Money Reform for Canada

[Spike22]

My son now prints all our money...he has to reform :-p

[Riverwind]

You cannot understad this subject by reading a few web sites. Your process explains how 10 % of the created money comes into existence.

The concept of reserve ratios is easy to understand. You own anti-banking site explains it correctly but they forget to point out that when money is created the bank creates a liability (i.e. a deposit) as well as an asset. Face it - you don't know what you are talking about. You read these sites and don't really understand what they are saying.

From that site "...That made it lawful for banks to loan far more than they had in deposits – to practice fractional reserve banking...."

What it says is banks were allowed to loan far more than the deposits that they had before the law was passed. Which is true. The same site explains how the mechanism actually works where money has to be redeposited before it is loaned again.

Why don't you simply admit you are wrong? A system with a 100% reserve ratio is system where banks are not allowed to loan money.

You are going to have to learn for yourself how the bank creates money from your deposits. I'm sick of your combined arrogance and stupidty and wish you would stop polluting my threads with your know it all attitude and know nothing reality.

You don't like being backed into a corner and shown to be a fool. Why don't stop polluting this forum with your bizarre fantasies?

[Albert Opstad Edmonton]

Reply: I propose that we elect our government and that we elect our BoC directors and that the government and the BoC operate independently of each other. We could elect each separately and at different times.

You cannot elect people if you want them to be apolitical. Do you want to see supreme judges elected? How about civil servants?

Typing in the following creates the text above:

[quote name='Albert Opstad Edmonton' date='Feb 22 2007, 04:41 PM' post='188817']Reply: I propose that we elect our government and that we elect our BoC directors and that the government and the BoC operate independently of each other. We could elect each separately and at different times.[/quote]You cannot elect people if you want them to be apolitical. Do you want to see supreme judges elected? How about civil servants?

Thank you. Perhaps tomorrow I'll try to reply differently.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:The concept of reserve ratios is easy to understand. You own anti-banking site explains it correctly but they forget to point out that when money is created the bank creates a liability (i.e. a deposit) as well as an asset. Face it - you don't know what you are talking about. You read these sites and don't really understand what they are saying.

That site does not explain what happens when someone deposits $100.00 into a retail bank. Only the "Money As Debt" video & The Creature From Jekyll Island book explain that. Only operation of central banks is shown in the Money Masters video. You may be able to find it on the web as "the Rothschild Formula".

I would copy the example out of Creature From Jekyll Island but you would just say that is wrong just like you assume everything that you don't find reasonable must be wrong.

The Money Masters is the best overall video on the topic but it stops short of an explanation on money creation at the retailer bank level.

If $100.00 gets deposited ina banks then it can result in the creation of over $3000.00 and that is with a 10 % reserve ratio.

Riverwind:What it says is banks were allowed to loan far more than the deposits that they had before the law was passed.

No. Thats not what it says.

[PolyNewbie]

An excellent site about banking is The Fed Exposed.

It has content from historians and intelligence officers and has links to movies about the Fed as well as an online book.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:Why don't you simply admit you are wrong? A system with a 100% reserve ratio is system where banks are not allowed to loan money.

Thats not what resrve ratio means. A 100 % reserve ratio means they cannot create money. They must only lend money that they have.

[Riverwind]

I would copy the example out of Creature From Jekyll Island but you would just say that is wrong just like you assume everything that you don't find reasonable must be wrong.

Go ahead. I am sure that you would prove, once again, that you don't understand the material.

That site does not explain what happens when someone deposits $100.00 into a retail bank.

Yes, it does. Here is what is says:

Question: How do private banks create money?

Answer: Focusing on the majority of the US money supply, the method is as follows:

The Federal Reserve Notes and equivalent Federal Reserve Deposits (mentioned above) are deposited in local banks or to their credit at one of the 12 Fed banks.

IOW. That site is claiming that retail banks work that way as well (why else would it claim that the 'majority' of the money supply is created in that way?).

Riverwind:What it says is banks were allowed to loan far more than the deposits that they had before the law was passed.

No. Thats not what it says.

It does. The meaning of the word 'deposit' in that sentence is vague. An intelligent reader would realize after reading the entire page that the word 'deposit' in that sentence must refer to the The Federal Reserve Notes deposited in the bank as described in the next section.

Or are you claiming that your own source is wrong?

[Albert Opstad Edmonton]

My son now prints all our money...he has to reform :-p

What message am I supposed to get here? Thank you.

[Albert Opstad Edmonton]

Reply: I propose that we elect our government and that we elect our BoC directors and that the government and the BoC operate independently of each other. We could elect each separately and at different times.

You cannot elect people if you want them to be apolitical. Do you want to see supreme judges elected? How about civil servants?

Typing in the following creates the text above:

[quote name='Albert Opstad Edmonton' date='Feb 22 2007, 04:41 PM' post='188817']Reply: I propose that we elect our government and that we elect our BoC directors and that the government and the BoC operate independently of each other. We could elect each separately and at different times.[/quote]You cannot elect people if you want them to be apolitical. Do you want to see supreme judges elected? How about civil servants?

I want/propose that the BoC and the GoC operate as separately and as independently of each other as we, the public, can elect them to be.

[Albert Opstad Edmonton]

Riverwind:Why don't you simply admit you are wrong? A system with a 100% reserve ratio is system where banks are not allowed to loan money.

Thats not what resrve ratio means. A 100 % reserve ratio means they cannot create money. They must only lend money that they have.

I thank you, and all others, for their input on this topic, but I feel that any further action is now up to my fellow/madam Canadians. For those Canadians who want a new money system in Canada, I believe that the one that I have proposed is the new money system that Canada needs.

[Riverwind]

I thank you, and all others, for their input on this topic, but I feel that any further action is now up to my fellow/madam Canadians. For those Canadians who want a new money system in Canada, I believe that the one that I have proposed is the new money system that Canada needs.

Why? I don't see any problems with the current system.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:Why? I don't see any problems with the current system.

The problem with the current system is that we have private bankers issuing currency in the name of the country. They cannot be held accountable and this isn't democracy.

The idea that bankers should be able to operate independently of the democratic process is rediculous and an idea put forth by bankers and the educational system. It doesn't even make any sense at all even with a casual examination. If this is true for bankers, why is it not true for the other branches of government. Whose interest do the private bankers operate in ?

Also, the problem is that a large percentage of our income tax goes toward paying interest on debt. This is completely unecessary and this money could be spent on hospitals, schools and infrastructure.

If the 28 % of our income tax that is used to pay interest on the debt was used to improve education, culture and security for Canadian citizens we would all be much better off. Currently we spend 5% on education and 28 % on paying interest to private individuals and international banks. This is robbery and oppression.

If we elliminated the robbery and oppression of private bankers we could create a society that would stretch the imagination.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I believe that the financial system needs major work, now let me tell you why. We are becoming wage slaves. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting more so. The average citizen has a debt to equity ration! We have become the means of wealth creation for those who take more than they need for their own satisfaction.

If we were all hunters, we would die from this type of operation. In fact, that is what is happening in the worlds oceans we are depleting the ecosystem. Now just for a minute think about how the system is actually working. We create money by utilizing the future profits of lending to finance a loan. There is no real fractional reserve at play is there? For the reason Riverwind so accurately described, banks don't make money off of their reserves so they asked for and received from the government the elimination of those reserves. They do pay 1/30 of 1 percent annually of total deposits to the CDIC to cover possible losses, the cost of which is of course charged back to the customers of these institutions. The point being that banks no longer have assets equal to deposits because they don't need them. Banks operate under a completely different set of rules than you or your business does. They wanted to hang the guys at Enron for selling bankrupcy insurance but once the fed is involved with a bank anything is possible. The fees charged for deposit insurance to member institutes are tax deductible as a business expense. Isn't that interesting, they get a tax deduction from having to charge us to protect our own deposits with an insurance plan.

The system is bent! The same rules should apply to all citizens of a nation, not one set of laws for the rich and one set for the poor.

I think we can trace our problems back to the creation of limited liability companies, the corporations. Originally designed for business ventures deemed to risky for either private or public funding, they are now a resident feature of the economy. The owners and operators of corporations are not subject to personal liability for their actions. No liability equals no responsibility. The creation of the "legal" citizen in the form of a corporate type of business entity was the beginning of much of our current troubles.

All bovine excrement aside corporate governance is a very real problem. The military industrial complex is another problem. The entire concept of taxation is probably the largest problem because it provides for the protection of the other two problems by transferring wealth from the individual to the government. What is truely needed is that citizens wake up and smell the coffee.

[PolyNewbie]

Jerry J. Fortin:All bovine excrement aside corporate governance is a very real problem.

Yes but if we do not get monetary reform these problems will continously re emerge and any solution will be short term because the real power does lie with those who print the money. The system can always grow new arms & legs but never a new head.

I agree with the COMER position on 50 % GCM and government finance through the Bank of Canada. This would clean things up and give the public a clear view of what the banks are doing as well as put politicians back in control of the system.

Without this, we have short term marginal gains. I believe that we cannot do anything until the political will in the USA wants the same thing.

I think the only thing we can actually do at this point is to help spread information and lead people to non corporate media and let them do their own thinking. Above all else we have much to read, think and talk about.

I don't believe corporate governance is the real problem, its being presentated that way but I think the real sources of problems are the dark corridors of power held by international bankers and their influence on the political process.

[geoffrey]

... the real power does lie with those who print the money.

The Mint controls Canada?

[PolyNewbie]

geoffery:The Mint controls Canada?

re my remark on "who prints the money". My remark is more of an expression than something that can be taken literally. Most of this money that I talk about is actually electronic money. In Cnada the government prints the "cash". I am refering to the banking powers.

[Riverwind]

The problem with the current system is that we have private bankers issuing currency in the name of the country. They cannot be held accountable and this isn't democracy.

We have a free market economy which means most services are delivered by private enterprises unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise. I see plenty of reasons to regulate banking. I see no reason to make banking a public service.

Right now, the free market determines who gets access to new money based on their willingness to take on debt and pay interest on the debt. The bankers are held accountable because they are the ones that are responsible for the money they created if the person they loan it to cannot pay it back.

What you seem to want is to replace the free market with a communist style system where the only way to get access to new money is to lobby the government. That is a recipe for more corruption and less accountability.

Also, the problem is that a large percentage of our income tax goes toward paying interest on debt. This is completely unnecessary and this money could be spent on hospitals, schools and infrastructure.

It is absolutely necessary for the government to pay interest on the money it borrows. If the government got interest free money then the private economy, which generates the real wealth of society, would suffer because their would be less money available for it to finance its activities.

28 % on paying interest to private individuals and international banks. This is robbery and oppression.

You are making up facts again. 60% of the interest on the public debt goes to a broad section of Canadians via their pensions and insurance policies. It does not go to 'international bankers'.

[geoffrey]

geoffery:The Mint controls Canada?

re my remark on "who prints the money". My remark is more of an expression than something that can be taken literally. Most of this money that I talk about is actually electronic money. In Cnada the government prints the "cash". I am refering to the banking powers.

No such thing as electronic money, banks existed before computers. You need to know a little something about bank accounting, and a little something about bank economics, before you make such a suggestion.

[PolyNewbie]

Electronic money is money that gets used in transactions and never gets converted to cash. An example of electronic money is the use of a bank card or credit card for a purchase.

The term is used throughout economic literature and books in print today.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:You are making up facts again. 60% of the interest on the public debt goes to a broad section of Canadians via their pensions and insurance policies. It does not go to 'international bankers'.

See the Canadian Action Party website. I can't find the link but the figure is 28 %. Its the largest single expenditure from income tax funds.

I don't think citizens should have to provide private individuals with investment opportunities in order to have sidewalks and schools.

[geoffrey]

Electronic money is money that gets used in transactions and never gets converted to cash. An example of electronic money is the use of a bank card or credit card for a purchase.

Wrong, I pay my VISA bill with cash unfortunately. No such thing as electronic money. You don't need hard in your hand cash for it to be a cash transaction. The bank also pays the vendor in cash.

Let's say at the end of the day, RBC and TD have a settlement between them, cheques, bill payments, ect. RBC owes TD $5.6m in cash, TD owes RBC $4.6m in cash. They settle and RBC sends TD a million dollars of cash. Or, more commonly, RBC acknowledges the liability and TD loans them at the overnight rate the difference in their settlement. Once this accumulates to a considerable chunk of change (unusual), sometimes they'll transfer actual cash, more often they'll transfer securities, whatever. The interbank lending, settlement and borrowing is amazingly complex.

It's such a complex process and system that you'll never understand it from reading a book. Unless your involved in the debt or banking industry, your unlikely to truly grasp the scale or complexities of the system. And it's evident in your posts.

I like how your questioning the system, but you've got to start questioning it and not just making assertions as they are fact... because honestly they are not.

Do Bankers control the politics of the West? Likely, in fact, I'll agree with you here. Those that hold the cash hold the power, no doubt. Do the major banks have power over inflation and economic growth through their lending practices? Absolutely. Is it a concern? Perhaps.

But wild assertations like banks creating cash, electronic cash and mysterious loans that appear out of no where and instantly convert to revenue upon issue (which they'd have to if we follow your line of thinking), just makes your concerns sound like the next alien invasion or bigfoot in New York.

Which is terribly unfortunate.

[Riverwind]

Do Bankers control the politics of the West? Likely, in fact, I'll agree with you here. Those that hold the cash hold the power, no doubt.

Bankers are not an exclusive club. There are many other industries with similar wealth that exercise similar inflluence.

Do the major banks have power over inflation and economic growth through their lending practices? Absolutely. Is it a concern? Perhaps.

That is why the banks lending practices are heavily regulated. Anyone who has tried to get a mortgage in another country (e.g. the UK) learns to appreciate the regulations in Canada that protect the consumer.

[geoffrey]

I support the the status quo (with more competition mind you), don't worry RW.

[PolyNewbie]

geoffrey:It's such a complex process and system that you'll never understand it from reading a book.

One does not have to get into the complexities of every last detail of all this to understand it. John Kenneth galbraith doesn't share your opinion, neither do many others. They claim it is a relatively simple system at the top level.

I don't know what Galbraith and the rest are talking about with this electronic money. Its a term that gets used often enough. Economists talk about electronic money and the affect it has had on the economy.

Obviously you know more because you have said so. Perhaps these guys are all delusional 8-)

geoffrey: (re my comment)Electronic money is money that gets used in transactions and never gets converted to cash. An example of electronic money is the use of a bank card or credit card for a purchase.

geoffrey:Wrong, I pay my VISA bill with cash unfortunately.

Do you mail the cash or like to go down to the bank personally ? I send a cheque myself.

[geoffrey]

Do you mail the cash or like to go down to the bank personally ? I send a cheque myself.

No, I pay it through WebBanking. With the cash payment my employer gives me every two weeks. Cash does not equate paper, only in one definition does it.

When you get paid, your getting paid with real deal money. Your employer could pay you completely in cash if he so desired, unlikely though, a little bit of a mess.