Banker/Wall Street Governance

[PolyNewbie]

Guyser:And yes, for the Gov to have done this would take thousands to know and be able to implement .

Most - actually all - of the intelligence experts that I have heard dissagree with the idea of thousands of people in on the deal. I've heard figures of around 20 people. There are a few intelligence experts that think 911 was an inside job. Are you an intelligence expert or just another "know it all" with a computer in your moms basement ?

Have you looked at

Here is what the ex German secratary of defence thinks, Andreas Von Buelow, Phd.

Article/Interview: "The planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement. To hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes, and within one hour to drive them into their targets with complicated flight maneuvers! This is unthinkable without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry."

William Christison – Former National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. 29-year CIA veteran.

Essay: "I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them."

Perhaps you and a few of the other neoliberal sycophant fascists on this group should show these guys and others like him a few things.

Its really amazing the level of intelligence you find on these news groups. There are people on this group that are obviosly qualified to called top scientists in their field incompetent, Phd's in economics fools and intelligence experts on the subject of 911 wrong- saying what they belkieve is impossible. It is my honor to share this forum with yourself and others who feel as qualified to criticise as you do.

[PolyNewbie]

Lets get back to the banks and financial oligarchy on this thread.

[madmax]

No, I show that 911 had a severe energy deficit if the official version is correct. The buildings could not collapse that way unless there were bombs.

BULL!!! It is a tragedy when the horrific truth is undermined by people wanting to make a name for themselves and trying to capitalize on events that are self explanitory.

If this is fact (which it has been proven many times) then the only logical conclusion is that government was in on it because no one could set this up without government co operation and governments are known throughout history for doing things like this to get people to want war.

It's too bad that you believe this crap, because the truth itself is far more disturbing then the fantasy presented here. The other one I like is the plane never hit the Pentagon. The only one that I ever had reservations about was flight 93 and whether the US fighters shot it down. They didn't.

The gaps in knowledge and reactions to events action as well as the incompetence and brushing off of threats by the Bush Administration are far more accurate and disturbing, then creating a clever government that pulls off an extreme event in participation with a Terrorist Organization. Sorry, this government was never this clever. They were incompetent. Al Qaida were well planned, Patient and lucky to pull off such a feat undetected. The Bush administration were thinking about missile defence and cold war mentality.

[PolyNewbie]

Back on topic: Another good site on monetary reform:

Comittee On Monetary and Economic Reform

Its always nice to see folks like mad max who never really consider things beyond what they are told. If we meet, shall I bring a 3 card monte table ?

Debate me on the 911 thread on issues around 911 in the US politics section. Once again another poster on this forum feels qualified to dispute senior people at the top of their fields. I feel honored to post among people that think so highly of themselves.

This thread is about monetary reform.

[geoffrey]

What exactly is wrong with the current system? I happen to like it.

[Riverwind]

What exactly is wrong with the current system? I happen to like it.

Here is a history lesson that explains why we have the system we have today:

The rise of the popularity of monetarism in political circles accelerated as Keynesian economics seemed unable to explain or cure the seemingly contradictory problems of rising unemployment and inflation in response to the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1972 and the oil shocks of 1973. On the one hand, higher unemployment seemed to call for Keynesian reflation, but on the other hand rising inflation seemed to call for Keynesian deflation. The result was a significant disillusionment with Keynesian demand management: a Democratic President Jimmy Carter appointed a monetarist Federal Reserve chief Paul Volcker who made inflation fighting his primary objective, and restricted the money supply to tame inflation in the economy. The result was the most severe recession of the post-war period, but also the creation of the desired price stability.

The policies that Poly advocates have proven to be a failure.

Furthermore, the world has changed - banks no longer have a monopoly on the ability to expand the money supply through credit - car companies, furniture stores, non-bank credit card companies, etc all have the same ability to create money. This means that interest rate policy is the only really effective tool left that allows the BOC to control the money supply. We would really hurt the economy if we actually did try to turn back the clock and re-institute the tight controls on credit that existed prior to 1970.

[Remiel]

Can we please just cleanse this infection from the Federal forum?

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind: I don't know where you got this quote from

The rise of the popularity of monetarism in political circles accelerated as Keynesian economics seemed unable to explain or cure the seemingly contradictory problems of rising unemployment and inflation in response to the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1972 and the oil shocks of 1973. On the one hand, higher unemployment seemed to call for Keynesian reflation, but on the other hand rising inflation seemed to call for Keynesian deflation. The result was a significant disillusionment with Keynesian demand management: a Democratic President Jimmy Carter appointed a monetarist Federal Reserve chief Paul Volcker who made inflation fighting his primary objective, and restricted the money supply to tame inflation in the economy. The result was the most severe recession of the post-war period, but also the creation of the desired price stability.

I suspect that you got it from a money establishment site and haven't compared its words with what is actually going on and has been since the 70's. I'll just point out a few things:

(1) Steadily declining hospital care since mid 70's (these stats in number of beds vs people widely available)

(2) Steady increase in national debt

(3) It now takes two average middle class incomes to buy a house, have the necessary cars and go on vacations when in the 70's it took only one.

(4) Increase in the difference in incomes between the poorest and the richest. CEO's used to earn about 40 times the average worker in their business, now that ratio is above 400.

(5) Increased poerty levels, every where you go there are beggers on the streets.

(6) Increased university tuition - drastically increased.

(7) Corruption is way up. 3 Trillion dollars have gone missing from the Pentagon since Bush was elected. Many other scandals from Bre-X to Enron.

(8) Drug abuse among young people is going up

(9) The real economy - manufactering capabilities is being exported. The politicians have openly said we are converting to a service economy. A service econmoy cannot last long because nothing useful is being produced. We will soon be nations of people that serve coffee and a few CEO's that get all the money.

(10) A much higher percentage of the populations live in prisons since the 70's

(11) National debt has taken a big rise since the 70's.

(12) Wars are now necessary to keep the economy afloat.

(13) Huge increase in speculative investment - derivatives. This is what lead to the crash of 1929.

Sometimes its good to just open your eyes rather than read about the establishment telling you it isn't corrupt.

Currently 28 % of your income tax goes to private bankers and they give you nothing in return. They use this money to control our society and have been doing it since it all started in 1913 (in the USA). Bankers got a big increase in their control of Canadian society since the mid 70's when Trudeau started using private banks to finance government rather than the governments own bank.

Geofferey:What exactly is wrong with the current system? I happen to like it.

Thats because you are a hockey puck and you live in a fish bowl and are so weak minded that you cannot imagine anything else.

Monetary Reform - that is the government using its own bank to finance operations would result in little visible change in our society for the first few months. Your income tax would decrease, the quality of hospitalization and education would drastically increase and there would be more jobs available that have higher pay. They would lose control of the media and you would get more fair news reporting instead of every news station giving you the same opinions rather than reporting on facts. We would also have fewer wars because we wouldn't have bankers lobbying for them.

[PolyNewbie]

Remiel:Can we please just cleanse this infection from the Federal forum?

You may be a bit slow so let me help you out. The economy is an important part of federal politics and this thread is about federal monetary policy.

[Remiel]

Monetary policy is just a facade for what it is really about: Your ridiculously deranged conspiracy theory.

[PolyNewbie]

No, monetary reform is much more important than any war or anything to do with 911.

[margrace]

Don't stop Polly, the last few posts prove that you are stepping on some very important toes.

[PolyNewbie]

Talking about monetary reform goes right to the very heart of the beast. People get killed for it. The Kennedies was killed for it. Everything else pales in comparison to the importance of monetary reform.

The importance of monetary reform can never be overstated.

Everyone, please watch the Money Masters video. Its free and will be the most important documentary you will ever see and will change your whole outlook on politics and the world.

The Money Masters View it here for free.

[geoffrey]

The first 5 minutes of the video is so loaded with crap I can't watch anymore of it. Go find that thread where I found you the audited financial statements of the Federal Reserve where you can see that they aren't making massive profits and screwing Americans. Yikes.

[Riverwind]

(Currently 28 % of your income tax goes to private bankers and they give you nothing in return.

Currently, a significant piece my income goes to private bankers and, as a result, I get to live in a house that I would not otherwise be able to afford. Debt is not intrinsically bad if it is incurred for the right reasons.

Furthermore, much of the interest paid on Canadian debt goes back to Canadians that hold gov't bonds. Anyone with a pension plan or a RRSP probably benefits from some of this interest. So it is a mistake to assume that interest paid on the debt simply disappears.

Trudeau started using private banks to finance government rather than the governments own bank.

Inflation was out of control - the system was broken and something had to change. Forcing the gov't to borrow money on the open market like everyone else was absolutely necessary to prevent the gov't from increasing the money supply too fast.

[geoffrey]

(Currently 28 % of your income tax goes to private bankers and they give you nothing in return.

You should invest in the private bankers if they are indeed making so much. You can buy TD, CIBC, RBC, BMO, whatever you wish.

Furthermore, much of the interest paid on Canadian debt goes back to Canadians that hold gov't bonds. Anyone with a pension plan or a RRSP probably benefits from some of this interest. So it is a mistake to assume that interest paid on the debt simply disappears.

Excellent point Riverwind. That's also why it's better for the government to carry debt, rather than individual Canadians. What do your government savings bonds pay you??

http://www2.csb.gc.ca/eng/bonds_rates.asp

2.8% on the non-premium GSB.

Alot cheaper than you or I can borrow money.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:Currently, a significant piece my income goes to private bankers and, as a result, I get to live in a house that I would not otherwise be able to afford. Debt is not intrinsically bad if it is incurred for the right reasons.

Furthermore, much of the interest paid on Canadian debt goes back to Canadians that hold gov't bonds. Anyone with a pension plan or a RRSP probably benefits from some of this interest. So it is a mistake to assume that interest paid on the debt simply disappears.

If our system was different your house would be even bigger and you would have paid less for it because the people that build it would not be paying as much income tax so wouldn't need as much money to work.

Riverwind:Inflation was out of control - the system was broken and something had to change. Forcing the gov't to borrow money on the open market like everyone else was absolutely necessary to prevent the gov't from increasing the money supply too fast.

Its a stupid arguement but one often used by politicians.

When the government creates money, it still gets paid back but without interest or at very low interest. The profits of banking serve the Canadaian people in capital projects instead of going into the pockets of private bankers who then decide who will get to be government and control us.

When Bank Of Canada finances projects we still pay them back or else we would be into a lot of inflation.

Private bankers are in banking for their own benefit, not to protect Canadian people.

I'm not surprised that you would stand up for such a corrupt system. The economics in this system add up about as well as the physics of the official version of 911.

If we ever meet I will bring a book of matches so that I can give them to you and watch you set yourself on fire. After all, if you set yourself on fire you remain warm for the rest of your life, an advantage that would not be lost on an economic/engineering/phsysics prodigy such as yourself.

[Remiel]

See, Poly, I don't object to you because you like to talk about monetary policy. There is nothing inherently wrong with the topic. I object to you because of your ridiculous notions of how some bankers have personally fortunes of 300-700 trillion and want to kill everyone over 12. So, I find it hard to want to entertain any of your ideas because I know that, ultimately, the purpose of all your arguments comes back to the fact that you are way off the deep end.

[Riverwind]

When the government creates money, it still gets paid back but without interest or at very low interest. The profits of banking serve the Canadaian people in capital projects instead of going into the pockets of private bankers who then decide who will get to be government and control us.

The gov't of Canada does not borrow money from banks. It borrows money by issuing bonds. Whoever buys those bonds receives the interest payments. Now you can correctly argue that only people with a certain amount of wealth would be able to afford to buy those bonds, however, we are still taking about a very large group of people. IOW: the interest on the public debt does not go into the pockets of some 'private banker' - it is paid back to Canadians that loan their money to the gov't in return for interest.

[PolyNewbie]

Remiel:I object to you because of your ridiculous notions of how some bankers have personally fortunes of 300-700 trillion and want to kill everyone over 12

See New World Order Quotes

Also notice the number of "detention centers" that are being built. Mainstream recently announced that Haliburton got another 385 million dollar no bid contract.

These detention centers can be found where rails link. Its an efficient way of moving large numbers of people. The dention centers have funny looking buses in some (like the ones in China) and asphixiation facilities in others. These are in virtually all countries all over the world. Who is going to feed all these people ?

From the quotes you can learn that there will be a new language and a new religion. Old dogs don't learn new tricks. Have you got your instructional tape for the new language yet ?

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:The gov't of Canada does not borrow money from banks. It borrows money by issuing bonds. Whoever buys those bonds receives the interest payments. Now you can correctly argue that only people with a certain amount of wealth would be able to afford to buy those bonds, however, we are still taking about a very large group of people. IOW: the interest on the public debt does not go into the pockets of some 'private banker' - it is paid back to Canadians that loan their money to the gov't in return for interest.

Its true that the government does get money by issuing bonds, but did you notice a big war bond push for the wars of late ?

The interest on public debt does in fact go directly into the pockets of private bankers - thats why we have a big national debt. If the money went back to the government we would not be in debt !. You can learn about banking from many sources and see this. The UK and Canada both have monetary reform websites and they do explain it.

Your banker sponsored educational system and the banker controlled publishing houses are very careful about what they say.

Congressman Larry P MacDonald did a study on who owns the banks - he did a congressional report that shows it was the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Schiffs, etc - same crowd that started the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve Act was signed into law a few days before Xmas when most people that would have voted against it were home for the holidays.

MacDonald was killed when his plane was shot down over Russia by a Russian Missile. He was a fighter against the New World Order and often spoke openly against it.

Kennedy was killed after he decided to nationalize the banks.

Jackson had an attempted assasination because of his war with the banks. His tombstone says "I Killed The Banks"

Woodrow Wilson said:

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men". -Woodrow Wilson

Presidential Quotes On Banking

[Riverwind]

The interest on public debt does in fact go directly into the pockets of private bankers

You seem to think that repeating a false statement over and over again makes it true. The interest on the public debt goes to the bond holders. Some of these bondholders are financial institutions but many bond holders are average Canadians who have RRSPs or Pensions.

The If the money went back to the government we would not be in debt !.

But we would have to deal with hyper inflation and a collapsing dollar - which, IMO, does much greater harm than gov't debt.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:You seem to think that repeating a false statement over and over again makes it true. The interest on the public debt goes to the bond holders. Some of these bondholders are financial institutions but many bond holders are average Canadians who have RRSPs or Pensions.

Thats true when the government finances war with bonds, but too much of this depresses the economy.

When the government buys bonds from banks they print off the money for nothing to pay for them.

Riverwind:But we would have to deal with hyper inflation and a collapsing dollar - which, IMO, does much greater harm than gov't debt.

The difference between government borrowing money from a nationalist banks such as the Bank Of Canada vs private banks is the interest - which incidentally - must be printed off as well causing inflation.

I know that you like the idea of Rockefeller and his gang of thugs getting our money in return for nothing, and you will back these guys up and the war mongers no matter what they do but I think we are better off without paying this interest to private bankers. I don't understand how paying 28 % of income tax to wealthy private bankers who give nothing in return helps our economy.

[margrace]

The interest on public debt does in fact go directly into the pockets of private bankers

You seem to think that repeating a false statement over and over again makes it true. The interest on the public debt goes to the bond holders. Some of these bondholders are financial institutions but many bond holders are average Canadians who have RRSPs or Pensions.

Please explain to me about RRSPs. I only get back what I put in it seems and I have to pay full income tax on that. My Old Age Pension is cut if I cash in RRSPs so who is benefiting?

[Riverwind]

When the government buys bonds from banks they print off the money for nothing to pay for them.

Banks have to pay interest on the money they create which means it would not be economical to finance the purchase of a low interest gov't bond with a loan.