The Money Masters!

[irjO]

Hello I want to share with you this long video (3:30:00min) of the history of how the consortium controls the banks and of course USA and the World economic system, in other words: our lives (mostly).


http://youtu.be/HfpO-WBz_mw

The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole...Their secret is that they have annexed from governments, monarchies, and republics the power to create the world's money..." THE MONEY MASTERS is a 3 1/2 hour non-fiction, historical documentary that traces the origins of the political power structure that rules our nation and the world today. The modern political power structure has its roots in the hidden manipulation and accumulation of gold and other forms of money. The development of fractional reserve banking practices in the 17th century brought to a cunning sophistication the secret techniques initially used by goldsmiths fraudulently to accumulate wealth. With the formation of the privately-owned Bank of England in 1694, the yoke of economic slavery to a privately-owned "central" bank was first forced upon the backs of an entire nation, not removed but only made heavier with the passing of the three centuries to our day. Nation after nation, including America, has fallen prey to this cabal of international central bankers. Segments: The Problem; The Money Changers; Roman Empire; The Goldsmiths of Medieval England; Tally Sticks; The Bank of England; The Rise of the Rothschilds; The American Revolution; The Bank of North America; The Constitutional Convention; First Bank of the U.S.; Napoleon's Rise to Power; Death of the First Bank of the U.S. / War of 1812; Waterloo; Second Bank of the U.S.; Andrew Jackson; Fort Knox; World Central Bank

Here is the same video with Spanish subtitles:

http://youtu.be/r_j_-uJCIU4

And this one with French subtitles:

http://youtu.be/grq0A1GuadI

Enjoy!

 

[Palinurus]

Hi irjO,

Just FYI as well as for archiving purposes, this movie was discussed earlier in the topic International Banking and the PTB which can be found here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,7717.0.html

It's also mentioned in the topic The Secret of Oz which incidentally forms the sequel to it, to be found here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,21477.0.html

Both these documentaries are also mentioned in the topic Money as debt over here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,7699.0.html where several other youtube vids are added to the mix.

Hope this helps a bit.

 

[irjO]

Hi irjO,

Just FYI as well as for archiving purposes, this movie was discussed earlier in the topic International Banking and the PTB which can be found here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,7717.0.html

It's also mentioned in the topic The Secret of Oz which incidentally forms the sequel to it, to be found here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,21477.0.html

Both these documentaries are also mentioned in the topic Money as debt over here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,7699.0.html where several other youtube vids are added to the mix.

Hope this helps a bit.

Oh! I was looking for it but I didn't find it, well it least It has subtitles, the mods can merge the threads then! sorry for that! thanks Pilinurus!

 

[Stoneboss]

I watched this documentary yesterday called "The Impending Collapse of the World Economy" which was posted on You Tube on July 11/13. Until now, I always thought that money had to be backed by something tangible, like gold, for a monetary system to work, but evidently that is not the case. Also, L. Frank Baum, the author of "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" actually took part in the struggle of the American people against the private banking system, which of course won, and is known as the Federal Reserve. It seems that Frank Baum wrote the Wizard of Oz to symbolize what actually took place in American history concerning how the PTB took control with the monetary system.

The video is quite long (just under two hours) but well worth watching IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdYG_ZEw2xw

 

[Palinurus]

Until now, I always thought that money had to be backed by something tangible, like gold, for a monetary system to work, but evidently that is not the case.

Hi Stoneboss,

Thanks for sharing.

Your hunch was conform reality until August 15, 1971 which marked the end of the Bretton Woods system of monetary management.

On 15 August 1971, the United States unilaterally terminated convertibility of the US$ to gold. This brought the Bretton Woods system to an end and saw the dollar become fiat currency.[1] This action, referred to as the Nixon shock, created the situation in which the United States dollar became a reserve currency used by many states. At the same time, many fixed currencies (such as GBP, for example), also became free-floating.

Later on a similar system was revived. More on that here. You have to scroll down for it.

A search around the forum yielded the following:

Money as debt

Wizard of OZ: Scarecow, Tinman, and Lion

The Politics of Oz

Gold

As an aside I also found this:

Pink Floyd Dark Side of Moon and Wizard of Oz synchronicity

Hope this helps a bit. :)

 

[Stoneboss]

Until now, I always thought that money had to be backed by something tangible, like gold, for a monetary system to work, but evidently that is not the case.

Hi Stoneboss,

Thanks for sharing.

Your hunch was conform reality until August 15, 1971 which marked the end of the Bretton Woods system of monetary management.

On 15 August 1971, the United States unilaterally terminated convertibility of the US$ to gold. This brought the Bretton Woods system to an end and saw the dollar become fiat currency.[1] This action, referred to as the Nixon shock, created the situation in which the United States dollar became a reserve currency used by many states. At the same time, many fixed currencies (such as GBP, for example), also became free-floating.

Later on a similar system was revived. More on that here. You have to scroll down for it.

A search around the forum yielded the following:

Money as debt

Wizard of OZ: Scarecow, Tinman, and Lion

The Politics of Oz

Gold

As an aside I also found this:

Pink Floyd Dark Side of Moon and Wizard of Oz synchronicity

Hope this helps a bit. :)

Thanks for the info Palinurus.

 

[Sol Logos]

Found this study revealing. It's about research done to understand the effects of wealth on human behaviour. Findings were that wealth shows a dominance for unethical behaviour, even the perception of wealth or advantage - the same results are shown (as is seen in the control study talked about in the vid with a biased monopoly game). It showed that just the perception of wealth, even if the participant was not wealthy, brought up more unethical type behaviours. It also worked the other way around - a wealthy person participating in an experiment that made them feel disadvantaged exhibited more generous behaviour.

In a series of startling studies, psychologists at the University of California at Berkeley have found that "upper-class individuals behave more unethically than lower-class individuals." Ongoing research is trying to find out what it is about wealth — or lack of it — that makes people behave they way they do.

http://<iframe width="560" height="...Lc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I wonder how the conditions would change if participants weren't in a state of scarcity which is predominant in our world? I'm thinking the basic psychology, not including psychopathology which is different, but "normals" is a fear based one being in an underlining condition of scarcity. Would make sense that having little makes one want to pool resources with others as a survival mechanism and the same as having access to a lot of resources. The one who has access, under the same general condition would take as much as they could for some perceived future event where there's scarce resources again. So both go back to basic survival responses - flight or fight or in this sense would be - pool resources with others / take as much as possible.

I reckon it's complex and real ethics and morality do come into play, but I'd say most people, as is shown with this study are acting from basic impulses that regard a constant threat and so in a constant state of self protection.

 

[Jack3]

Looks like it is all about self-assurance, a feeling of security when one is in possesion of certain materialistic wealth. This may at times be perceived as arrogance or rudeness and sometimes it is.

But money or wealth don't make one a "nasty" guy who looks down on poorer neighbours. One simply must have always been "nasty" only now there is no need to keep it secret. In fact it is very difficult to keep it secret anymore - so many opportunities to show-off and get even. Once after having become rich and feeling more secure and independent now the true colours simply come into surface.

As someone wisely said "It is not power that corrupts you, you have always been corrupted."
Now let me borrow this great insight and say "It is not wealth that makes you greedy and mean, you have always been like that. " ;)

 

[Sol Logos]

Makes sense, there's a general condition likely the majority are in that predisposes us to act unethically and it's just a matter of the right situation to trigger it. Unethically is probably simply to say you do things to others that you wouldn't like done to you. So wealth is just one of those triggers as it holds a lot in it like attention from others, power, fame, being seen as credible / successful / accomplished etc. Given the fact many of us carry early emotinal woundings that tell us the opposite all the time ("I'm not worth attention, I'm not and never will be a success"), driven by that could vindicate unethical behaviour. So we could easily convince ourselves something like: "I deserve this wealth and I have a right doing whatever it takes to keep it because I've earned it by my suffering and I've suffered enough already and damn it if I'm gonna let anyone or anything take this away again!"

So seems not ever doing the right personal work that allows us to see more objectively and the. mixing in wealth and power spells a recipe for disaster.

 

[Duncan]

This reminds me of people who take pride in "pay to win".

 

[edwardthefirst]

Thanks for linking the video alkhemst, that was a good watch :)

 

[nidO]

I almost skipped over watching the video because I thought I already knew what was going to be said. Glad I watched it. It's a very short but insightful piece. Wish they had expanded more on the details of the causes and effects of excess wealth and poverty (on top of what they already reported). If they would have maybe come to some conclusive or tangible solution to the "problem", that would have been nice too. Great find.

Lying to oneself can really hurt the self and those around you. Being rewarded for such behavior really compounds the situation (as the video shows), apparently in an devastatingly exponential manner.

 

[Palinurus]

Source: _http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/03/archives-how-amsterdam-got-fiat-money-in-1683/

How Amsterdam Got Fiat Money In 1683

Posted By: VW Staff Posted date: March 26, 2015 11:49:20 AM

Abstract:

We investigate a Fiat S.p.A. money system introduced by the Bank of Amsterdam in 1683. Using data from the Amsterdam Municipal Archives, we partially reconstruct changes in the bank’s balance sheet from 1666 through 1702. Our calculations show that the Bank of Amsterdam, founded in 1609, was engaged in two archetypal central bank activities — lending and open market operations — both before and after its adoption of a fiat standard. After 1683, the bank was able to conduct more regular and aggressive policy interventions, from a virtually nonexistent capital base. The bank’s successful experimentation with a fiat standard foreshadows later developments in the history of central banking.

How Amsterdam Got Fiat Money

Financial innovation consists of doing more (trading) with less (collateral). A key innovation, present in all modern economies, is the use of fiat money—a kind of virtual collateral whose value derives only from the force of law and custom. Conventional wisdom says that fiat money can enhance liquidity through “credit policy”—the directed relaxation of collateral constraints through a central bank’s lending operations, and through “monetary policy”—the beneficial manipulation of economic aggregates through variation of the money stock.

Fiat money, and its implications for policy, are usually seen as the twentieth-century developments. This paper analyzes an earlier and less well known experiment with fiat money, undertaken by the Bank of Amsterdam (Amsterdamsche Wisselbank, henceforth AWB or simply “bank”). The Amsterdam experience with fiat money is noteworthy for its originality, its prominence in European financial history, and its compatibility with price stability over a long period (roughly a century: 1680 through 1780). The AWB opened in 1609 as a municipal exchange bank, an institution for facilitating settlement that was common in Early Modern Europe. Our focus is on the period around 1683 when the bank limited its depositors’ ability to withdraw coin, and so effectively became a fiat money provider. The fiat money regime remained in place until the bank’s collapse in 1795.3

The AWB’s transition from exchange bank to fiat bank has been described by economic historians (e.g., Mees 1838, van Dillen 1934, Neal 2000, Gillard 2004, van Nieuwkerk 2009), but these contributions do not fully explain the motivation for the transition. If fiat money did indeed lower and smooth the costs of collateral in Amsterdam markets, how were these changes manifested and who benefited? To lapse into modern terminology, how did an early central bank alter its monetary and credit policies after limiting the right of withdrawal?

To shed some light, we examine historical data on the AWB. Using ledgers available from the Amsterdam Municipal Archives, we have compiled partial balance sheets, at a daily frequency, for the AWB from 1666 through 1702, a period centered on the fiat money transition. When combined with information from other sources, these data present a revealing picture of the bank’s activities.

First, the data clearly show that the fiat money regime facilitated the AWB’s lending to a preferred customer, the Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Ostindische Compagnie or VOC, a government-sponsored enterprise employing approximately 50,000 people during our period of interest). The bank lent to the Company both before and after 1683; but afterward this lending becomes more seasonal and regular in nature. Seasonality means that this lending often does not show up in the annual AWB balance sheets assembled by van Dillen (1925) nor in the annual balance sheets of the VOC assembled by de Korte (1984). Lending was cheaper and less risky for the AWB after 1683 because liquid claims on the bank were limited and chances of a run were ameliorated. Lending activities were extensive but, over the period considered, never exposed the bank to substantial credit risk. We find that the 1683 changes also freed the City of Amsterdam to frequently take the bank’s retained earnings from this profitable activity.

How Amsterdam Got Fiat Money
Stephen Quinn and William Roberds
Working Paper 2010-17
December 2010

Send Full PDF (109 pages): _http://www.valuewalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/SSRN-id2481165.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,-16,792

 

[bianca etezete]

Thanks for posting this video.

I read about this effect some time ago. Thing is even when you don't change the rules in the way it was done here you can see the effect. It is sheer dice luck you need, and greed to own the most to win the game. Watch the winning players. Very often you can clearly see a slight change in personality, at least for the durance of the game, maybe a little longer.

So one might ask whether the effect is rooted in the game itself. Or any games one can "win". Where there are winners, there will be losers.

 

[SummerLite]

I haven't read the entire thread yet, only Laura's writing on the first page. Very good food for thought there and thought I'd bump the topic for others who may be having "money" dilemmas. Thanks Laura.

Thanks to Menrva, who pointed this discussion out to me. Very enlightening, its what I need to consider right now and you hit the nail right on the head with this one! ;D

I have forwarded Lauras' post and the link for this thread to a friend who struggles with money concepts. In the spirit and energy of the Universe, to give abundantly... :)