Session 7 February 2015

[GqSoul]

With each new session that is posted, I'm filled with renewed gratitude and hope, as well as overcome by the tremendous amount of WORK that the team on the front lines invests in service to this network. The increasingly clear vision that we have of the global, cosmic, and our personal inner landscapes is directly attributable to what they are doing to inspire and facilitate our own learning. This strikes me as an enormous debt I--indeed we--all owe, which must be balanced! The Cs mention the upcoming balancing action of this Macrocosmic Quantum Event, and we should not be ignorant to the fact that similar principles are at work in our community dynamic.

Overr the years, as I've been confronted by the possibility of cataclysmic world changes, the progressive devolution into madness of those who hold the reins, and the apparent blindness, apathy, or paralysis of the majority of us, my psyche has run the gamut of possible reactions. I'm sure many of you can relate to the feelings of anxiety, dispair, anger, and desperation as we see things unfold. Thanks to this network, many of us can now "stare unflinchingly" in the face of the unknown, greeting it with different emotions: Hope, Resolve, and even Excitement. So whether I'm swept away by tidal waves or swept up to higher realms in 4-6 months time, there seems to be but one expedient aim: To Be more. Irrespective of finding ourselves in 5D or 4D, quality of Being and lessons learned seem to be our only guaranteed possessions.

For me that translates to living simply, safeguarding my humanity, being industrious -- as much in mundane as well as esoteric efforts -- striving to learn and grow while helping others who desire the same. This seems to me the way to give back and "make good" on the tremendous investment being made in my development. These goals require all of my being, every ounce of energy, and I find I have little to no emotional energy to spare on "what if" games or projecting into some murky future.

Questions of whether or not Laura will meet a 4D STO entity, or the validity of predictions made by some Guru under the mountain, is largely immaterial; fun curiosities, undoubtedly, but the answer to those questions don't teach me how to provide for a family when the economy implodes.

May we all be inspired to give of ourselves, to each other, the universe, whatever we can according to our varied capabilities and degree of development. If your "transition" occurs tomorrow, what will you be taking with you?

 

[Grail Keeper]

GqSoul now that is a brilliant and most timely remark you ve made. Good for you
Well, Dear Laura thanks much for your concise and to the point remark too.And as for your suggestion whether any bigwig person could peruse the sessions from time to time i for one thing have no doubt. As the C's said inquiries are in the process and our intel forces i mean in Russia that is have long since put most of us on the list no doubt. So i believe that whenever you choose to come to Russia it could be much like with Ed Snowden - a valuable asset in our common fight with the tyranny of some psychopathic clique. Now just a few more remarks.

Well if my memory serves me right the C's once said that when it all gets really interesting only then some major disclosure event would be possible and some 4D STO or bidensity faction members would produce for most worthy elements of our society some very valuable information. Now when i asked my friend if that was true in any sense he said that this is so close to the fact that i could not even dream of more.He said that when the brown stuff hits the fan (so sorry for being too straight) some of his close acquaintances will indeed share some very sensible info with the people of the network as he called them. And as far as i understood this correctly by that he meant the members of what the C's call the tribal unit.So assuming that V.V.P.is most surely one of the major participants of this group i believe that even as of now he receives from time to time some very valuable info from the good guys on the other side so to speak.

And also he once said that almost all of the network members are constantly watched over by one or another member of their group helping in most difficult times and even saving the lives. This principle he said is multi trans generational and once long long ago gave reason for some families and clans to call these watchers the divine guardian patrons of the bloodline or some dynasty.So that is about all for now.

Best regards :)

 

[SeekinTruth]

@GqSoul

Well-said. I see being alive at this time to be very exciting - in addition to witnessing all the suffering which is excruciating to do. All this insanity, oppression, injustice has been this way for a very long time. Living now is like being present and observing the collapse of the Roman Empire or similar world-changing events/times. Except now, it seems even more is at stake and even more "world shattering" events are coming. So, all things considered, I see it all as very exciting and full of opportunities, as well as very dangerous and volatile times....

 

[Skyalmian]

When the going gets tough, people will be inevitably faced with having to come up with more reasons for living rather than dying, and if the latter wins out, well..."Will to live", as explained in some survival manuals, is known as the single greatest survival tool; all the knowledge, protection, techniques, etc. in the world won't matter without it, as that fundamental lack will underly and undermine them all... :(

 

[A Jay]

For me that translates to living simply, safeguarding my humanity, being industrious -- as much in mundane as well as esoteric efforts -- striving to learn and grow while helping others who desire the same. This seems to me the way to give back and "make good" on the tremendous investment being made in my development. These goals require all of my being, every ounce of energy, and I find I have little to no emotional energy to spare on "what if" games or projecting into some murky future.

Questions of whether or not Laura will meet a 4D STO entity, or the validity of predictions made by some Guru under the mountain, is largely immaterial; fun curiosities, undoubtedly, but the answer to those questions don't teach me how to provide for a family when the economy implodes.

May we all be inspired to give of ourselves, to each other, the universe, whatever we can according to our varied capabilities and degree of development. If your "transition" occurs tomorrow, what will you be taking with you?

Hear, hear!

The best way to give back seems to be for us to act on what information has already been collected, therefor giving the Universe an outlet through which creative energy can be utilized. How this looks will depend on the individual and their talents, but it is the effort and application that counts. Very inspiring post. :)

 

[Mr. Premise]

The problem with the Federal Reserve and other Central Banks (privately owned, by the way, which is totally insane) is that when they create money out of thin air, mostly to give out loans, they only "create" the principle amount of the loan. So there's never enough money in circulation to pay off the dept in the country of the central bank, because the borrowers have to pay back the principle AND the interest (which was NOT created/put into circulation at the time of the loan). Money as debt just can't work, it's simple math - it's a scam that's designed to perpetuate debt into eternity. The profits from the interest payments go to the private share holders of the largest banks that are the owners of the central bank.

Thanks, ST, this is the most concise and understandable explanation I have come across. I'm curious about a couple things. Could there be some kind of multiplier effect that to some extent can counteract the problem of only principal being created not money to cover interest? Related to this is the question of economic growth and production. The one legitimate function that central banks serve is to make sure the growth in the money supply keeps pace but doesn't exceed the growth in production of goods and services. That's why I am not a hard money proponent. I think a better system than what we have now is public not private central banks. That might reduce the skimming of wealth by the super rich.

 

[Grail Keeper]

As many of you must have already noticed i after all did start some sort of a personal thread-blog dedicated from now on to all that happens around us every day with some comments and opinions of yours truly and my friend and informer. You are welcome to read the posts and comment them. Now it is called Grail Keeper's blog in the Bloggers blog section right at the top of the forum homepage. :)

 

[Yozilla]

The problem with the Federal Reserve and other Central Banks (privately owned, by the way, which is totally insane) is that when they create money out of thin air, mostly to give out loans, they only "create" the principle amount of the loan. So there's never enough money in circulation to pay off the dept in the country of the central bank, because the borrowers have to pay back the principle AND the interest (which was NOT created/put into circulation at the time of the loan). Money as debt just can't work, it's simple math - it's a scam that's designed to perpetuate debt into eternity. The profits from the interest payments go to the private share holders of the largest banks that are the owners of the central bank.

Thanks, ST, this is the most concise and understandable explanation I have come across. I'm curious about a couple things. Could there be some kind of multiplier effect that to some extent can counteract the problem of only principal being created not money to cover interest? Related to this is the question of economic growth and production. The one legitimate function that central banks serve is to make sure the growth in the money supply keeps pace but doesn't exceed the growth in production of goods and services. That's why I am not a hard money proponent. I think a better system than what we have now is public not private central banks. That might reduce the skimming of wealth by the super rich.

Good point ST, so i wonder if somebody could count all "real" money (all coins and paper money) and accordingly claim all other "virtual" money (loans, leverages, derivatives et al) as void? So "to big to fall" banks would have all "their" assets erased from doctored balance sheets... Maybe something like this is already in process due to frenzied gold hoarding by some nations. Uf i am at very odds with financial headaches

 

[taratai]

Not that it changes much, since people here were most likely watching the situation in Greece anyway. Everyone should be aware that Greece was given additional financial help after all. Which is supposed to last for... how long?
4 months.

Just an observation here. Don't expect any salvation coming from Greece. Rather, i would expect the mentioned "dramatic change" (or at least a significant portion of it) to be economical in nature, and related to how the situation in Greece resolves during those 4 months and after.

 

[A Jay]

Thanks, ST, this is the most concise and understandable explanation I have come across. I'm curious about a couple things. Could there be some kind of multiplier effect that to some extent can counteract the problem of only principal being created not money to cover interest?

Well, in order to pay interest on a debt or loan when only the principle exists means that one has to have a continuous supply of debt in order to pay for accrued interest on previous debts. So would this infinite debt to pay for infinite interest be the multiplier effect you're referring to?

 

[Mr. Premise]

Thanks, ST, this is the most concise and understandable explanation I have come across. I'm curious about a couple things. Could there be some kind of multiplier effect that to some extent can counteract the problem of only principal being created not money to cover interest?

Well, in order to pay interest on a debt or loan when only the principle exists means that one has to have a continuous supply of debt in order to pay for accrued interest on previous debts. So would this infinite debt to pay for infinite interest be the multiplier effect you're referring to?

No, I was referring to an economic multiplier. For example, if someone gets a loan from a bank to start a business or buy capital goods to create more goods. Theoretically the growth in production should more than cover the interest. I think what's gotten out of whack with hyperfinancialization and big banks is the opportunities for rent seeking by the super rich has overwhelmed the productive forces.

 

[goyacobol]

Thanks, ST, this is the most concise and understandable explanation I have come across. I'm curious about a couple things. Could there be some kind of multiplier effect that to some extent can counteract the problem of only principal being created not money to cover interest?

Well, in order to pay interest on a debt or loan when only the principle exists means that one has to have a continuous supply of debt in order to pay for accrued interest on previous debts. So would this infinite debt to pay for infinite interest be the multiplier effect you're referring to?

No, I was referring to an economic multiplier. For example, if someone gets a loan from a bank to start a business or buy capital goods to create more goods. Theoretically the growth in production should more than cover the interest. I think what's gotten out of whack with hyperfinancialization and big banks is the opportunities for rent seeking by the super rich has overwhelmed the productive forces.

Mr. Premise,

This system has been "out of whack" for longer than many realize. I wish this was as simple as honest borrowers and lenders. Usury begets greed I think no matter how small the interest rate.

The following was formulated before the previous post and is not meant to criticize any previous posts.

Well, I wasn't going to continue the financial discussion but since it keeps popping up I will try to share my concerns. December 23, 2013 was the 100th anniversary of the Federal Reserve which was established December 23, 1913.

We have been conned for quite awhile now. There were several versions of the private banking cartel even before the Federal Reserve.

The first version was:
Early American currency

During the American Revolution, the colonies became independent states; freed from British monetary regulations, they issued paper money to pay for military expenses. The Continental Congress also issued paper money during the Revolution, known as Continental currency, to fund the war effort. Both state and Continental currency depreciated rapidly, becoming practically worthless by the end of the war.
.......
Colonial currency

There were three general types of money in the colonies of British America: commodity money, specie (coins), and paper money.[1] Commodity money was used when cash (coins and paper money) was scarce. Commodities such as tobacco, beaver skins, and wampum served as money at various times and places.[2]

As in Great Britain, cash in the colonies was denominated in pounds, shillings, and pence.[2] The value varied from colony to colony; a Massachusetts pound, for example, was not equivalent to a Pennsylvania pound. All colonial pounds were of less value than the British pound sterling.[2] The coins in circulation in the colonies were most often of Spanish and Portuguese origin.[2] The prevalence of the Spanish dollar in the colonies led to the money of the United States being denominated in dollars rather than pounds.[2]

One by one, colonies began to issue their own paper money to serve as a convenient medium of exchange. In 1690, the Province of Massachusetts Bay created "the first authorized paper money issued by any government in the Western World."[3] This paper money was issued to pay for a military expedition during King William's War. Other colonies followed the example of Massachusetts Bay by issuing their own paper currency in subsequent military conflicts.[3]

The paper bills issued by the colonies were known as "bills of credit." Bills of credit were usually fiat money: they could not be exchanged for a fixed amount of gold or silver coins upon demand.[2][4] Bills of credit were usually issued by colonial governments to pay debts. The governments would then retire the currency by accepting the bills for payment of taxes. When colonial governments issued too many bills of credit or failed to tax them out of circulation, inflation resulted. This happened especially in New England and the southern colonies, which, unlike the Middle Colonies, were frequently at war.[4]

This depreciation of colonial currency was harmful to creditors in Great Britain when colonists paid their debts with money that had lost value. In 1776, British (Scot) economist Adam Smith criticized colonial bills of credit in his most famous work, The Wealth of Nations. The inflationary nature of the currency, wrote Smith, was a "violent injustice" to the creditor; "a scheme of fraudulent debtors to cheat their creditors" (Book II, Chapter II). As a result, the British Parliament passed several Currency Acts to regulate the paper money issued by the colonies. The Currency Act of 1751 restricted the emission of paper money in New England. It allowed the existing bills to be used as legal tender for public debts (i.e. paying taxes), but disallowed their use for private debts (e.g. for paying merchants).

Next came:

First Bank of the United States

The President, Directors and Company, of the Bank of the United States, commonly known as the First Bank of the United States, was a national bank, chartered for a term of twenty years, by the United States Congress on February 25, 1791. Establishment of the bank was included in a three-part expansion of federal fiscal and monetary power (along with a federal mint and excise taxes) championed by Alexander Hamilton, first Secretary of the Treasury and the Rothschild Family. Hamilton believed a national bank was necessary to stabilize and improve the nation's credit, and to improve handling of the financial business of the United States government under the newly enacted constitution.

........
There were other, nonnegotiable conditions for the establishment of the First Bank of the United States. Among these were:[citation needed]

That the bank was to be a private company.
That the bank would have a twenty-year charter running from 1791 to 1811, after which time it would be up to the Congress to approve or deny renewal of the bank and its charter; however, during that time no other federal bank would be authorized; states, for their part, would be free to charter however many intrastate banks they wished.
That the bank, to avoid any appearance of impropriety, would:

be forbidden to buy government bonds.
have a mandatory rotation of directors.
neither issue notes nor incur debts beyond its actual capitalization.

Then came:

Second Bank of the United States

The Second Bank of the United States, located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was the second federally authorized Hamiltonian National Bank[3] in the United States during its 20-year charter from February 1816[4] to January 1836.[5] The bank's formal name, according to section 9 of its charter as passed by Congress, was "The President, Directors, and Company, of the Bank of the United States."[6]

A private corporation with public duties, the bank handled all fiscal transactions for the U.S. Government, and was accountable to Congress and the U.S. Treasury. Twenty percent of its capital was owned by the federal government, the bank's single largest stockholder.[7][8] Four thousand private investors held 80% of the bank's capital, including one thousand Europeans. The bulk of the stocks were held by a few hundred wealthy Americans.[9] In its time, the institution was the largest monied corporation in the world.[10]

The essential function of the bank was to regulate the public credit issued by private banking institutions through the fiscal duties it performed for the U.S. Treasury, and to establish a sound and stable national currency.[11][12] The federal deposits endowed the BUS with its regulatory capacity.[5][13]

Modeled on Alexander Hamilton's First Bank of the United States,[14] the Second Bank was chartered by President James Madison in 1816 and began operations at its main branch in Philadelphia on January 7, 1817,[15][16] managing twenty-five branch offices nationwide by 1832.[17]

The efforts to renew the bank's charter put the institution at the center of the general election of 1832, in which the bank's president Nicholas Biddle and pro-bank National Republicans led by Henry Clay clashed with the "hard-money"[18][19] Andrew Jackson administration and eastern banking interests in the Bank War.[20][21] Failing to secure recharter, the Second Bank of the United States became a private corporation in 1836,[5][22] and underwent liquidation in 1841.

Andrew Jackson was the "hard-money" proponent who clashed with the Second Bank of the United States.

Andrew Jackson

Congress attempted to reauthorize the Second Bank of the United States several years before the expiration of its charter, which he opposed. He vetoed the renewal of its charter in 1832, and dismantled it by the time its charter expired in 1836.

By the way Andrew Jackson foiled his attempted assassination:

President Andrew Jackson Survived an Assassination Attempt

President Andrew Jackson, perhaps the most combative American president, not only survived an assassination attempt, he immediately assaulted the man who had just tried to shoot him.

On January 30, 1835, Andrew Jackson visited the U.S. Capitol to attend the funeral of a member of Congress. While on his way out of the building a man named Richard Lawrence stepped out from behind a pillar and fired a flintlock pistol. The gun misfired, making a loud noise but not firing a projectile.
As shocked spectators looked on, Lawrence pulled out another pistol and again pulled the trigger. The second pistol also misfired, again making a loud, though harmless, noise.

Jackson, who had survived countless violent encounters, one of which left a pistol ball in his body that wasn't removed for decades, flew into a rage. As several people grabbed Lawrence and wrestled him to the ground, Jackson reportedly struck the failed assassin several times with his cane.

After this brief period of "hard money" came the next period:

A United States Note/"greenbacks"

A United States Note, also known as a Legal Tender Note, is a type of paper money that was issued from 1862 to 1971 in the U.S. Having been current for over 100 years, they were issued for longer than any other form of U.S. paper money. They were known popularly as "greenbacks" in their heyday, a name inherited from the Demand Notes that they replaced in 1862. Often called Legal Tender Notes, they were called United States Notes by the First Legal Tender Act, which authorized them as a form of fiat currency. During the 1860s the so-called second obligation on the reverse of the notes stated:[1]

This Note is Legal Tender for All Debts Public and Private Except Duties On Imports And Interest On The Public Debt; And Is Redeemable In Payment Of All Loans Made To The United States.

They were originally issued directly into circulation by the U.S. Treasury to pay expenses incurred by the Union during the American Civil War. Over the next century, the legislation governing these notes was modified many times and numerous versions were issued by the Treasury.

United States Notes that were issued in the large-size format, before 1929, differ dramatically in appearance when compared to modern American currency, but those issued in the small-size format, starting in 1929, are very similar to contemporary Federal Reserve Notes with the highly visible distinction of having red U.S. Treasury Seals and serial numbers in place of green ones.

Existing United States Notes remain valid currency in the United States; however, as no United States Notes have been issued since January 1971, they are increasingly rare in circulation.

The "greenbacks" were at least issued directly by the U.S. treasury but they too were a form of "fiat" money.
Abraham Lincoln was considering how to use the "greenbacks" wisely.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND THE CIVIL WAR (1861 - 1865)

ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND THE CIVIL WAR (1861 - 1865)

With the Central Bank killed off, fractional reserve banking moved like a virus through numerous state chartered banks instead causing the instability this form of economics thrives on. When people lose their homes someone else wins them for a fraction of their worth. Depression is good news to the lender; but war causes even more debt and dependency than anything else, so if the money changers couldn't have their Central Bank with a license to print money, a war it would have to be. We can see from this quote of the then chancellor of Germany that slavery was not the only cause for the American Civil War. "The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the US, if they remained as one block, and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world."


Otto von Bismark chancellor of Germany 1876 On the 12th of April 1861 this economic war began. Predictably Lincoln, needing money to finance his war effort, went with his secretary of the treasury to New York to apply for the necessary loans. The money changers wishing the Union to fail offered loans at 24% to 36%. Lincoln declined the offer. An old friend of Lincoln's, Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago was put in charge of solving the problem of how to finance the war. His solution is recorded as this. "Just get Congress to pass a bill authorising the printing of full legal tender treasury notes... and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also."


Colonel Dick Taylor When Lincoln asked if the people of America would accept the notes Taylor said. "The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money; as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution."


Colonel Dick Taylor 1 Lincoln agreed to try this solution and printed 450 million dollars worth of the new bills using green ink on the back to distinguish them from other notes. "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 2 From this we see that the solution worked so well Lincoln was seriously considering adopting this emergency measure as a permanent policy. This would have been great for everyone except the money changers who quickly realized how dangerous this policy would be for them. They wasted no time in expressing their view in the London Times. Oddly enough, while the article seems to have been designed to discourage this creative financial policy, in its put down we're clearly able to see the policies goodness. "If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

Well, we know what happened to Abraham Lincoln.

That brings us back to the latest and greatest version of central private banking known as the Federal Reserve. There of course is nothing "Federal" about the Federal Reserve except it's name. If you look in the blue pages of the phone book thinking that the Federal Reserve is a government organization you won't find it. It is a private banking cartel. The Federal Reserve cannot be audited. There have been attempts to do so but none have succeeded.

So here we are trillions of dollars in debt wondering how this "fiat" money system is going to end or when it will end. I suspect that the PTB are possibly planning the failure and of course have some back up plan such as the use of a global currency such as Special drawing rights through the IMF.

This is but the tip of the iceberg. I have been looking at this for many years and initially became very angry but now I guess I look at the anger as "splitting". We are now closer approaching the end of the 4 months marking "dramatic" change. This may include a financial change. It may include many changes that will be totally unsuspected. While we are waiting to see. It doesn't hurt to review what we do learn and keep learning. The IMF, World Bank and Bank for International Settlements is another story so I'll just stop for now.

Let's just say I have no problem believing the C's when they say:

Session 26 April 2014

Q: (KJN) So we should spend it on things we need now, versus spending it on gold or putting in a bank
or that kind of thing?
A: Mostly. Money will soon be worthless, ownership will survive awhile longer.

 

[SeekinTruth]

I think several different approaches would work to have "an honest money" system. The problem is that psychopaths and other pathological types in positions of power and influence are NOT honest and only care about stealing as much as possible from all transactions/economic activity to give themselves even more wealth and power.

The positive side of having a gold standard or similar system is that you can't create more of the gold out of thin air, so there's a natural limit to the cheating. But there's many other tricks that can work for a while to obfuscate what's going on. Fractional reserve banking is a scam. As far as I understand, if there were competent and non-corrupt people making policy, you can issue money in a way that doesn't lead to inflation by always keeping the money supply at the right amount where value is created in the economy and society at large. In other words, you don't issue more money than there is value creation to match.

When money is issued by private bankers at interest - money as debt - there's no way around always needing more debt to pay off the old debt because all new money put into circulation is lent at interest that is NOT in circulation, thus enriching the private bankers at the expense of everyone else. There's no reason for these private bankers to be issuing the money - anyone can do what they're doing, but they have convinced everyone that they should exclusively have the authority/right to do so. If an honest and competent government agency issued money at a nominal, very low interest rate as an administrative fee, there would only be the goal of growing, and developing the economy, NOT making profits from the interest charged. Then as the economy developed and more value was created, and more opportunities appear for economic activity for all, there wouldn't be the kind of parasitic draining at the expense of the real economy that the banksters now have. The parasite is killing the host and creating a situation where all this unsustainable and extravagant debt just CAN'T be paid back - so the whole system will collapse. What the parasite bankers want is to exchange all the impossible-to-pay-back debt for actual ownership of everything. But time is running out as the whole thing is taking a huge toll on real economic activity that enables people to live.

The problem is also global, so it seems to me impossible to have the whole world completely locked into this enslaving system as things get more and more volatile on the planet. The most likely outcome seems to be that the globalization project will collapse, much of industrial/technological society will collapse, and the small numbers of survivors will revert back to small, local economies for basic necessities (all shiny toys and distractions will fall by the wayside, etc.) Or so I think.

 

[syldan]

Thank you all for the wonderful session!

This is a question regarding the problems that could occur with the french site, as Laura asked and the C's suggested to be careful. Now, this may be off base, but would it make a difference if the french site emanated out of Québec, Montréal for example, or another french speaking country (Africa?), or is it the language itself that can be cause of problems? We've seen for example Sputnik News, open up a french site, but they could just as well have opened one in Qc, the way Huff Post does it? The french population here is beyond 7 million.

I feel that the french site is important to a lot of people, it would of course be a shame, although most should learn how to use Google translate, but that is another story!

Thank you!

 

[goyacobol]

I think several different approaches would work to have "an honest money" system. The problem is that psychopaths and other pathological types in positions of power and influence are NOT honest and only care about stealing as much as possible from all transactions/economic activity to give themselves even more wealth and power.

The positive side of having a gold standard or similar system is that you can't create more of the gold out of thin air, so there's a natural limit to the cheating. But there's many other tricks that can work for a while to obfuscate what's going on. Fractional reserve banking is a scam. As far as I understand, if there were competent and non-corrupt people making policy, you can issue money in a way that doesn't lead to inflation by always keeping the money supply at the right amount where value is created in the economy and society at large. In other words, you don't issue more money than there is value creation to match.

When money is issued by private bankers at interest - money as debt - there's no way around always needing more debt to pay off the old debt because all new money put into circulation is lent at interest that is NOT in circulation, thus enriching the private bankers at the expense of everyone else. There's no reason for these private bankers to be issuing the money - anyone can do what they're doing, but they have convinced everyone that they should exclusively have the authority/right to do so. If an honest and competent government agency issued money at a nominal, very low interest rate as an administrative fee, there would only be the goal of growing, and developing the economy, NOT making profits from the interest charged. Then as the economy developed and more value was created, and more opportunities appear for economic activity for all, there wouldn't be the kind of parasitic draining at the expense of the real economy that the banksters now have. The parasite is killing the host and creating a situation where all this unsustainable and extravagant debt just CAN'T be paid back - so the whole system will collapse. What the parasite bankers want is to exchange all the impossible-to-pay-back debt for actual ownership of everything. But time is running out as the whole thing is taking a huge toll on real economic activity that enables people to live.

The problem is also global, so it seems to me impossible to have the whole world completely locked into this enslaving system as things get more and more volatile on the planet. The most likely outcome seems to be that the globalization project will collapse, much of industrial/technological society will collapse, and the small numbers of survivors will revert back to small, local economies for basic necessities (all shiny toys and distractions will fall by the wayside, etc.) Or so I think.

Fractional Reserve Banking System

Understanding the Fractional Reserve Banking System

When you put your money into a savings account or a checking account at a bank, the bank doesn’t just sock it away in a vault underground somewhere. Instead, it lends your money to other individuals and companies who need it.

Thanks to the magic of fractional banking, when your banks lends your money to other people, it is actually creating money.

[VIDEO] Understanding the Fractional Reserve Banking System

Fractional Reserve Banking

In our modern banking system, banks are only required to keep a small fraction of their deposits on reserve in case depositors wish to withdraw their deposits. But why? Why shouldn’t banks keep all of our money?

The Federal Reserve explains it this way:

The fact that banks are required to keep on hand only a fraction of the funds deposited with them is a function of the banking business. Banks borrow funds from their depositors (those with savings) and in turn lend those funds to the banks’ borrowers (those in need of funds). Banks make money by charging borrowers more for a loan (a higher percentage interest rate) than is paid to depositors for use of their money. If banks did not lend out their available funds after meeting their reserve requirements, depositors might have to pay banks to provide safekeeping services for their money. For the economy and the banking system as a whole, the practice of keeping only a fraction of deposits on hand has an important cumulative effect. Referred to as the fractional reserve system, it permits the banking system to “create” money.

SeekinTruth,

While I focused on the Federal Reserve and the history of how we got here, the Fractional banking system is just as important. It allows small banks to share in the looting. You can see why it is tempting to want to be a banker. Offer to hold peoples' money, use their money to loan to more people, charge interest on the loans and hope they all don't want to withdraw their deposits at the same time. You only need a fraction of the total deposits on hand (maybe as low as 10%?) and you can play with the rest as loans to make more money. :(

One could argue I suppose that a bank might provide a service "to provide safekeeping" of a persons money but I think you can see that it doesn't take long for this money making to become an addiction to the profits. The power that money provides is very addicting I think. It reminds me of what the C's said about our "fall" and "addiction:

Session 23 October 1994

Q: (L) Did, at any time, the human race live for a long time in an Edenic state, where they were able to use bodies and still have a spiritual connection?

A: Yes. But not long. No addiction takes long to close the circle.

Q: (L) So, mankind was addicted to pleasuring the self?

A: Became quickly.

You might want to also keep in mind that while the smaller banks can be audited the Federal Reserve cannot be audited as far as I know.