fact that a state says they have value. 'fiat' currencies are quite literally a modern day religion and depend on people having blind faith in them. There are numerous examples where people have been burned badly by blind faith in fiat currencies, however, the are many more examples of healthy growing economies that depend on the liquidity provided by fiat currencies. The role of central banks is to 'keep the faith' and it is more of an art than a science. We have learned from experience that a central bank which does not report directly to the gov't does a better job of 'keeping the faith' than a central bank that can be manipulated by politicians seeking votes. That is why the central banks in most developed economies are run like privately held companies.

[PolyNewbie]

ROTFLMAO !!

The difference between the value printed on a bill and the cost to actually produce the money is called seignorage.

In the case of our system, that seignorage is given to the private bank. When you borrow 10,000 to buy a car that $10,000.00 gets created by the bankers. Sometimes they need to put something up for it and that is YOUR collateral.

The only way a dollar ever comes into existence is if it is lent to someone. This means every dollar out there in existence is earning interest for the bankers.

Its a debt based fiat currency- it is the most oppressive form of currency but is one thing all "Western Democracies" have in common. Private bankers own and operate the currency supply and become very rich while doing it. Only a government that was being controlled by private bankers would ever allow a system like this to exist.

Its been called the ultimate hoax by too many different people all throughout history.

There are societies, both UK & Canada have political parties based on monetary reform and putting the seignorage back into the hands of the people. If this could ever be made to happen it would change our society dramatically for the better. It would practically elliminate wars if all other societies did it as well, no more income tax, no more "national debt" - the idea is absurd that gov would borrow money at face value from private bankers who only print it off when they can print it off themselves (its in the laws).

Private bankers use their wealth to direct society through think tanks and focus groups. Both the Rockefeller Republicans (Bush) and Rockefeller Democrats (Kerry) were really the same party with the same objective.

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money ." - Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England (in the 1920s); reputed to be the 2nd wealthiest man in England at that time

- from site http://www.themoneymasters.com/

Also see Mon

Monopoly Men - free on google video

-The Creature From Jekyll Island (book)

-Money (John Kenneth Galbraith)

This is the great big secret of our civilization that the powers do not want you to know or understand. I learned about it in economics 101 but they actual mechanism of some of this was "skated around" by my economics prof.

[Riverwind]

In the case of our system, that seignorage is given to the private bank. When you borrow 10,000 to buy a car that $10,000.00 gets created by the bankers. Sometimes they need to put something up for it and that is YOUR collateral.

And your point is? This ability to create money from nothing increases the capital available for loans which means more people can get loans at lower rates. This leads directly to more economic activity and more wealth for everyone. Banks make money 'creating money from nothing' but it is nothing extraordinary compared to other businesses. Banks play a central role in the economy which is why they are heavily regulated and foreign ownership is prohibited.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Riverwind there is truth beyond the words of economists. The financial system is merely a means of transfering wealth. Is it surprising that governments have horned in on the deal? Is it surprising that banks have political power through manipulation of the economic system and their monopoly on the money supply? Who creates a larger portion of the money supply government mints or financial institutions?

There are alternative economic models out there. C.H. Douglas created one good enough to debate Kynes with. Douglas was tarred and feathered for his thoughts because his theory was decidely against the current system of wealth transfer.

The point is that a paradigm is just that.............

[PolyNewbie]

There is no reason for the bankers to get all that seignorage. They run the banks for their own interest, if the banks were run in the public interest the gov would get the seignorage and there would be no national debt or infrastructure debt.

Ceasar was killed because he wanted to change a similar system. Jesus Christ said "throw the money changers from the temples", all US presidents that were assassinated wanted to print off US gov currency and have the gov get this seignorage.

The current system has the banks functioning no differently than counterfeiters. It must really be the banks that run things in order for this to happen.

[PolyNewbie]

Suppose Dick Cheney had Haliburton generate Iraq war / Haliburton commemorative pens for all the corporate heads of the companies that are privatizing Iraq. Suppose the pens costed $500.00 each but were sold to the Pentagon at $10 billion each.

The money needed to buy the pens would be borrowed from the bankers. The bankers would make more money on the deal than anyone else. They would create the 10 billion needed for each of the pens from nothing. The bankers bring nothing to the table other than the ability to print currency. They make 10 billion for each pen where the rest of them get $10 billion minus the $500.00 cost of production.

This works well for bankers and in the same sense war does.

Our central banks want to own their central banks and convert the countries financial system over to the IMF system. The banks can therefore collect tax from the labour of the people. This is why we have a "war on terror". These countries that are listed as "rogue nations" do not have our central banks owning their central banks. Leaders that represent the people get military coups, terrorist attacks (Iran 1950

's), etc, and govs get replaced with ones open to the idea of going under the IMF with bribes, etc as encouragement. We put criminals into power in both Afganistan & Haiti when we go to war with them so that our central banks & corporations can enslave their populations.

A seminal book on this is Economic Hit Men by John Perkins. Its quoted all the time.

[lost&outofcontrol]

Death and Resurrection of the US Dollar

Thanks to the fact that the Dollar has virtually become the world’s key currency – albeit, imposed by the combined actions of the Federal Reserve Bank (Fed), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank (WB), the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and, in our own region, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) – the United States has been able to finance its Budget Deficits by exporting US Dollars to the entire planet through various complex mechanisms and channels that guarantee that those Dollars and Dollar-denominated financial instruments will flow in an orderly and balanced manner, all in favour of US National Interests and that of its key allies. […]

Over the past two years, the US Treasury Dept. and the IMF have succeeded in suggesting/imposing on around thirty national central banks in different countries – Argentina’s Central Bank included – that they must “soak up” US dollars from their domestic economies and hoard these in their vaults as “reserves” for their own local currencies and for foreign debt payment. In other words, these countries invest in US Dollars which implicitly means that they are financing for free a chunk of (uncontrolled) US public spending which is done by printing Dollar bills. This process is headed by Japan which today has Dollar denominated instruments in its central bank reserves to the tune of over u$s 670.000.000.000; strangely, followed by the “Marxist” Peoples Republic of China with u$s 470 billion, then by South Korea with u$s 220 billion plus a long list of other countries which suddenly awoke to the “need” to “soak up” US Dollars and hoard them silently in their central banks whilst they issue, as a counterpart, their own local currencies to fuel their respective domestic economies (something, by the way, which China has been doing fiercely, maintaining an undervalued Yuan much to the displeasure of the Bush Administration).

[Riverwind]

It appears that technology is allowing others to cash in on the ability to 'creating money' from nothing.

Some virtual world developers officially sell virtual items and currency for real-world money. For example, the MMOG There has therebucks that sell for US dollars. The currency in Project Entropia, Project Entropia Dollars, could be bought and redeemed for real-world money at a rate of 10 PED for U.S.$ 1. On December 14, 2004, an island in Project Entropia sold for U.S. $26,500 (£13,700). One gamer also purchased a virtual space station for U.S. $100,000 (£56,200) and plans to use it as a virtual nightclub.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_economy

These virtual worlds would also allow someone to prove whether their pet economic theory works any better than what we have now. I suspect that the system we can now exists because it is best system compared to the alternatives in practice. Just like democracy is the worst type of gov't imaginable except when compared to all others.

[PolyNewbie]

I can't believe someone is actually defending the idea of private individuals to create money from nothing and excercise almost complete control over the economy. I guess the only question to ask is how much do you pay in income tax ?

What makes you think that this is better than having government create the currency ?

Why couldn't the gov manage currency to the public interest rather than private banks make it for their own interests. I just don't see any advantages and I see a system that absolutely will collapse at some point. It must collapse at some point.

[Riverwind]

I can't believe someone is actually defending the idea of private individuals to create money from nothing and excercise almost complete control over the economy.

Creating 'money from nothing' is a natural consequence of a market economy. Any private individual can create a fiat currency and if they market it properly they can convince others to exchange real goods for it (as I illustrated with my link to the virtual worlds). I assume you have no problems with our market economy?

What makes you think that this is better than having government create the currency ?

The gov't owns the rights to all resources in the ground like oil and gold. Should the gov't run the companies that extract these resources from the ground and sell them on the open market? A gold company makes a profit from the difference between the cost of digging the gold out of the ground and its value on the open market. A bank makes a profit on the difference between the cost of getting money from the BOC and the money people pay for loans. What is the difference? The amount of money banks can create is limited by the gov't via their reserve requirements which the gov't sets. That is why banks make a profit but they are not hugely profitable compared to other businesses. This fact alone tells me that 'creating money from nothing' is not a magical ticket to endless wealth as you seem to believe.

Why couldn't the gov manage currency to the public interest rather than private banks make it for their own interests. I just don't see any advantages and I see a system that absolutely will collapse at some point. It must collapse at some point.

Why couldn't the gov't run a oil or gold company in the public interest rather than let private companies use these valuable resources for their own interests? The answer should be obvious: gov'ts are not good at running enterprises like that and there are literally 1000s of examples that prove this point. Similarily, the gov't should not be in the business of deciding who should get a credit card or what businesses deserve loans.

The only time the gov't should provide services is when it is not possible to have competition between private suppliers or when the services are always money losing propositions that serve a greater public good (i.e. providing education to all children no matter what their economic background).

Incidently, USSR tried to have a system where the gov't had complete control over the money system and did not allow private enterprises to profit from making loans. That system collapsed but our so-called-unstable system has kept going despite some pretty nasty crisis over the years. The experimental evidence seems to indicate that our system is considerably more stable than you would like to believe.

[August1991]

The amount of money banks can create is limited by the gov't via their reserve requirements which the gov't sets.

Riverwind, a minor point. The government no longer sets reserve requirements in Canada.

Otherwise, your post was a breath of sweet reason in a thread of rank gibberish.

[JerrySeinfeld]

The amount of money banks can create is limited by the gov't via their reserve requirements which the gov't sets.

Riverwind, a minor point. The government no longer sets reserve requirements in Canada.

Otherwise, your post was a breath of sweet reason in a thread of rank gibberish.

Besides, correct me if i'm wrong, but if the Government could just print it's own money anytime it wanted, wouldn't that completely undermine the whole monetary system?

[Riverwind]

The amount of money banks can create is limited by the gov't via their reserve requirements which the gov't sets.

Riverwind, a minor point. The government no longer sets reserve requirements in Canada.

I assumed that not having a specific reserve target is not the same as having no requirement. When I looked into this issue a bit more I found this article:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa36...i_n8758050/pg_1

It appears that the BOC feels it can control the money supply by increasing interest rates so it does not need rigid reserve requirements any more. I guess this works because raising interest rates is a way to force the banks to raise their prices which in turn reduces demand for credit. I don't have time to figure out how the BOC is able to force banks to raise their prices when it raises interest rates (i.e. is a legal requirement or a natural market consequence).

[lost&outofcontrol]

Besides, correct me if i'm wrong, but if the Government could just print it's own money anytime it wanted, wouldn't that completely undermine the whole monetary system?

Read these links -1-2-3- concerning the "soaking up" of US dollars.

You can print all the money you want when you control and instruct the IMF and World Bank to force foreign countries to soak up these "excess" dollars.

*edit*

US dollar reserves

1. Japan 670 Billion
   
2. China 470 Billion
   
3. South Korea 220 Billion
   

[Riverwind]

You can print all the money you want when you control and instruct the IMF and World Bank to force foreign countries to soak up these "excess" dollars.

Nobody is forcing Japan, China or South Korea to buy those dollars. In fact, the US gov't has been trying desperately to get China to stop buying US dollars in order to get the Yuan to rise. All fiat currencies are faith based - the US dollar will eventually collapse if the US gov't does not change its policies soon.

[PolyNewbie]

A bank makes a profit on the difference between the cost of getting money from the BOC and the money people pay for loans. What is the difference?

I'll answer the rest of your post later. The important thing is that the banks do not get their money from the bank of canada. They just print it off. They can print a $10,000.00 bill just as easily as a five dollar bill. They create the money from nothing and then have it at full value. A charter is a license to print money.

Banks don't normally operate this way except when the Rothschilds took over in the 1750's or so. Governments used to print money but battles have been fought between private bankers and governments throughout history- since Caesar and Jesus Christ.

If a government wants to build a bridge for 10 million dollars, it must borrow the money. The governemnt would have Canadian people earn the money into the economy and have a bridge built by Canadian people using Canadian resources and still owe a private banker the 10 million when all the banker brought to the table was the printing of the money. For printing digits on paper he effectely owns the bridge.

A system like this can only exist when bankers own governments.

Wouldn't it be better if gov printed the money and allowed the gov workers to earn it into the economy through public service and capital works ? Then we have no such thing as a "national debt".

[Riverwind]

They create the money from nothing and then have it at full value. A charter is a license to print money.

Why do mortgage rates go up when the BOC raises rates? We have plently of competition in the mortgage market in Canada so you cannot argue that the market is rigged. The BOC controls the price that the banks are allowed to charge when they create this money from nothing.

Why do bank profits actually go down when interest rates go up? If it costs them nothing to create the money then higher interest rates should mean more profit but this is clearly not the case. Banks must pay the BOC for the money they create and banks only make their profit on the difference between what the BOC charges and what they can charge the consumer. When interest rates go up fewer people are willing to borrow which means they make less money.

Why do banks go bankrupt? This should never happen if they had an unlimited ability to print money yet it happens all of the time.

[PolyNewbie]

Why do banks go bankrupt? This should never happen if they had an unlimited ability to print money yet it happens all of the time

They are required to keep reserves of deposits of other peoples money in order to lend. Also when bankers go bankrupt its the public that fills in the needed capital in the states through FDIC. FDIC protection lowers reserve requirements making the public more responsible.

Banking is complex and volumes have been written about them but these volumes carefully go around the fact that money is printed for nothing and lent out at full face value.

The best sources are The Money Masters video and The Creaure From Jekyll Island book. There are many sources that all explain the same thing, those two are very good for seeing the history of banking.

[PolyNewbie]

The gov't owns the rights to all resources in the ground like oil and gold. Should the gov't run the companies that extract these resources from the ground and sell them on the open market?

These are value added activities. It takes skill and chance to mine gold. It takes nothing to put numbers on paper or type them into someones account on a computer. There is no value added to account for the profit.

[Riverwind]

They are required to keep reserves of deposits of other peoples money in order to lend. Also when bankers go bankrupt its the public that fills in the needed capital in the states through FDIC.

There are no longer any reserve requirements for banks. They can lend as much as they want now. However, they still have to pay the BOC for the money they lend. If you don't believe me then try to answer the other questions I posted.

These are value added activities. It takes skill and chance to mine gold. It takes nothing to put numbers on paper or type them into someones account on a computer. There is no value added to account for the profit.

It takes a just a much skill to determine who is likely to pay back a loan and who is not. It takes skill to keep your customers satisfied so they don't go to the bank down the street.

[PolyNewbie]

They can lend as much as they want now. However, they still have to pay the BOC for the money they lend. If you don't believe me then try to answer the other questions I posted.

Which question ?

That is just plain untrue. The Canadian Action Party website has some short tutorials on banking,

Bank Of Canada Tutorial / Canadian Action Party

See where your income tax goes & how money is created in this 5 page tutorial.

The UK also has a monetary reform party with lots of great info on money.