PDA

View Full Version : Why a public Central Bank would be great.


john
12-20-2004, 03:47 PM
Simple description of how would work a Central Bank if not in the hands of the private bankers:

1. On behalf of the government, the public Central Bank is printing as much money as necessary for:
- the annual public budget;
- the private economy investments.

2. The sum necessary to the public budget is not charged with interests, contrary to what does a privatly owned Central Bank (generally 8% but often much).

3. The sum necessary to the private economy is lended:
- directly to finance big projects in real economy (not in speculative financial economy), at a low rate of 1% or 1,5%;
- through the private banks, at a non-usurary rate of 2,5% or max. 3%.

4. When lended through the private banks, these have to pay back an interest of 1% or 1,5% to the public Central Bank. The difference between their own interest of 2,5% or max 3% makes their non-usurary profit.

5. Every year, the money which was lended by the public Central Bank to the private enterprises or to the private banks is paid back to the Central Bank with the 1% or 1,5% interests covering the public costs and risks of these lendings. These paid-back sums are destroyed in order to avoid an inflation due to excedentary money in circulation ("excedentary" is relative to the current national production-consumation balance).

6. The supplementary sum necessary to the individuals and the private enterprises to pay the 2,5% or max. 3% interests to the private banks and the 1% or max. 1,5% to the Central Bank if directly borrowed from it is coming from the money spent by the government (its annual budget) in the form of salaries and furniture`s buying.

As main results of this system:

- no more inflation as no more debt accumulation in the private economy;
- no more unemployment as the enterprises can invest in their projects without being struggled by usurary interests and without being obliged to borrow a lot of money just to pay back the previously borrowed money`s interests;
- no more non-stop increasing national debt as the government don`t have to pay back usurary interests and interests on the interests to a privately owned usurary Central Bank.

Sorry for my poor english, folks.

rushdoony
12-20-2004, 06:01 PM
Why a public Central Clothing Manufacturer
would be great. We could have the government make
and price all our clothes, black burlap for men and gray burlap for women.
Why not just have a free market in clothes?

Why not just have a free market in money:
www.libertydollar.org

marypopinz
12-20-2004, 06:20 PM
Mushdummy.

You are a f%$king idiot.

F&*k off back under the rock you crawled from with your stupid brainwashing. You must be thick as shit to think that anyone will fall for your bullshit here. Toe jam smells better than what you are serving up.

You do serve your purpose in enlightening many who visit what people like you are about, that people like you are real, and we should rise above your breed of ignorance.

You may snare a few unsuspecting sheep and not while I type what an ignorant, self-absorbed in your own world, center of the universe, kind of idiot you are.

It's the intention behind your actions that makes me dislike you so. You are up to know good and I will certainly make an example of you.

If you have bothered to read many posts on this forum, what you are proposing in in direct correlation with what the NWO want.

And now you want a single NWO world? People are not as stupid as you or your government fiends (oops) friends believe. We will rise above the likes of you.

Go fly your commie flag up your arse. We can all see it waving now.

I will pray for your soul.

XXX

sablefish
12-20-2004, 08:07 PM
The Federal Reserve could not exist if it were not for government deficit spending.. That is what they do.. Loan the government money for the emergencies that they create in our names...The way to solve the problem is to not have deficit spending..

Forget about politicians, and voting out the representatives that sign these bills indebting our children's children to tax slavery.. We are way beyond that..

The real reason that Timothy Leary was thrown into prison was that his message was to drop out of the war machine.. Turn on, tune in, and drop out is the answer..

It doesn't take drugs it takes personal integrity to resist this evil empire.. and all we have to do is drop out... Grow our own food live simply and barter and the whole NWO scam will fail.

Would you trade your microwave oven for your great grandchildren's future is the question.

MaryX.. The way to get rid of the rushdoonies of the world is to not post after he enters a thread.. When the administrators see what is happening, they will get rid of him, and people like him, or the site itself will be destroyed by
the disruptors and the destroyers of honest discourse... I don't think Henry would like that.

marypopinz
12-20-2004, 08:31 PM
Sable, thanx for the good advice... accepted.

Toilet overflowed last night and fat fire today!

Didn't have a chance to go singing, so I thought I'd let dummy have a taste of his own. I know I should ignore and I shouldn't bite and sorry...

Today, I just couldn't resist. "Sorry, rush loonie."

I will ignore the dummy, from now on, I promise myself.

Point noted. I have to get back to the real world and earn some play money. I'll be stopping by now and again. I hope everyone has a great "holiday" season...MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Mary xxx

sablefish
12-20-2004, 08:56 PM
MaryX you are an inspiration.. A light in the darkness and cowardness of our lives.. Keep up the good works, God Bless and MaryX Mas.. I couldn't help the pun.

freeman
12-20-2004, 09:24 PM
Yes, Mary Xmas, I second the motion.
Believe me, Mary, your "hot buttons" are the same as mine. No need to apologize.
I suspect we have had many of the same experiences with the same groups of people.
Don't work too hard for your play money, and have a nice holiday with your family.

freeman
12-20-2004, 09:28 PM
At the risk of indulging what rushdooney suggests, I have to ask, is it really necessary to have central banking?
In an ideal world, wouldn't we be better off with real currency backed up by a gold or silver standard?
Don't we need to get away from an economic system based on usury and speculation instead of real reward for actual work and production?

sablefish
12-20-2004, 10:16 PM
It seems like the the people that work and save are exploited by the people that cheat and borrow.. It seems like the righteous end up in jail and the slimes end up in government.. What happened in 1913 on Jeckel Island is the cause of the problem.. That was the beginning of the FED.. and the end of American Constitution.

Every president that wanted to get rid of the FED has been assassinated.. JFK was the last American presidential hero.. Ever since then "our" Presidents have supported the FED.. because if they didn't they and their families would die..

The Kennedy curse is the ill will of the FED... None of "our" politicians want to take on "That Dog".. So chickenshit traitors is all we get to chose from in our elections...What a drag.

nohope187
12-20-2004, 10:20 PM
Howdy Freeman, the problem with Gold and silver is the limited supply which leads to hoarding. I think barter is the best way to go. :-P

Pliny
12-21-2004, 12:54 AM
A public central bank is not a new idea. It has been around for a long time. Social Credit under Aberhart in Alberta had the idea of a public central bank. And diehard social credit supporters still support the idea. Much be tter than the current system of central banking but in my view still the same idea supposedly run by honest public interests and when it comes to centralized power we know it corrupts.

Rushdoony has the presented the idea of a private system of banking and I have read two threads tonight where Ms. Poppins rails against him. The other was the dinosaur thread. I don't know what the problem is but take whoevers advise it was to just ignore people you dislike or be civil. Although I don't care to pursue the dinosaur thread Rushdoony is a little more informed on basic economics than most on this thread. There is nothing wrong with privately minted coins of gold or silver, as long as people will trade in them and they have confidence in them, they can be a valid currency.

What went wrong with banks in the past was they used, and still do today, an economic tool called fractional reserve banking.

Gold and silver or even platinum can be used to back currency. The currency can be paper but must be backed by a commodity so that wealth remains in the hands of the people. it then behooves banks to just be what they were intended to be - safe storehouses for people's gold and silver. The bank could issue currencies as a claim on deposits. Originally, that was the intent but it became corrupted by fractional reserve banking.

Nohope187 suggests there is a limited supply of gold and silver and that is a problem. it is only a problem if the gold price is fixed as it was before the cancellation of Bretton-Woods in 73 by Richard Nixon. I can't see hoarding as being a problem. People generally have needs and desires so they will always need to spend. They can't hoard it all. The only time I can remember when hoarding was a problem was after the civil war in America when greenbacks, originally printed to pay for the war became worthless for awhile because the government couldn't honor them. Then a few bankers got wind that the government was going to buy them all back and pay off that debt so the bankers started collecting them at ten cents on the dollar and then sold them back to the US Traeasury for their face value.

Economics is an interesting subject and the source of a lot of our social ills really. An honest monetary system would solve a lot of them and although a public central bank would be an improvement over our current structure, I wonder how long it would last before it too became corrupted. I think the best way to avoid corrupting the economic system is not to concentrate too much power in one agency.

john
12-21-2004, 03:03 AM
I agree with you Pliny when you say: "I think the best way to avoid corrupting the economic system is not to concentrate too much power in one agency."

But don`t be troubled by the word "bank". A public Central Bank would in fact not be a "bank" as we understand this word usually and it would have no power at all. A public Central Bank would be only the part of the State Administration which:

- prints the money demanded by the Executive (government): technical function of money production;
- transmits the demanded money to the Executive as requested by the annual budget as democratically adopted: technical function of money transmission;
- recovers the money -it was authorized to lend by the Executive- to the enterprises and the private banks (the only real banks) as well as the interests of this money (1% -1,5%): technical function of recovering the loans;
- destructs the recovered money in order to avoid inflation: technical function of money destruction.

All this is done on the instruction of the Executive and these instructions originate from the democratic parliamentary decision process. The public Central Bank makes no benefit (its low interests on the loans to the private entreprises and the private banks are just to cover its costs) and is entirely submitted to the Executive in its functioning.

psholtz
12-21-2004, 04:09 AM
The great evil of central banking is that they charge interest on their currency. If you can get debt-free currency into circulation (however you have to do it), then you've solved the problem.

Pliny
12-21-2004, 07:11 AM
psholz:

Interest is a problem,I agree. But fractional-reserve banking is the biggest evil. It allows banks to create interest on nothing.

World economists, of the leftest persuasion, see
nothing wrong with the economy and point to the fact that major capital projects, especially of a governmental nature, could not be accomplished any other way than through debt and borrowing against the future GDP. Of course, they argue that our standard of living is owed to the fact that we have been able to finance it.

The real crime is to, and it should be illegal, indebt a future generation that has no say in those debts. It is no less than economic slavery.

John:

Sounds like a workable idea. The public has to understand though that democracy is not about opening the public coffers and voting themselves benefits. It is only about voting for representatives to govern. The style of government and definition of it and its mandate must be clear and not corruptable. The original American Constitution was a fantastic document until it was corrupted by men of government who thought it too restrictive on their activities and deemed it irrelevant and inapplicable.

I guess you can figure out I am not a big government lib-left fan.

psholtz
12-21-2004, 08:17 AM
pliny:

that's a great point.. fractional reserve banking is a great evil.. I wonder whether it is possible to have fractional reserve banking w/o a central issuing bank? (i.e., I guess what I'm asking is, even if we eliminate the central bank, have we solved all the problems? What happens if we dissolve the central bank, but allow private banks to continue the practice of fraactionalizing their reserves?)

It seems there are really two problems we're dealing w/ here: (a) debt-based currency; and (b) fractional reserve banking;

freeman
12-21-2004, 09:35 AM
This is an excellent discussion, and I am hearing great ideas and analysis from all corners.
I agree that fractional reserve banking is a large part of the problem.
So is the privately controlled Central Banking System. John puts forth an excellent plan and explanation for government takeover of the Central Banking system, but like Pliny, I am not sanguine of delegating too much power and authority to government, since they are controlled through the same evil elitists that currently run the Fed. It would be a small adjustment for them to gain control of the government bankers and revert to the same old debt-laden system.
Finally, I don't personally like debt-based currency at all. Perhaps we even need to limit economic growth and government funded projects as many have postulated, and what better way than to limit our currency to the value of real wealth currently in the system, rather than borrowing against a future standard of living that is guaranteed to enslave future generations with onerous tax burdens.
Finally, I concur with sablefish that our most effective strategy in the short run may be to free ourselves as much as possible from the Fed's "funny money", even if we have to revert to some basic bartering.
I also agree with Pliny that price adjustments could atone for the limited supply of gold, silver or other precious metals to back up currency. There is even a theory that the warmongering of Bushco and the neocons in the Middle East right now is a desperate, last ditch effort to rescue the American economy by controlling the world's oil and utilizing that as the new currency.

Pliny
12-21-2004, 11:41 AM
Since banks have no real wealth to lend they are
today simply creating tokens (not money), as required, or for other reasons such as to resolve a sluggish economy. Besides the evils of fractional reserve banking and unbacked fiat currencies the government manipulates the economy with their various economic tools rather than depending on the natural forces of the market to flow.

This has resulted in inflation of course and the dollar being a debt instrument means that no one is saving. It makes no sense to save money when inflation eats away at it. Savings are a good indication of wealth in a nation but no one is actually saving wealth if they are saving fiat dollars. Saving for retirement is an almost hopeless task. Inflation will eat away half your savings by the time you are ready to retire and there is always the danger of hyper-inflation and currency devaluation if not outright collapse. Voltaire said that, "all paper currencies will eventually return to their intrinsic value", and I believe him correct.

Freeman:

I think the USD's strength is based on oil. All oil in the world is sold in USD. Saddam tried to sell some in Euros. Every country relies on oil so it must have USD reserves. This keeps the international community interested in the USD and its health(value). The strengthening of the Euro has also made nations take an interest in having some stock of Euros. It is an exciting time for currency traders at the moment.

psholz: Fractional reserve banking started long before their were central banks. Private banks started the practice and their ofttimes collapse brought in government regulation on the matter
that prevented runs on banks and their collapse by limiting the amount of percentage and by guaranteeing or insuring deposits.

I am not an economist but am a big fan of Austrian economics. A free market style with little government intervention. Keynesian economics was embraced by governments because it meant they could meddle in the economy and have their hands in everyones pockets. Supporters of Keynes argue for the political necessity of governments to save markets from themselves through intervention by the use of tools such as interest rates, money creation, taxation, tariffs, debt-management, inflation, wage and price controls. Note deflation is not a tool but considered by government an evil to be avoided - prices must always go up.

Someone mentioned Jekyll Island. I haven't read the book but I guess it really gets into the actual conspiracy of bankers to control the US economy. I think it is called, "The Creature from Jekyll Island" and i forget the authors name.

I think the Federal Reserve Act and the Income Tax act of the US had the bankers thinking they now controlled the worlds economy and it started nine decades of experimentation, which continues today, to subvert all nations and their citizens toward accepting legitimacy for global government.

If you look from that period forward, 1913 to be exact, WWI occurred less than a year later and the October revolution, funded by western interests, occurred in 1917. The great expansion of communism had started. America was rather recalcitrant regarding socialism. It was an individualistic country that believed in small government for the most part, even though the Marxist concept of graduated income taxation had been adopted. The great depression allowed a ballooning of government under FDR in the States and a more warmer feeling toward socialism through his new deal. Unionism was in full swing as well on the business front.

After that, world war II, the cold war, Korean war, Vietnam war, the recession of the seventies and eighties. Then terrorism developing in the nineties.

Well, gotta go. I think that's enough grist for the mill. Getting deep into conspiracy country now. :-)

789
12-21-2004, 05:07 PM
John

>>1. On behalf of the government, the public Central Bank is printing as much money as necessary for :
- the annual public budget;
- the private economy investments.


What would this budget include ? Expenses of any government (the true cost of government, not every kind of re-distribution programs) must be paid by some form of tax. You can't just print up money to pay for the legislature, law enforcement, garbage removal, sewage and water.

The Bank of Canada is 100% publicly owned -- so is the National Bank of Hungary; but it makes no difference. Both of these countries has an irresponsible, marxist government which spends other people's confiscated earnings like drunken sailors. And both of these governments allows money changers to issue their own paper based on 5% (government bond) fractional reserve. The whole entire leninist eastern block had publicly owned central banks, but they had irresponsible and incompetent leaders so the people did not benefited from their banks and paper money.

The government should own the central bank (like the State of Nevada has, or some Canadian provinces used to have, or some people wanted the US Treasury to be), but you need responsible and competent management to run it, not spend-thrift politicians.

_________
If you lend/borrow money into circulation and existence (even if from a government bank) you always have the problem of having to pay back 105 for 100, when there is only 100 in existence. Paper money has to be spent into circulation against useful projects. Just as, first work is expanded to get gold, silver, or copper.

_____________________
>>corrupt democracy
Democracy (mob-rule) is a corrupt idea to begin with, invented and brought to you by the private bankers, in ancient Athens as in our days. If you rob Peter to give some to Paul and pay yourself handsomely, you will always have the vote of Paul, and Peter is out of luck and never has a chance to free himself from this yoke because he is always out-voted.


_________________________________
Timothy Leary, the great admirerer of Alister Crowly ?! Now, there is somebody to look up to if you are opposed to the new world order.

john
12-21-2004, 06:00 PM
789.

You say: "You can't just print up money to pay for the legislature, law enforcement, garbage removal, sewage and water."

From where do you think money is coming, from the clouds? Also in the actual private Central Bank system, money must be printed before put in circulation. In the USA it`s already governmentally printed on the instruction of the FED. The problem is that even if this money is printed by the government, it is sold to the same government by the private bankers who own the FED, the interests charged by these bankers being the price of this money. These (high) interests correspond to no real productive service from these private bankers and that`s why we can speak about usury. Every US$ in circulation was printed at the costs of the US people AND sold to this people by the private bankers who own the FED. Funny situation isn`it? Just like if you were constructed your own house and paid for it to somebody who didn`t even help you to construct it...

Concerning Hungary, its Central Bank isn`t "owned" by the government but is indeed completely independent of this government and receives all its orders/instructions from the European Central Bank which in turn is under the absolute control of bankers like the Rothschilds. By the way, the present Hungarian government is a 100% ultra-liberal one, even if he calls himself "socialist": he serves exclusively the giant multinationals just as do the other Eastern European governments today and was doing the "communist" government of the sinister Yeltsin in Russia during the 90`. Don`t trust in words such as "socialist" or "communist", they aren`t worth even the ink used to print them.

789
12-21-2004, 06:51 PM
John

>>>From where do you think money is coming, from the clouds ?

Today money is borrowed into circulation. Printed in a government mint.
But money issued against nothing by a publicly owned central bank, as your scheme would suggest, causes inflation just the same as money created by a private bank based on 5% reserve.


>>the present Hungarian government is a 100% ultra-liberal one

Isn't that what I said ?

___________________
usury means interest low or high

john
12-21-2004, 07:08 PM
789.

No inflation created. Re-read my post, excedentary money would be destructed every year.

You said Hungary has a marxist government. This would be a real good joke here in Hungary...

Usury means interest not justified by any counterpart from the money lender. A public Central Bank would charge only the interest corresponding to its functioning costs. A non-usurary private bank would charge interest corresponding to a reasonable profit, reasonable meaning not higher than the current profit of a private enterprise of the real economy.

789
12-21-2004, 07:39 PM
John

You are up late.


You create inflation when you issue money against neither goods nor services produced.

Usury means interest, any interest, 0.5% 8%.

The joke is on them, because their government is following a line known as marxism, no matter what name they choose for themselves season after season. Of course, the joke is on us, too, because our governments are doing the same. I lived under Trudeau (openly marxist), Mulroney(conservative), Chretien(liberal), and they all were the same. Bigger and bigger government, more and more taxes, more and more regulations. All three of them were internationalist, all three of them were in favour and promoted socialist programs. All three of them darkened the doors of churches, but what god they believed in, I wonder.

How many and what type of socialist services are there in Hungary ? Is this present, allegedly non-marxist, ultra-liberal government opposed to internationalism (EU) ? Is it a proponent of nation state ?
Is the United States of Europe not socialist ? not internationalist ?
Didn't comrade Marx tell us that socialisms will be realized first in the most advanced capitalist countries, then the socialist state will wither and give its place and power to a (communist) world government ?
Forgive me, but that is exactly what I see happening in front of my eyes. Just because, after 40 years of leninism, they still don't know what marxism is, it still is marxism.

redrat11
08-13-2006, 02:04 AM
789 wrote:
John

>>1. On behalf of the government, the public Central Bank is printing as much money as necessary for :
- the annual public budget;
- the private economy investments.


What would this budget include ? Expenses of any government (the true cost of government, not every kind of re-distribution programs) must be paid by some form of tax. You can't just print up money to pay for the legislature, law enforcement, garbage removal, sewage and water.

The Bank of Canada is 100% publicly owned -- so is the National Bank of Hungary; but it makes no difference. Both of these countries has an irresponsible, marxist government which spends other people's confiscated earnings like drunken sailors. And both of these governments allows money changers to issue their own paper based on 5% (government bond) fractional reserve. The whole entire leninist eastern block had publicly owned central banks, but they had irresponsible and incompetent leaders so the people did not benefited from their banks and paper money.

The government should own the central bank (like the State of Nevada has, or some Canadian provinces used to have, or some people wanted the US Treasury to be), but you need responsible and competent management to run it, not spend-thrift politicians.

_________
If you lend/borrow money into circulation and existence (even if from a government bank) you always have the problem of having to pay back 105 for 100, when there is only 100 in existence. Paper money has to be spent into circulation against useful projects. Just as, first work is expanded to get gold, silver, or copper.

_____________________
>>corrupt democracy
Democracy (mob-rule) is a corrupt idea to begin with, invented and brought to you by the private bankers, in ancient Athens as in our days. If you rob Peter to give some to Paul and pay yourself handsomely, you will always have the vote of Paul, and Peter is out of luck and never has a chance to free himself from this yoke because he is always out-voted.


_________________________________
Timothy Leary, the great admirerer of Alister Crowly ?! Now, there is somebody to look up to if you are opposed to the new world order.


NOPE! I caught your B.S. A Government Central Peoples Bank is what is NECESSARY! A bank controlled by,and for the people who CHOOSE to put their assets in said BANKS is common sense.

The reality of the World's problems is in the PEOPLES stupidity of managing MONEY (MY SELF INCLUDED) think about what POWER the people can have just realizing that their MONEY IS THEYR"ES to do what is best for them!

The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE INSTITUTION! So fucken what! People have to BYPASS that shit, only knowledge can overcome the Zionist shitheads! this will never be Achieved. 8-)



I Forgot!
P.S. All the Jackasses who are "Investing" in Gold are just that, If, of course you really follow scripture, NO one shall buy and sell without the MARK! 8-)

Therefore, the Con Artist who promote that Gold and Silver are UNIVERSAL are full of SHIT!

redrat_
08-13-2006, 07:46 AM
You'll have to forgive the little mouse, he's as crazy as hell.

avalon
08-13-2006, 09:16 AM
Why is it so hard to find any information about this site? Who started it. Why? Who is using this information? If I remember correctly this site is run by Cornell University which is funded by the NWO....keeping track of what we think??? Doesn't anyone wonder...has this been discussed.

avalon
08-13-2006, 10:10 AM
The Government can make it illegal to use gold any time it wants. It can confiscate every piece anyone owns. What can they do to stop bartering?

O_VAUGHAN
08-13-2006, 05:28 PM
Hey John

You are a total fucking moron. Why don't you move to Cuba or China? Fucking communist.

truebeliever
08-13-2006, 10:23 PM
789 wrote:
John

>>1. On behalf of the government, the public Central Bank is printing as much money as necessary for :
- the annual public budget;
- the private economy investments.


What would this budget include ? Expenses of any government (the true cost of government, not every kind of re-distribution programs) must be paid by some form of tax. You can't just print up money to pay for the legislature, law enforcement, garbage removal, sewage and water.

The Bank of Canada is 100% publicly owned -- so is the National Bank of Hungary; but it makes no difference. Both of these countries has an irresponsible, marxist government which spends other people's confiscated earnings like drunken sailors. And both of these governments allows money changers to issue their own paper based on 5% (government bond) fractional reserve. The whole entire leninist eastern block had publicly owned central banks, but they had irresponsible and incompetent leaders so the people did not benefited from their banks and paper money.

The government should own the central bank (like the State of Nevada has, or some Canadian provinces used to have, or some people wanted the US Treasury to be), but you need responsible and competent management to run it, not spend-thrift politicians.


I'm with Bill Still and "The Money Masters".

With so much INSTANT information at the fingertips of economists it would be an EASY task to release EXACTLY the right amount of "fiat currency" to oil the cogs of the economic machine. There would be NO inflation due to EXACTLY the right amount of money following the production of goods and services.

I want this in the hands of politions. We can vote them out. NO power to print money should be in the hands of private banking. In fact all bankers should be hung.