The Secret of Oz
In 1996, in a documentary called The Money Masters, we asked the question why is America going broke. It wasn’t clear then that we were, but it is today. Now the question is how can we get out of this mess. Foreclosures are everywhere, unemployment is skyrocketing – and this is only the beginning. America’s economy is on a long, slippery slope from here on. The bubble ride of debt has come to an end.
What can government do? The sad answer is – under the current monetary system – nothing. It’s not going to get better until the root of the problem is understood and addressed. There isn’t enough stimulus money in the entire world to get us out of this hole. Why? Debt. The national debt is just like our consumer debt – it’s the interest that’s killing us.
Though most people don’t realize it the government can’t just issue it’s own money anymore. It used to be that way. The King could just issue stuff called money. Abraham Lincoln did it to win the Civil War. No, today, in our crazy money system, the government has to borrow our money into existence and then pay interest on it. That’s why they call it the National Debt. All our money is created out of debt. Politicians who focus on reducing the National Debt as an answer probably don’t know what the National Debt really is. To reduce the National Debt would be to reduce our money – and there’s already too little of that.
The economy of the U.S. is in a deflationary spiral. Nothing can stop it -- except monetary reform.
1. No more national debt. Nations should not be allowed to borrow. If they want to spend, they have to take the political heat right away by taxing.
2. No more fractional reserve lending. Banks can only lend money they actually have.
3. Gold money is NOT the answer. Historically gold ALWAYS works against a thriving middle class and ALWAYS works to create a plutocracy.
4. The total quantity of money + credit in a national system must be fixed, varying only with the population.
Left-wing communist bullshit.
They don't explain what a government bond is, a bond is a legal entity with a NAME attached. Our legal NAMES are bonded into the system as incorporated DEBTORS through social contracts that bind our NAMES to the money masters who own them.
In summary, all that is necessary is correcting a few mistakes that WE allowed to happen. And to be better electors and monitors of those we elect so that WE don't allow it to happen again. Will that seem like a big change in things monetary to most, probably. That is a result of a socialist education, another problem which needs fixing.
From the Intro:
The economy of the U.S. is in a deflationary spiral. Nothing can stop it -- except monetary reform.
1. No more national debt. Nations should not be allowed to borrow. If they want to spend, they have to take the political heat right away by taxing.
2. No more fractional reserve lending. Banks can only lend money they actually have.
3. Gold money is NOT the answer. Historically gold ALWAYS works against a thriving middle class and ALWAYS works to create a plutocracy.
4. The total quantity of money + credit in a national system must be fixed, varying only with the population.
I have not watched this yet but assume the above description is accurate. First you have to believe Item 0: "Nothing can stop it except monetary reform."
That all depends on what you consider "reform". What unleashed the tidal wave of malfeasance was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act regulating banks from putting depositors money at risk in the wall street or other casinos, keeping commercial banks separate from "investment" banks. Note: When reading anything you would be much closer to the truth by replacing most instances of the word "investment" with SPECULATION. Not that all speculation is bad, just when you Banksters (like the skeptic darwinian) speculate with depositors money without notifying them that their money would be far safer in their mattress than your bank after repeal of Glass-Steagall. I would consider the re-institution of the Glass-Steagall act a mere correcting of a bought and paid for congress and president (both political parties should be strung up for what they have done to this country) mistake. That would go a long way to correcting the current problem of the banking system.
Did we have a debt problem before Glass-Steagall was repealed, enabling commercial banks to roll the dice with depositors money at the wall street casino, which most all lost, got bailed out with the citizens future tax obligations, and most doubled down again, and will go bankrupt (as they already are technically), when the people say no more trillions to the banks who have committed moral hazard yet again? Yes, for certain we had an ever expanding debt problem prior to the latest craziness. But first another mistake should be corrected. Our wonderful banking oversight also decided to change the accounting rules allowing them to keep their doors open. Previously it was Mark To Market, valuing assets at their current market value. Now it is known as Mark To Fantasy accounting. Reading the accounting statements of banks and corporations is essentially a waste of time unless it is a small straight forward business, unlike the many larger corporations which stuff their big problems into acquired companies or off shore accounts. Accounting rules must be corrected back to the way they were so a rational person can have some level of confidence in what they are reading. Why bother having accounting at all if it is a joke?
So those two corrections would solve the more recent crazy /debt problem. How to solve the prior debt problem? Is it a monetary problem or a political problem? Who put us into debt? Clearly congress cannot be trusted to be financially responsible. And if you get rid of the private bankster Federal Reserve which simply does accounting and as an insane fee gets to charge interest on every dollar rather than being paid a salary. Ok they print the physical dollars as well. I'm sure we are underpaying them for that as well (cough cough) and could not manage that on our own either. That would get rid of a huge debt burden but wouldn't solve currency debasement by congress overspending. One of the methods the banksters have been using to steal your wealth (inflation). Next by deflation when your assets will be devalued when you and many others are competing to sell them to get some money for food, and the banksters will scoop them up at pennies on the dollar. When the dust settles they will start the inflation game again. Unless of course YOU decide to stop all that thievery by kicking all the bought bums out of congress, seeing to it incorruptible decent wise people in numbers from all parties are running for all offices so it doesn't matter who the fools vote for, someone decent will get in to make the necessary corrections and changes. What other changes besides getting rid of the Fed would solve the financial problems? Actually if you go back just prior to the Wilson presidency, getting rid of the Fed would be just another mistake correction.
Credit is just another word for Debt. What have either really done for the world, except unnecessarily accumulate most of the wealth in the hands of the few families that own or control most of the banks and corporations? Does any country really need credit or rather to go into debt? If one looks at every country ensnared into the debt pit of hell by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), some recent prime examples are in South America such as Argentina, where their administrations were tempted into accepting more money than they could pay back in the allotted time frame, thereby defaulting, causing their currency to crash and enabling the banksters to get at their natural resources which they wanted all along. Not to mention extracting a tax on the people in perpetuity, another goal achieved. The bankers did the same thing to farmers in the usa years ago. Take this money and buy new better equipment and land to expand. And when the crops failed or prices fell due to the rapid expansion in an area, they couldn't pay. Did debt help the food supplying farmer? Only the lucky ones or those that didn't take on more than they could afford to lose. Did some farmers do fine growing at a slower pace avoiding banks altogether? The majority did. Is that possible today? Not very since the banksters have cause the inflation in the price of land and equipment. If pay as you go works well for families and farmers in the past. It seems it would work well again for governments as well, if we only could get rid of inflation, which is the theft of the value of your money.
Item 1 and Item 2 seem clear solutions. No national debt and no fractional reserve banking. So what if you cannot have something instantly by going into debt up to your ears. When all the inflation ends, it won't take you near as long to afford it. A much better situation than being saddled and road hard with debt a large portion if not all of your life; the bankster plan to get rich off of you.
If a government wants to spend more it will have to tax more. If a country is poor then it has no business spending unless the people decide they want to pool their money to build a better water system or road, which they certainly don't need govt to do for them. If the road is tougher to prosperity, people will be less likely to give it up to some weasel carpet bagging bankster who wants to put them in debt chains.
What then is to prevent a current administration (govt) from printing more money to buy votes with to stay in power? Or importing poor people who like free stuff too, that would also vote for more of same?
It is interesting that the documentarian is against gold-money (Item 3) but proposes Item 4 that money + credit must be a fixed amount. If money + credit can only increase with the population that means it is a zero sum game. You can only increase your wealth by taking someone else's. Haven't we had enough banksters doing that to prove it to be a lousy system, ideology, or method? There must be some means of allowing the individual to work for what he wants without having to step on others ability to do same. Exactly what the corporate "person" or entity does. If you look close enough, Socialism is all about getting rid of the competition. When you have socialist run schools they don't educate, they brainwash with emotional falsehoods. Govt run schools are socialist by definition. They will never explain that socialism is where govt and its corporate cronies eliminate all competition and then you have to pay what ever they ask. No. They lie saying socialism is the benevolent method taking care of everyone (also a falsehood). They take care of themselves, enslave everyone else, and give just enough to the poor to keep them voting for the same, which is less and less until the money runs out. Takes a LONG time for the money to run out when countries are allowed to borrow, not nearly as long in a pay as you go system, which would demonstrate the evils of socialism in short order ... although it is plain to see at any time for anyone willing to look rather than regurgitate emotional ego protectionism.
I submit that politicians will find a way to circumvent any laws installed to limit their ability to print money to buy votes unless their is a limited supply of the ink, or paper. Since they can always grow more than enough paper and ink or smuggle it in, it seems the founding fathers were correct in stipulating in the US Constitution that the only money shall be gold, which seems to have a limited supply. Why would gold ALWAYS work against a thriving middle class and limiting money + credit to a fixed amount would not? When for most practical purposes they would accomplish the same result, IF the fixed amount of money + credit could actually be accomplished? I disbelieve the premise altogether. Fractional reserve banking began with the gold "storage/bankers" lending out more than they had in deposit. That is what created a plutocracy or rule by the wealthy. Money is just a medium of exchange. If you allow that to be corrupted in one way or another, by the printing press or by fractional reserve banking, wealth will always accumulate to those doing the corrupting. Personally I would be more in favor of Silver as being the only money since it wouldn't be worth the effort to counterfeit silver. Bring back the silver certificates I had when young. They looked like a dollar, they acted like a dollar, and if they didn't you could trade them in for an ounce of silver.
Problem solved.
Helpful commentary , I loved the facts . Does anyone know where my business can get ahold of a sample a form form to type on ?
skeptic_darwinian who do you think the number one scientist is? Who is the Creator of science?
Well put together Doco, thank you Bill Still. I now have a good tool to work with to try to awaken some sleepers.
Please explain to this layman how wealth is created if the government issues its own currency, as Lincoln's issuance of "Greenbacks", without a standard like gold backing it up. Does simply having currency in circulation, enough for carrying on commerce, enable the economy to function, value being attached as the currency moves? Just by having currency in motion it assumes worth?
How is the government kept from overproducing currency in order to finance a boondoggle, a wasteful scheme, or an ill-advised invasion of a sovereign nation? Are citizens somehow more alert to fiduciary malfeasance? Do they have their fingers more firmly on the pulse of the nation's budget when our government is in control of the currency rather than self-serving bankers?
Remove the Does the How the Do and the question marks and you've answered your own questions.
Thanks Hogster. My early inculcation via public education and mass media misinformation has created a vast dark hole of ignorance on subjects economic. My single comforting thought is that I'm not alone in these misapprehensions. Documentaries like this are performing a great public service by a proper and timely re-education of debt and wage slaves.
At least you are getting the information now James. Many I speak to refuse to believe anything other than what they were taught in a hijacked education system. Bottom line is the Banksters are seen as philanthropists building Hospitals and Universities, what people don't see is their hidden agenda to misinform and control the masses.
Well said. As worth the watch a few years ago as now. What has often mystified me is why the creation of debt system is so little understood by so many. (I do realize how much energy goes into keeping people confused and compliant). Today, surely most of us get it that 'corporations' (especially banks) are directly and indirectly responsible for most of the economic problems of our times (and those in the past). This doc (watch more then once if your not quite sure-because all is made very clear) shows the wide distribution of historical context in an entertaining way, yet stays with the key issue and key solutions. Namely, banks (controlled by a very few super rich 'persons') has control of the money system, and through that control has manipulated and controlled governments and the people in order to grow their own wealth - period. Obviously, when the govt. must go hat in hand to those who 'control' then govt. is not going to do a great job in representing the needs of the people. The solutions are simply - bank and corporate control is returned to the 'elected' government, which is then forced to be responsible (as intended) to the people who elect them. We do have local banks who do not run like the corrupt and greed based BIG corps... they are credit unions and coops ... transferring our wealth to these is a good first step, while we find the political will to make the required changes. (millions of people are already doing just that, and while the big banks are laughing at us and saying it is having little effect on them-least that was the cry a year ago - they are not laughing so well now, as branches of their banks are being closed and the numbers of folks walking away keep growing and growing, without rallies or marches, we can also vote with our action). - peace
The simple solution, is first sticking together no matter what the money whores say, and then telling our representatives and the presidents comment line, that we want to use U.S. debt free notes as currency, put the federal reserve on hiatus and convert those buildings to treasury buildings. The debt will slip into darkness. I am not so naive as to think the money-hos will remain idle, as I'm positive they will hatch yet another scheme to confuse the people into being their slaves again. So far this is all quite Biblical [ the killing of the 2 witnesses [ U.S.A. & U.K. ] because our prosperity was killed, and our being revived later on. We have to network with our fellow man and get it done!
Wipe the slate clean, and start again. Debt forgiveness has always happened throughout history, and we need it now, more than ever.
NO!!! In forgiving a debt, you are acknowledging the validity of that debt. There is no validity to any current debt world wide and your suggestion would hand them that world in one step. The debt must be nullified and expunged and in addition, since labor has been nearly negated (except for the financial marketers) by machinery (or at least could be negated) money itself has ultimately become moot and unnecessary.
Remember "Close Encounters of the Third Kind"? When the organist is playing the notes broadcast at the space ship and the guy with the headset is giving him instructions on what to play by another guy in the control tower and they switch over to computer control, all three of those guys were immediately out of work. Just like elevator and switchboard operators, when your job is gone, you shouldn't have to find another one, you simply become one of the many who can then begin living instead of working for a living. Working for a living is the worst saying ever created. Nobody works to live, they work to survive - and just barely.
And as money is no longer needed, patents and copyrights also need to disappear. Copyright should have gone away when the first cassette recorder with a built-in radio was sold to the public as far a music is concerned and movie copyrights after the first home video recorder was sold.
As for patents, as they really only protect the money behind the invention, if you are not willing to share it with the world, don't invent anything. Ely Whitney created the cotton gin so he wouldn't have to pick cotton and put thousands of pickers out of work. I say GREAT, now lets try to put everybody out of work so they can begin living. Investigate the Venus Project along with the Zeitgeist Movement for more information.
Brilliant documentary, thanks mr Stll!!!!!
Historically bank reserves have earnt no interest till as recently as 2008 and 0.25% after that. This documentary at the every beginning presents the fractional reserve system as enabling the banks to earn 6% by lending its reserves to the government and then again lending a multiple of those reserves.
What hope does it have of proposing a better system when it cant even present the existing sytem accurately.
If a bank gets 6% interest, the bank gets 6% interest.
Don't deny that.
It's quite obvious quest87 you do not understand that these banks create the money they are loaning out of thin air (nothing) and getting it all paid back plus the interest. so if the interest is 6% their return is 106%.. Get It?
The Rockefellers. the Morgans, the Rothschilds and about 9 or 10 other bankers are the worlds only multi-trillionaires. Don't ask me how come they never get on any of the published "richest in the world lists" because i'll tell you now, They don't want to be, they want their wealth to be obscure to the masses.
So what is the solution if we are a consumption based society? The reasons tangible goods have to replaced so often, is so we have a need to purchase goods and services. What is the solution??? Bartering? Equal goods for everyone, which would mean everyone has to work and no handouts?
Perhaps a resource based economy, with nation states dissolved to form a unified Earth. Maybe something like the Venus project.
No way. That's what these criminals want, a New World Order. No nations but one huge empire w/ one religion, one currency and one world govt.
Our consumption is irrelevant...the debt notes are what is killing us. Throughout history, from prior to Andrew Jackson to Congressman Lindbergh and McFadden, all warned of the pvt bankers and the interest. The treasury needs to do it's job and print the interest free money we need, only as we need it, and we'd be fine without the money whores sacking any progress we make towards fixing the problem.
Now is the time we really need a Fight Club action.
The debt-free system would slow down production and capitalism. Today's US monetary system, though not perfect, has brought about the largest boom in World History. Hard to ignore that while we're all searching for the lesser-of-all-evils-system.
What needs to be done is End the Fed, go back to sound money, free market principles (if you think we have a free market system today you'd be wrong), let capitalism do it's detoxing properly (liquidate malinvestment, let banks fail - if you would let these banks and companies fail when the market calls for it we wouldn't be in predicaments today - and limit governments size and power.
I know the de-regulation argument has been beaten to death - and the one interesting thing about the debate is that half of the Wall Street'ers Ive spoken with say some of the de-regulation caused the crisis and the other half say the free market would do a better job regulating than government. They admitted there would be more violent volatility but you wouldn't have even CLOSE to the bubbles created today (government creates these bubbles with poor politics/policies - E.g. "Everyone should own a home! yay!")
When your government is spending 40% of the GDP you have problems and should probably start right there.
This thinking is relying on the same tired philosophies of Adam Smith and 'the invisible hand.' If there was a truly unregulated free market, it would rely on the same principles and self destruct in days. The principles it relies on don't work and are terribly outdated.
The capitalist system relies on continuous growth to sustain itself. How can a closed ecosystem such as Earth have continuous growth? It can't, its completely unsustainable and will lead to mass environmental and social chaos. The priniciples of capitalism are completely at odds with nature and this is the reason the system is collapsing around the world. When water becomes dirty, companies make more profit by selling bottled water. So companies have no incentive to keep the environment clean, in fact they make more profit when its not clean. This is the paradox of the profit system.
The problem with the capitalist system is exactly what its proponents tout as a benefit: creative destruction. For the system to continue, it requires cyclical consumption, continuously using plastic, computers, I phone 5,6,7,8 when one I phone could be updated easily with a new chip. It is not an efficient system, it creates enormous waste and inefficiency at its core. It doesn't have to be such a fight, there are better ways to live and people are waking up to this even if it hasn't been fully articulated yet, hopefully we're moving in the right direction. If you look at the world today and think this system is working, I'd like to have what you're having.
Spot On ~ it's called Disaster Capitalism brought to you by Neo-liberal ObamaNationInc, our current rulers along the continum...
'built in obselescense' a hall mark/cornerstone of Capitalism it demonstrates the Zero Sum Game (Socialize the Pain and suffering and Capitalize on the Gains game) that is totally dependent on Exploitation and Enslavement; and eventually it eats itself alive as it turns to fascism to save it from the feudal riff raff once known as the Working Class.. as they come after it/Capitalism, with pitchforks and torches. (vs Drones, Hitech surveillance, sound dilibatation devices etc)
So, move to Somalia they have a Deregulated system.
The largest boom in world history was the industrial revolution, which was funded under a gold standard.
Anyone that thinks THE FED is legal and fair will soon see just how wrong they are.
When the economy crashes, caused by the fed, the fed will come up with plans to get your money and you will be scratching your head as to why.
Am I the only one who learned what the "fractional reserve banking system" is from an actual university not from weed and LSD?
This documentary should be under Conspiracy not Economics .
REALLY??? 11:30 on for a couple minutes, you really have to attack christianity to get your point across? Wow, stupid!
Yes, there are plenty of things wrong with the way we (the world, in general) handle currency and we've created a big mess: rising unemployment, food and water shortages, lack of natural resources, exploitation of labor, et cetera.
But what about population control? It seems to me that there are too many human beings on this earth given the limited resources we have. We have created a lifestyle for ourselves, at least, in the Western world, that is unsustainable given the present circumstances, but it seems we could sustain something very comfortable and close to what we have now (perhaps even better) with a lower global population and both current and future achievements in technology. The lack of abundance of cheap labor a lower (and hopefully more educated and intelligent) global population would offer could be overcome by technology; namely, robots, automation, etc. Companies have already begun replacing workers who perform mundane, mechanical tasks with robots that can work 24/7, take no lunch breaks or vacations, make a more consistent product, don't need benefits or a 401K and above all, save them money. I can't blame them; I'd do the same thing. It makes good business-sense.
Granted, there is no way to legislate such a thing, even if it were for the betterment of human civilization at large, without infringing on basic freedoms. I, for one, highly value any and all freedoms I have and resent any infringement that has been placed upon them, though I am aware that some of these restrictions, such as laws against robbery, murder and the like, protect me from people who might otherwise do so (or at least provide a deterrent), whatever the reason. Additionally, doing so would rely heavily on people's ability to reason and think independently and intelligently about the world, since there could not be a just system of law to regulate it, and as far as I can tell, people in general are pretty incompetent when it comes to thinking through things with any sort of thoughtfulness and thoroughness. So am I apparently.
1 - Poverty in the developing nation is the main cause of population growth. As a nation becomes richer and more educated, families decrease in size.
2 - The unsustainable way of life that we are in now can only be set on a more sustainable course if we have the ressources to do so. Every dollar we are spending in interest on the debt is one we could have spent in financing the sustainable future.
Economics is the science of choice. Right now, economists are not able to help because the banking system denies us the choice between consumption and investment in the future. They only let us choose between paying rent on our money or suffering the woes of depression.
If we continue like this, the whole world will be a over-populated slum by the end of our lives.
DECENTRALIZE... putting all the power in the hands of the few causes corruption. That is the problem. If you do not get this simple solution then continue to put all your hopes and dreams in someone else's hands.
Ugh fixed currency is moronic when you understand economics and government monetary policy. The problem isnt debt its that we fail to pay it off when the economy is good.
My guess is your still not getting it, money is created as interest bearing debt!!!!
Then add the "fractional reserve lending" process, and it becomes populous enslavement.
It might be a bit boring but may i suggest that you watch the doc again.
I'm not sure you're getting it. You defeat your position when you don't know the difference between the words "your"(a possessive pronoun) and "you're" (a contraction for the words "you are").
We dont care!!! go teach sombody english who cares,we are here to have open thoughts not spelling classes.nxdc10capt is the type of person that loves rules and regulation but with little freedom hence he needs to comment on spelling.
Don't tell me you don't care. If you really don't care, why respond to my e-mail. Never mind, you won't get it anyway.
----- Reply message -----
What you have failed to understand is that under a debt-money system there is no other money in the economy than borrowed money. If the government wanted to raise taxes to pay the debt it would mean contraction of the money supply and therefore depression. What ddo you think the bankers mean when they say if you don't bail us out it will be a catastrophe? They are not kidding. It will really be a catastrophe because the banks will collect their loans and not lend out anymore. The economy will drop dead.
Oh boy, the debt can not be paid off. Ever. It isn't possible. In our current system, our Gov't has to borrow money to pay off the debt. That is a problem, because it just creates more debt! So if the Gov't increases taxes then the people would use the debt based money to pay their taxes and the Gov't could never get enough money to pay off the debt, because the Gov't would have to borrow more money to pay off the existing debt and therefore the debt would only keep increasing. It would stop the whole economy in it's tracks! The only real option is for the Gov't(not the Federal Reserve!) to print it's own debt free money.. Andrew Jackson was the last president to pay off the debt and he faced tremendous opposition from Banksters and Congressmen.
congratulation for this job!
Castro was wrong with wondering why they hadn't tried to shoot Obama yet. He's obviously not influenced enough if he's on the public's side.
I take this document with a healthy grain of salt, since Jackson was a freemason and when his precidency was over, USA was in a more depressed monetary situation than before the crisis. My big question is, who was it that made US take loans right after Jackson had gotten the country debt-free?
Brilliant!
yay
@skeptic_darwinian.
You suggest we should accept what we have then in the same breath suggest the bankers are wealthy because they are the fittest. You boldly state survival\of the fittest but seem to not have understood the most basic of darwinian principles. that principle is that the survival is or isn't achieved in a struggle to propagate ones genes. In this struggle the lambs do not line themselves up for the wolves and just hope their fatter buddy next to them will provide ample distraction. You accept what you're given, I'll stick to looking out for the best out there.
You are a fool of the highest order.
@Swytch
Nice one. Bell definitely Jacked the plans from the patent office in-tray. He had guys at the submission desk on the payroll (allegedly). I wonder if its the repetition of the name Alexander Graham Bell or an unwillingness to change all the educational literature (and thereby reveal the brutal edge of capitalism ) that causes a failure to correctly credit the real inventor. Bell made the first working telephone but with a transmitter suspiciously similar to Grays.
THIS MESSAGE IS TI SKEPTIC DARWINIAN, YOU SAY LEAVE IT TO THE BANKS THATS WHAT THEY DO IS MANAGE MONEY , THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DOING SO WELL LATELY, I WOULDN'T TRUST THEM WITH A PIGGY BANK LET ALONE ANY MORE THAN THAT, ALL THEY DID WITH THE BAIL OUT MONEY IN MY OPTION WAS A TOTAL WASTE , TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS WENT TO PAYING PEOPLE OFF , YOUR STATEMENT WAS CORRECT IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHEN BANKS FIRST WERE FIRST OPENED, WAY BEFORE ANY OF OUR TIMES, THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSE TO DO,
HOWEVER THEY WOULD RATHER STEAL FROM YOU , THAN HAVE YOU OWE THEM .
Oh man ! what a bull***! so what then ?
I agree with a lot of things....but honestly, having the government print the money themselves is no better then the Federal Reserve doing it. If a currency isn't backed by something, what value does it hold other then the number on the paper? I'm not saying it has to be gold or silver, i once heard someone mention a basket of commodities, but it should definitely NOT be fiat.
Honestly, how about we just legalize competition, and let the chips fall where they may. The people choose the currency they want to trade in, whether it be gold, paper money, or whatever commodity they like. We shouldn't give the power to create money to ANY entity, whether it be a private corporation like the Federal Reserve, or a government that has failed in everything it has tried to do. The power to manipulate currency is too much power to wield.
Ending the Fed is only the beginning. And as you mentioned having our current government print the money would still have issues, but even with those issues it is 1000 times more beneficial than having the Fed control our money. For one thing it would be debt free & end all the financial voodoo of Wall Street bankers securitizing debt, the insane "financial instruments" that caused the Great Depression & the housing bubble & 2007/8 crash that are only possible with fractional reserve banking.
For things to be truly restored so the once sovereign men & women of America we must end the fed, the federal income tax or at least cut it to its original levels & abolish the IRS with it, repeal the Organic Act of 1871 (that created Washington, DC & a shadow government) & remove 99% of Federal, state & local laws, mandate all laws that create a criminal act must have a physical victim, limit the size & language of new bills so it's easily understood, ban paid lobbyists, campaign contributions & give all candidates equal media coverage.
Along with those things prosecuting all parties involved in treasonous acts, those who defrauded and/or stole from the American people with penalties of jail, fines & for those who knowingly committed murder or genocide get the death penalty forfeit their estate. But all of these things are a far off dream, I doubt we'll get a free monetary system, let alone the rest. I believe the change from the fed as it is now will be to a global currency under the IMF.
@Bill
Thanks for the indepth comentery on the Feds status as governmental instrument or quasi-governmental instrument. To simplify for the laymen / wheel barrow pusher - Government has opted to protect itself from prosecution in financial matters by creating the Fed as a quasi-governmental instrument and promoted global marketing by doing so. The draw back is that none of the Feds elected officials appear to be inditable for their actions / lack of action. The Founding Fathers removed one aristocracy and created another. The Fed. You would have to google for a couple of hours to even find the names of those officials at the height of the economic crisis, circa 2007. There were only 5 sitting Fed officers at that time. Their power is absolute. The media only ever mentions their front man and never addresses the other board members. Al Greenspan and Ben Bernanky? Manipulation of interest rates appears publicaly to be their soul responsability. Their true responsabilitie being the oversite of all banks that are members of the Federal banking system. Who could have imagined that bailing out the banks would actually work? The Fed? Apparently the board members are elected by the President / Obama this time.
So much for a seperation of government branches. Now that most of those banks and other companies have paid most of their debt back in record time no doubt, thanks to the lowest interest rates in recorded history. The American people actually gained from loss. Unfortunatley they may never understand that it was George Bush Junior and the Republican party that elected or re-established Al Greenspan and company. We may never know their actions / inactions behind the sceens. They may never be held accountable for any actions whatsoever. Bernie Madeoff will have to do. One would think that they should be held accountable for their actions regardless of their status of quasi-governmental instrument or not. Their responsability is reflected in CEO. positions of private sector companies who suffered no losses due to their golden parachute clauses. It starts with government officials being held accountable. This sets the tone and policy of the private sector. Unfortunatley the public has never known where the buck stops or who to hold responsible since King George in the revolutionary war of independance.
-----------------------------------------------------------
@All
The last 20 years have demonstrated economic crisses in a global glut situation. Any body who lived through WWII. should remember rationing and the great depression. Today with global marketing and a glut of consumable products we are still haveing economic crisses. This is due inevitably to the one true obstuction to the 'ends of goverment' since time began. The people. Greed unfortunatley is a very humane trait. Untetherd greed is selfdestructive and will implode upon itself. Education is the onlyway to avoid it. Watch the Documentry and make sure every one else does so that they can make more informed decissions as to their next vote. Any easy decisions are just that, easy decisions. It easy to say that this documentry should be a part of all kids education.
THIS IS FACTUAL, HISTORICALLY SOUND a wonderful WONDERFUL movie....and ALL America should revolt & INSIST on taking down the centralized fractional bankers, STOP THE PRIVATELY OWNED money changers, poverty, THE MILITARY Industrial Complex & their murderous PERPETUAL profit making WARS! & OPEN STATE chartered banks NATIONWIDE SPREAD THE NEWS!!!!! Factual until the end...Thomas Edison DID NOT INVENT the electric light bulb or anything economically effective in yesterdays or todays world....NIKOLA TESLA DID! come on Still you know this....why would you perpetuate THE LIE? Teslas technology is suppressed FREE WIRELESS energy for all....this bit about Edison PROMOTES the lies, re-written history of OUR TESLA and gives credit to Edison, Ford etc & their FOR PROFIT system? thats like promoting Rockefeller or Morgan etc?????? YES virtually free energy for ALL the planet THIS WE OWE to Nikola Tesla! BUT we do not have it because the EDISON technology FATTENS THE POCKETS of the Globalist POWERS THAT BE Puppet Masters....JUST LIKE Dorothy WE HAVE THE KEY, find the TRUTH, SPREAD THE WORLD and kill THE BEAST....THE MONEY MASTERS! NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN! CORRUPTION and murder ABOUNDS! ARE WE NEXT! Almighty GOD FORBID IT! VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!!!
You speak true, but I urge you and everyone to act peacefully if you choose to act, especially if you're a citizen of the US. If you've followed what's been on the real news lately, you know you ain't that far from a complete martial law. I know it's not easy after all they done to you people, but there are peaceful ways to combat this. Stay strong and united.
Are you somehow instigating that a FOR PROFIT system isn't moral or even productive? I guess you find communism to be less evil?
There is no utopian society or perfect system but I'll be damned if capitalism hasn't brought us great prosperity.
One of the main problems in the US is that lending institutions were basically given insurance on their debts. So the private system which is being criticized normally does (arguably) a decent job of weeding out who should get a loan and be good debt, and who will not get a loan because they seem risky.
Then along comes the trusted and helpful government, who says to the financial institutions "Hey, we will guarantee those bad loans you normally wouldn't make ... so go ahead and make them anyway."
So in this scenario, how does turning the privatized part of the system public solve anything? The public part is in many ways what messed up the private part from working properly! Central banks are private for a reason, and it is not necessarily the evil intentions of a global banking elite (although to say there is NO corruption of course is also foolish). The public cannot all of a sudden vote for a "hand out money to everyone" day, which although popular could be disasterous to the capital in the capitalist system.
Your simplification of the situation is mindboggling.
1. Private insurance companies like AIG insured most of the bad loans, and with money it didn't have, to boot.
2. The banks gained the ability to make these loans to begin with by exerting enormous lobbying pressure on Congress to deregulate them. Congress has been and still is in the pocket of powerful bankers, insurance companies, and defense contractors. Congress is nothing but their tool.
3. It is true that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were buying up bad real estate loans, and that banks and insurance companies know damn well the government couldn't let them fail and covered them with bailout money, and therefore the government is complicit in all this mess. However, blaming the government for the whole debacle and painting the greedy, immoral banks and insurance companies as wholesome institutions that would "normally do a decent job" is just another pitiful example of the great American brainwashing; that is, government is the big bad wolf and private enterprise is the good angel, halo, harp and all. When will you ever understand? Government is the only thing we the people have. If it doesn't represent our will, it is on us to make it do so. But private enterprise is only interested in 1 thing: profits at any cost. And there is no way we will ever make IT represent our will. Well, right now I believe the will of many people is not to have a system based on debt. The bankers very much want this system. Whose will is going to prevail?
About time somebody noticed this. Real life is kind of like the terminator movie accept it's US that have to become self aware:)
The documentary presents a lot of great historical facts about the US banking system; however, I think it falls fairly short in properly diagnosing the actual issues of the US (and world) economy. Are there robber barons in a corrupt system? Oh yes ... there certainly are. Are they the cause of the financial crisis of the times, not exactly and not as presented. Economic bubbles eventually burst. If your government is engaged in fiscal policy that promotes bubbles, for instance by backing lending institutions so that they can make poor lending decisions with federally insured funds ... well eventually the market is going to have to correct itself to represent the actual economic situation. As individuals, and as a nation, you cannot sustainably live beyond your means. It seems too simple to be the explanation, right?
As far as proposed solutions. Having your nation NEVER be able to use credit is probably not the best idea. Credit can be incredibly effective at smoothing out economic bumps ... obviously it can also be misused, and so here we are :)
Why not just issue debt-free currency? The government could just start paying all federal employees in newly printed cash, I suppose. Immediate devaluation of the US dollar would be one overwhelming reason not to do that. I am skeptical of the merit of directly devaluing your currency while running a trade deficit ... perhaps if the US declares war on China, paying off our debts with newly minted money would be a great way to say "I dare you to push the red button"
Government can spend interest-free freshly printed money to pay for its expenditures but to maintain its value, the congress will have to vote a law forcing the banks to gradually increase reserve up to 100%.
I've been reading widely and trying to sort much of this stuff out for years now. This is the first time I have come across financial issues sorted out so well and in a way that puts so much in realistic perspective so well. This is the message that needs to be spread. Not spread like manure, as is the counter propoganda, but as revelation shining a bit of light on dark, abusive practices.
If you are wishing to understand the financial issues of our times and to understand historically the role of finance on the world stage, then - and I do not hesitate to use the cliche expression - THIS IS A MUST WATCH.
At one hour fifty minutes it might seem a slow watch, but in that time you stand to gain more than I have gained in extensive readings lately in economic theory and through several basic economics courses. In other words playing on a cheap pun, the time spent will earn you compound interest.
watch and think and learn
This was one of the most contradictory docs I've ever seen. At once it was both dull & boring, but yet was also informative, interesting and most fascinating of tales. While I could only watch it in 30 minute intervals, it is an amazing piece and is a MUST SEE for anyone interested in our economic crisis. It has made me a convert to the "Money Masters Solutions".
Really a great documentary.... Very enlightening. Its great to see what Jefferson and Lincoln really wanted for our country. Its also nice to see that there is an alternative to our current broken monetary system.
The following pertains to the Federal Reserve Banks and the Federal Reserve Act.
Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
1. United States
There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act, but critical factor is existence of federal government control over "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of an entity. . . .
2. United States
Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Tort Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations in light of fact that direct supervision and control of each bank is exercised by board of directors, federal reserve banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks, banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations nor as "mixed ownership" corporations; federal reserve banks receive no appropriated funds from Congress and the banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own names. . . .
In enacting the Federal Tort Claims Act, Congress provided a limited waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States for certain torts of federal employees. . . . Specifically, the Act creates liability for injuries "caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission" of an employee of any federal agency acting within the scope of his office or employment. . . . "Federal agency" is defined as:
the executive departments, the military departments, independent establishments of the United States, and corporations acting primarily as instrumentalities of the United States, but does not include any contractors with the United States.
28 U.S.C. Sect. 2671. The liability of the United States for the negligence of a Federal Reserve Bank employee depends, therefore, on whether the Bank is a federal agency under Sect. 2671.
[1,2] There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within the meaning of the Act, but the critical factor is the existence of federal government control over the "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of that entity. . . . Other factors courts have considered include whether the entity is an independent corporation . . ., whether the government is involved in the entity’s finances. . . ., and whether the mission of the entity furthers the policy of the United States, . . . Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purpose of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.
Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank’s nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. Sect. 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. Sect. 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activites include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. Sub-Sect. 341-361. . . .
It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks
It is proposed that the Government shall retain sufficient power over the reserve banks to enable it to exercise a direct authority when necessary to do so, but that it shall in no way attempt to carry on through its own mechanism the routine operations and banking which require detailed knowledge of local and individual credit and which determine the funds of the community in any given instance. In other words, the reserve-bank plan retains to the Government power over the exercise of the broader banking functions, while it leaves to individuals and privately owned institutions the actual direction of routine. . . .
For these reasons we hold that the Reserve Banks are not federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and we affirm the judgment of the district court. ______________________________________________________________________
I almost forgot to mention the following, which clearly shows how the government has a double standard, which allows private controlled Federal Banks to evade paying State Taxes.
Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
“The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston v. Commissioner of Corporations & Taxation, 499 F.2d 60 (1st Cir. 1974). . . .
State taxation has traditionally been viewed as a greater obstacle to an entity's ability to perform federal functions than exposure to judicial process; therefore tax immunity is liberally applied. Federal Land Bank v. Priddy, 295 U.S. 229, 235, 55 S. Ct. 705, 708, 79 L. Ed. 1408 (1955). Federal tort liability, however, is based on traditional agency principles and thus depends upon the principal's ability to control the actions of his agent, and not simply upon whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . .”
It now appears there is two conflicting laws.
1. Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities of the government for
purposes of immunity from State taxation.
2. Reserve Banks are not deemed to be federal instrumentalities of the government, for
purposes of Federal tort Liability.
________________________________________________________________________
The two aforementioned laws make it very clear that Congress can create independent agencies which can be declared as federal instrumentalities of the government, which act as agents on the governments behalf. These said laws also makes it very clear that Congress has granted the government “immunity” from all liability pertaining to actions of the independent agencies, which were created to aid them in the conducting of their business.
The creation of these laws clearly show how Congress can manipulate the laws to mean whatever they want them to mean whenever they deem it necessary to do so. Congress needs to revise these laws. Reserve Banks are either independent agencies which act as agents on the government’s behalf -or- Reserve Banks are not independent agencies which act as agents on the government’s behalf.
In other words, Reserve Banks are either part of the executive branch of government, which has the lawful authority to act on the government’s behalf -or- Reserve Banks are privately owned and locally controlled independent corporations (agencies) acting unconstitutionally on behalf of the government.
Several recent Supreme Court separations of powers decisions have noted that there are three, and only three, distinct branches of government; 'independent' agencies, therefore, either are in one of the three branches or they are unconstitutional. See Symposium on Administrative Law, The Uneasy Constitutional Status of Administrative Agencies, 36 AM. U.L. REV. 276 (forthcoming 1987). . . .
Congress also needs to revise the laws pertaining to quasi-governmental agencies.
The Attorney General has stated:
“Agencies have no inherent lawmaking powers. They are not creatures of the Constitution. . . . .This means we should abandon the idea that there are such things as 'quasi- legislative' or 'quasi-judicial' functions that can be properly delegated to independent agencies or bodies. . . . .[F]ederal agencies performing executive functions are themselves properly agents of the executive. They are not 'quasi' this, or 'independent' that.”
Address by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, Federal Bar Association, Detroit,
Mich. Sept. 13, 1985).
The reason I mentioned quasi-government.
Congress created a quasi-government for one purpose and one purpose only, which is to
allow the government to circumvent the law by the creation of a new harbinger management era where the purported artificial barriers between the governmental and private sectors can be breached as a matter of principle” Rather than by law.
Report for Congress Order Code RL30533
“Time will tell whether the emergence of the quasi government is to be viewed
as a symptom of decline in our democratic government, or a harbinger of a new,
creative management era where the purported artificial barriers between the
governmental and private sectors are breached as a matter of principle”
(Re: summary Section)
In other words when Congress created a quasi-government, they allowed the government to go beyond the Rule of Law and circumvent the very intent and purpose of the Bill Of Rights.
“Our Bill Rights curbs all three branches of government. It subjects all departments of government to a rule of law and sets boundaries beyond which no official may go.”….. Justice William O. Douglas. U.S. Supreme Court.
The framers of our Constitution warned that if legislative power were combined with executive power, or if legislative power were combined with judicial power, our republic would become an oligarchy and the rights of the people would be sacrificed to achieve the selfish ends of those who govern. _______Madison wrote, “(the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judicial, in the same hands, whether of one , few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elected, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Typically of the Federalists who advocated ratification of the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton explained that the separation of powers was “itself, in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, A BILL OF RIGHTS.” It would deny a single department autonomous governance. It would keep abuse of power in check by humbling those in government with the need to satisfy the dictates of competing power centers.
I think anyone watching this movie should temper their assumptions with a broader perspective, including history. This documentary is largely true, but the business about Andrew Jackson is bogus--the National Banks were not private, but National Banks--there was some corruption, as is related about the British flooding the U.S. early on with phony script. There is an excellent article from Ellen Brown that helps to describe the meaning of money as a relationship between buyer and seller. In the second article on her list at Global Research is the article describing how money is merely credit-- not debt.
That is the primary message of this movie--we don't need to pay 1000% interest to the actual private banking consortium (global Central Banking), and can instead issue credit for development of small businesses and industries in an actual free market (not the current British Monetary financial terrorism we see now).
While there are plenty of provocateurs that spew typically toxic poison "opinion" (worth nothing), the truth is that Lyndon LaRouche's superior historical understanding of the American System, the REAL American System, not the John Locke, Adam Smith mythology, is how we can get out of the current bankers trap.
Banks must be government controlled, not corporations who operate on a revolving door basis with Wall Street and British Loyalist banks, such as Goldman Sachs and the Jacob Rothschild Inter Alpha group of banking terrorists, who operate to create a One World Government of plutocrats and oligarchs who intend to reduce global population to maintain their obsession with power and control--psychopaths: See How does it feel knowing that psychopaths are doing "surgery" on your brain every day with the Collaborative Governance / Fascist / Marxist ideology?
Let's get back to being able to think historically, without the usual sophistry and logical fallacy, and learn to save our own butts. Also recommended is the American Inflation Association video series, particularly the latest, The End of Liberty.
Get ready by learning to grow your own food: Over 8 million died during the banker-caused depression when most were farmers who could grow their own food. Now, in idiotville and yuppieville, most Americans don't know how to plant a seed, let alone think their way out of a paper bag. Wake up and smell the fascism--there are ways out of mass chaos, inflation, etc. if enough people learn to THINK AGAIN. Remember, there is a difference between facts and opinions.... The former can help you make good decisions, the latter can get you in the gulag...
No more logical fallacy indeed. Time to educate ourselves out of slavery.
@ COOL E BEANS
Zero sum banking hmmm. Very interesting idea. Nice to see some forward thinking for once. Any thoughts on how we could implement it? Of course we would have to wake people out of the monetary trance they've been put under. That's a given.
I live in Denmark and there are a lot of changes happening in the next few years. Alternative energy is really taking a foothold and in 2012, we'll be going towards E-governance, which will be more of a participatory democracy instead of a representative one. Zero sum banking could be a nice addition to our advancements.
Last year, our government made a bail out of 12 billion dollars from our national bank. It may not sound like a lot, but with a population of only 6.5 million, it's extensive. But our national bank had to get money from somewhere.... that's right.... J.P. Morgen, Citigroup, Bank of America Merrill Lynch in exchange for CP's (Commercial papers). So maybe sometime in the future, banks will be buying up countries and literally ruling the world. Something has to happen.
The Gov't has the power of the people to tax and spend. This potentially gives the Gov't far more power than the Banks. The Gov't would need to print it's own Gov't debt free money. I think the Iceland example of recent years is spot on: LET THE BANKS FAIL. In my opinion the example of Tally Sticks is the most important aspect of this documentary. Gold and silver isn't necessary. Just the faith and good credit of the People of the Nation is necessary. It is a human problem, and humans created this illusion that money has value. But it will take work.
Video has been removed :(
Now should be OK @Daniel.
No, the elected members of the Federal Reserve are not the right people to have in charge but more than that, nobody should have the power to sell their own nation into slavery through debt without facing dire consequances for their lack of responsability in their power to do so. The only way to stop this from ever happening again without tearing down the whole financial system is to get off the gold standard completley and hold all elected officials responsable for their actions, both government and private sector.
I agree that this documentry should be a part of every childes education and that it should be part of the standard educational system. To wit, I propose that standard dictionary deffinitions should also be updated. My suggestions for the following word deffinition updates would be as follows.
Capitalist: N/ Person that votes for a government that opperates on less than 10% of the workers/citizens paychecks per week(Other forms of government revenue aside).
Socialist: N/ Person that votes for a goverment that opperates on less than 35% of the workers/citizens paychecks per week.(Other forms of government revenue aside).
Communist: N/ Person that votes for a government that opperates on less than 90% of the workers/citizens paycheck per week.(Other forms of government revenue aside).
All of these systems of government are tried and true. Their only faults are to be found in the people that run them. They all have the same problem. The problem with governing the people is the "people". No, Stalin was not the right guy to have in charge of the first Communist country, nor was Hittler the best guy to have in charge of the first Sociaist country but he did cut the Kings/Emperors taxes in half and freed many people from the slavery of surfdome. Let's not beat around the bush. Educate the children and allow them to change the world with their votes. Get this documentry to all of the schools and let freedom reign?
"... obscured the original symbology" 0_o?
It's symbolism, numbnuts.
Failure, on basis of poor copy-editing.
Awesome documentary. Wonderful historical journey through our financial history as a nation, and what is the root cause of our financial struggles. Thanks, and keep up the good work.
@skeptic_darwinian
You should re read Darwins Theory of Evolution. Homosapien/the Wise one was the only one who could overcome the "law of the Jungle" ie. "Only the fittest of the fittest shall survive". He could plan for the future and overcome any physical inability by doing so.
@all
Government issued none debt bearing money can be held responsable to the people that issue it. 7 governers of the Federal Reserve are suposed to be held resonsable but at the height of the "Recession!" there were only 5 who chose to throw "Bernie Madeoff" at the unknowing public. The fact that they have not been held responsable for "Madeoffs" offences tells me that they have failed in their jobs and should be fired. No confidence in a system that has no body held responsable is a direct consiquence of their actions.
Bin Laden has cornerd the Gold Market? Through proxies etc. and that is why we can't catch him. We sold that gold to him and over valued it for our own greed. We must bring back the "Green Back", cut the value of gold in half and force Bin Ladens' proxies to hand him over.
There is not enough gold in the world to back the worlds current population demand? It is overvalued. Even bankers can understand this simple supply and demand economics.
Just as the Romans did years ago, all countries by necessity must return to "Fiat" monetary sytems in which the elected officials are held resonsable for the issueing of said monies. This is common sence economics.
Let's get it done, never again should mankind be chained to a commdity of such limited supply.
@ skeptic_darwinian :
You sound like a typical ignorant American who thinks their society is the only working society (I have no problem with Americans, just those that are completely ignorant). I bet you even believed the media when they told you the current economic downfall was over.. lol....
Your dismissal of this video without even backing up ur ideas just proves how irrational you are. If you had a mind of your own u would have taken a moment too consider the points that are being put forward. You have your own brain.. why do you let the government and media control your ideas?
Our society is NOT perfect and should NOT be left alone! Absolute power corrupts absolute, and if everyone in our community was as passive and uneducated, as u seem too be, we would all be taken advantage of.
A MESSAGE TO ALL.
The United States Government is doing the only thing that they know how to do right now. Since all money is debt this means that all the money in your wallet and bank are somebody's principle from their loans either business or personal. When you take out a loan, only the principle is created but not the interest. You get the interest to pay back your loan from somebody elses principle making them short. The US Government borrows as much money as they can to create principle that is not being paid back and spending that money into the economy making it possible for more people to pay back their loans to their banks. Some still fall short.
When you buy stuff, that money circulates throughout the economy. When you make a payment to your bank on your loan, that money does not circulate but only retires your loan. At some point you will have paid out of the economy an amount of money equal to the principle amount you borrowed. From that point forward, all payments that you make are sourced from someone elses available principle that is still circulating in the economy. The US Government is not really 12 trillion dollars in debt but closer to 80 trillion if all monies are accounted for.
A real solution, instead of the one proposed by this documentary, is for banking to become automatic in the real sence that nobody owns it and it doesn't make any profits whatsoever. What I mean is that it would be a computer program similar to Quicken or Microsoft Money in that it is only there to calculate the pluses and minuses of everybodies finances.
When you take out a loan for your house, it would be approved based on a percentage of your income available to pay back the loan. The principle and interest would both be created at the same time. The seller would get the principle and the government would get the interest. The government would then have money to spend back into the economy for whatever it spends it on now. All of the money you need to pay back your loan would exist within the economy and if you paid back early, there would be extra money in the economy left unattached. This would also mean that the government wouldn't need any tax dollars from any citizen or business directly, it would all come from the interest created from business and personal loans.
I call this system "Zero Sum Banking". This is also the logical first step towards the Venus Project as those who pay back their loans early would be leaving excess money in the economy, people would eventually realize that they don't need cash. It would become cumbersome to have to use money at all and we could actually go as fully mechanized with our manufacturing as possible. I would like to visit the fully automated restaurant in Germany or just wait until they make them where I live :).
Looking to the future...B
Interesting arguments...
I must admit the doc puts forth some stuff that rekindles a bit of hope for cities, states, regions and countries that literally cannot afford themselves.
(case in point - how many college grads will wind up paying 3 or 4 times more than their degree was actually worth?)
Defaulting along the way not from deadbeat sloth, but from lack of income due to lack of jobs due to lousy planning (or outright conniving and predation by financial "industries")
I imagine there will be considerable hysteria surrounding the painful midwifery required for such a difficult birth as debt-free money creation - lord, just look at what goes on with feeble attempts to embrace some idea of universal healthcare entitlement! Yep - that's the correct e-word. Any society that doesn't consider this an actual human right would no doubt sell granny for dogfood.
But considering that money is more sacred than manna from heaven (more easily manipulated, don'tcha know) we should have a good old-fashioned fundamentalist (emphasis on mental) free-for-all (an ironic term, I know) get the business over with, and see what can be done with the mess of debt the past three decades hath wrought.
good luck to us all.............
Great Documentry,
Morality aside, knowledge is power and the fitist can no longer overcome the wizest. That is the very concept of Homosapiens and sentient beings, that they could contradict Darwins original hypothasis of 'Only the fitist of the fitist shall survive'. The wise one?
Oliver Stone failed to mention it in JFK. as a possable reason for his death. Or was he rellying on the bankers to pay him?
Has Obama made a mistake in bailling these companies out? A house devided against itself can not stand.
The regulators that allowed Bernie Madeoff aren't incarcerated and confidence in the markets isn't comming back too soon knowing that they are still around.
As a wheel-barrow pusher, the foundation of all great societies, I am the fitist of the fit and I am tired of the spoilt brats that would use any means to knuckle the working man under. No debt money is the only way forward for all of mankind. Lets get it done.
Also get the banks to take Pensions, hospital Levies and social security out of the workers paycheck every week and deposit them in that workers name into deposit only government accounts of the same category that can not be touched by the budget. Half should be payed by the employer and the total should be less than 10% of his paycheck per week. The workers are the ultimate consumers and they are the only garauntees of prosperity in any financial enterprise. Even the greedy banker knows that.
The law of the land has turned two thirds of the workers into outlaws through tax evasion and at 35% per week those workers can not bare supporting the fat cats sitting on thier buts collecting money even if not fraudulently.
Even though we might not all agree on how to achieve the 'ends of government', all children should have the right to make thier own decision and have access to this documentry as part of thier education.
The Scarlet Onion
Interesting film! More people need to watch this kind of thing!
G2code,
You either did not watch this film or you should watch it again. Tally Sticks are not backed by anything, they represent fiat currency. President Eisenhower wanted to audit Fort Knox. He was refused access. Why? To begin with, most of our gold left the country back in the 1890's and secondly, our money has not been backed since the Federal Reserve Act was passed into law back in 1913.
It's all in the film. Watch it again. The big issue is interest. Why should the US Government borrow money at all, let alone pay interest. What this film is advocating is that the US government print it's own money, interest free and distribute it as needed for projects, programs and such.
If we want to build a bridge we print the money, hire a contractor and build the freaking thing. There's no interest compounded mumbo jumbo about it. The money is backed by the good credit of the government / AKA, the people. This is a far cry better mechanism than what we are currently burdened by.
If the movie is suggesting that there is no need for gold to backup the printed money , then this means every country would print endless amounts of money ... who is to say which country is rich , and which is not ?
skeptic_darwinian, are you a cent dealer in arizona?
Athought,
Thank you for your response. There are a couple of things I would like to clear up. To begin with, I'm broke, not because of poor choices and their consequences, but because I am endeavoring to put myself on a money fast. Much of what I create these days is for trade. I prefer not to trade in money. I have no credit debt and the debt I do have is for work to be performed at a later date. Example: while I was building our tree house I made an agreement with a friend who is a plumber. He installed the plumbing at my house. I owe him a wood framed roof on the house he is currently building. I built all the shelves, desks and other accouterments for a small shop up the way. They provided me with rice, beans and the occasional Corona. Thats where I want to go. I live in a very rural area and it's farmers and tradesman who make up the population.
It's not a game.
When you have a group of people who's main motivation is profit for profit's sake, you've estranged yourself from the very core of what sustains you at all, the earth. When people are willing to poison that earth for profit, they have lost any notion of benevolence. It's very sad Athought, but it is not a game. This paradigm starts wars to create wealth. "Wouldn't you rather play tic tack toe?"
I have children and I do not what them growing up thinking that they can depend on the paradigm that, against all evidence,promises to create security while providing for independence.
I want them to know how to go find food anywhere, grow their own food, catch fish, care for themselves and then, others. This is love. This is not dependence. It is independence.
As far as games are concerned, we surf every day. It's hands down the best place on earth to study quantum mechanics.
It's all there. Max Planck said it best: E=HF
Jaak,
I see what you mean, no worries. I'm just trying to analyse things one by one, without falling too easily into total rejection. I'm from a socialist country, live like a hippie (not tied to any loan among other things), but have studied economics at the uni and never come with easy answers on all those subjects.
What I respect though is the fact that men are not to be lined up into anything else but what they aspire to, even if that is artificial. If people want to play money games and other artificial ways that are foreign to me, I do not hold despise. As long as I have a choice to be insider or outsider, with a place to retreat to and food to eat, I dont mind what others may do, provided my rights to a peaceful night and healthy food is not alienated.
My wish: every human being should be entitled to a free and descent home and piece of land at birth, a right which should moreover be unalienable. Provided this is secured for everyone, the fact that other parts of humanity decide to play risky games would not affect me, nor anyone (provided all have that fundamental and essential right to fall onto).
You organised your life according to the risks of the game and you lost. You were probably not aware of those risks, and that is the problem. You should have saved instead of borrowing right off.
Ps: artificial is not bad: I play games everyday with my neighbours. The games are artificial but they bring sensation to my living entity. I just don't put my future at risk: everyone's own responsibility.
So lets not borrow like mad gamblers coz the rules directing banking terms are often hidden behind small letters; but they are there. I wish we all knew them.
great doc. a must see by every person on this planet. iceland should be used as a model by all countries to repel our modern day banking system. its been proven time & time again that centrals bank only consider the human being as some type of commodity to be used as they deem fit.
Whoa! That was a loooooooooong documentary! Could have been edited to a much shorter version. I enjoyed the information but felt like I was going to go nutkin futz because everything was repeated so many times! Can't get through all the comments but wanted to say; Excellent rebuttal Alex M!
@ skeptic. Your traits do not appear bode well with those of good people. I assure you, as an anonymous friend, you will not find much satisfaction in chasing this view of yours, and this work of mighty self. Naturally you already understand this, this is why I assume you include close family. However, a nations power should perhaps only be entrusted to those whom realize it is up to them to ensure "all" their people are fit enough to survive. For what motive? For those who seek great power are in fact seeking satisfaction. But for many that wield great power, they do not appear to be satisfied, logically they seek more. The point is, and you'll agree, its not power nor wealth that satisfies; its what you do with it that defines your satisfaction. The more you do, the more you will know this. A reward reserved for great leaders and tyrant has ever known.
To be old and happy and loved is a good goal.
Thats just the thing, It would be far more simple to appeal to the motives of tyrants and include them in identifying the point of pursuing power. As apposed to kicking them to the curb. Has anyone of high regard actually tried? Just talking to the bankers with unarmed maturity? Would this not be a ideal first step?
Buy seeds. I live in southern mexico. All the Indians are aware of the "frankenseeds" sold to ignorant farmers. They know that these seeds are a one crop only crop. Most of the locals buy their seed in the mountains. Deregulation of corporations has created this. We are in control but have refused to step up. Who are the real terrorists? Answer: Banks and their complicit governments.
Malcom X said, "The truth is always ready."
Bravo Jaak.
I dread what's coming down the pike but think it to include the Amero. Homesteading skills are something city-slickers should be learning.
Atought
Capitalism is a artificial construct. Humanity is a species of animal that lives on an organic lump of rock. Capitalism is a construct of human beings who have managed to equate that construct with another construct; democracy. Democracy is a popular doctrine with people who create things. People that work. Capitalism is a popular doctrine with people that want others to do the work.
I build homes. I'm broke. I've worked for the last 42 years building homes. Why am I broke? Over 40 years, take 20 trillion dollars, give 18 trillion to 3% of the population and give 2 trillion to the other 97%. Tax the s@#$ out of that 97%. Loan them money and then take their jobs away. Create a boom, then pull the rug out. Sell that as capitalism as a natural bookend to democracy. That poor builder works so much he won't notice. Well, as Robin Williams so aptly observed, "...the s#$% 'bout to hit the fan mother!@$&er."
Care to comment on facts?
Fractional reserve banking in its self does not have to be bad. Its use has been abused and we all hope that people won't loose their houses because of abusive banking practices. Lets just take each problem one by one. Fractional reserve is just like capitalism or humanity. It has inherent benefits and risks. Thats all am saying.
Fractional Reserve Banking:
History has shown that this type of banking, privately owned banks who have the mandate to create money from nothing always benefit the wealthy at the expense of the rest. Right now we have in the neighborhood of 3% of the population in control of over 90% of our total wealth. This same scenario played out in the fourth century in Rome,and others. How does this happen? Monetary contraction. Who contracts the currency? The private banks. What do they have to gain?
They loan us money at interest. They never print the interest. When they decide to contract the money supply, a percentage of the debtors cannot pay their loan because there is not enough money to go round. The private bank then repossesses the collateral, pockets the money that already was paid by the debtor and re-sells the collateral. Good scam if you're on the right side of the counter. How does this effect the portion of the debtors that had been able to pay their debt? Property values fall, their neighbor is in foreclosure and cannot purchase your services any longer and you, as a consequence suffer as well. This is simplistically put, I'll grant you, however, it is what happens and is happening.
I have just one more question, what do private banks provide that they actually produce besides money out of thin air?
"The economy of the U.S. is in a deflationary spiral. Nothing can stop it — except monetary reform."
or debt cancellation?
or a rise in import taxes?
or a ceiling to one man's wealth accumulation?
I am not convinced fractional reserve is a bad thing by itself.
It sounds good to create money out of the blue. Its like in a monopoly game, give them players more money so they can buy stuff more quickly. The only problem with that is the inflation that comes with the limited amount of resource society has to share. Limited amount of streets in the game implies a relatively equal share of money creation across players or some get all and others nothing. But so far, so good I am tempted to say. You can work one day and buy yourself over 10 meals. You can work 3 years and buy yourself a piece of land, somewhere not expensive in the USA!
Things are very complicated and it is important to think about them deeply. Lets not just reject radically anything we are made to be scared of. There are good things to be enjoyed from fictitious money creation. The world is big and we are not that many... give us resources (money) so we can keep the game working to our advantage with a few added rules we make up as we see abuses grow. Fractional reserve is not one of them as such though.
skeptic_darwinian
The first amendment provides for freedom of speech with no regard or provision for ignorance. If you think that the fractional reserve banking system we are now suffocating under is a great thing and we should "take what we are given," perhaps you should change your moniker to Skeptical Masochist. Often ignorance causes pain for the knowledgeable, rarely for the ignorant. good luck with your bliss.
Skeptic.. do you have a lot of money in these Banks if we have the power through our Government to print money interest free.
Without debt attached. Then why in the world would we want to line the pockets of greedy bankers.
Its a good thing people are finally waking up. its time we took back the power we,ve always had. Now its time to hold all these Greedy f--ing Politicians and Bankers Corp. accountable and I mean, bring them to Justice no matter what. your a true I@#$% ..if you think your comment was rational you are living in OZ.
@skeptic
How far are you willing to take your ideas? It seems to me if your beliefs were followed to their logical conclusion then you would be advocating global genocide through scientific means for all but a small percentage of the rich and powerful.
I hope you don't really want to take social Darwinism that far.
@Alex B
Thanks!!!!!! You elegantly and intelligently put into words all of the vaporous ideas that have been bubbling around in my brain for a very long time. This film has some merit, but as you say ultimately money based systems are worthless and lead to slavery for most of the population.
You mean if the banks had failed, all the government would have to do is print money themselves and this whole mess could have been avoided? sheesh!
@ez2b12
Thank you for not ignoring me. I was done posting here until you brought up more for me to discuss. I know Dawkins supports militant atheism. But despite what you say, he *is* very PC because he's not 'putting his money where his mouth is'. To be militant implies the use of force to defend an ideology. But he can't advocate that for legal reasons. My guess is that he's hoping someone else will take the initiative on that one. But I'd rather see anti-religious legislation before violence, personally.
"Someone with your ideals has no right to even say his name."
It's funny because a neighbor of mine told me this same exact thing during a conversation about Christ. I enjoy Dawkins just as much, if not moreso than you. But that's going a tad too far, and quite frankly sounds a bit looney. Or should I say, religious?
@ Mo and Shawn L.
It sounds like both of you know more about this than i do. Can you guys tell me were I could learn more? I would like to truly understand economics better so i can "follow the money" as they say. From my experience if you want to know the truth now days you need some understanding about economics. I am in college and will probably take macroeconomics next quarter, is this a good place to start?
If you want to fix the money situation, it is useless to try and fix it with new money. As Einstein said, "We can't solve problems using the same level of thinking that created them." Several methods have been attempted, but in the long run, money promotes greed and competition, and so long as this model of economy exists, those tendencies will continue to pop up.
What we need is a new way of organizing how we distribute resources and technology. A resource-based economy is just that system. We have to stop all the bickering back and forth as to how we can regulate the market, print money, and get ourselves out of debt. The root of most problems today stems, not just from IMF debt, but from the system itself. If your old car continues to crap out, you could just say, "Well, it's the alternator," and then "it's the oil leak," and then "it's the steering column," but when you look at the larger picture, you realize that this car (this system) is outdated and will continue to fall apart. Now that we have the technology, we can all be driving electric vehicles with fewer moving parts and less wear and tear. This is the analogy I have for a resource-based economy.
Do away with money altogether. It only holds us back from making better social and personal decisions. In a monetary system, you can have millions of empty houses while millions live homeless. In a monetary system, you can have a grocery store full of food while people starve. In a monetary system, you can have plenty of running water and electricity while people live without those things. Is this not a backwards economy we are running? How can we have so much and yet have so many with so little? Money, and the idea of ownership makes this all possible. To stake claim to something and not share is a definition of selfishness. What have we all been taught growing up? To share and play nice with our classmates. Funny how we teach all these morals to our kids, and yet as we all grow up, we seem to dismiss them along with ideas of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. If we have the means of feeding and sheltering every human being, let's do it and not waste time figuring out how much it will cost. Cost via currency is an illusion. The only "costs" should be how much work is required, and with recent advances in machines and robotics, work can be reduced to very little human effort.
For anyone interested, watch here on SeeUat Videos a film called "Future By Design." As well, I recommend "Zeitgeist Addendum" and the lectures "Where are we now?" and "Where are we going?" by Peter Joseph. If those don't answer your questions on a resource-based economy and the possibilities it holds, then ask me. I can't stand this world we've created, and I hope most of you out there can see this as well. Though, in the context of our current economy, I can't really complain, I understand that everyone deserves the opportunity to grow in healthy conditions, free of stress and unnecessary suffering. We can make this possible, it just takes a lot will and a little bit of creative and logical thinking.
@ Shawn L
Wouldn't the poorer countries still be able to take loans from richer countries, as they are doing now?
@Shawn L
I think you're confused about what a reserve currency is. You can't read into the name like that. A reserve currency is a currency from any which any other country can hold large quantities of as a kind of a hedge against their own currency (although it's not always used as a hedge and much of the time is used for trade). The US dollar is floated just like many currencies so the value of it is determined by the demand of the market.
Not every country uses the US dollar as reserve! In fact oddly enough recently many countries are shying away from using the US dollar as a reserve because of how unstable the US economy has become. The reason why Zimbabwe experienced hyperinflation is pretty complicated but boiled down it's because they tried to pay foreign and IMF debts by printing money with floated currency. Big mistake.
Trust me, the US is no special case. Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Mo
@Mo
The interesting thing about the monetary system is that the only country in the world that can print things "debt free" is the United States. They're the reserve currency right now -- they're money's as good as anything else. Let's see Zimbabwe try to print things "debt free". They tried, and have experienced some of the worst inflation of the century. When developing countries want to develop, they need to buy things like 1) fertilizer, 2) industrial machinery, and 3) whatever resources they need to invest in their economy. All those things are inevitably priced in US dollars. When German, Chinese, Japanese, Whatever countries sell their goods and wares, it's always priced in USD. Guess what? Ghana can't print USD. Whatever USD they have, they have to earn through exports. The notion that countries can just print and buy things ONLY APPLIES TO THE UNITED STATES. If developing countries only do as the documentary tells them to do (no debt, just get money out of their tax base) then they will forever be doomed to being underdeveloped, as they have absolutely no tax base to speak of! Remember: as the RESERVE CURRENCY, the US is a special case.
@Shawn L
I think you misunderstood what was being said in the docu. What it was saying is that monetary policy should be controlled by the government and should be printed by the government debt free. This would actually help empoverished african nations because they would simply create the money they needed to help along the economy and no more, rather than paying interest on loans from the IMF. Hope this helps your understanding.
Cheers,
Mo
thank you,thank you,thank you!!! finally the missing piece to understanding how our world works!!! geezzz ,and it all came down to greed,greed,how much steak and lobster can these creeps digeste in one day anyway!!!!this documentary is a testament to the new democratic power of the internet to educate,everyone needs to see this film now!!!i personally loved the comment made by the icelandic lady,save the banks!!! r u kiddin!!!that icelandic circumstance really gives us the modern example,yes,theyd lov the icelanders to join the EEU and keep supporting the debt!! and what about Greece? same deal?? and the USA,borrowing money from bankers at interest,so the bankers can be bailed out,wow,great work if u can get it!!! thx again,sweet,now i get it,huyyyy
@ Nader
I take it from your web site that you live in Jordan. What a beautiful country. I would love to visit but I am scared that being an American I might be unwelcome due to recent events that i am ashamed are taking place in my country. Not all of us here feel this animosity toward mulims though. I for one do not hold anything against the religion at all. I wish that my country men would be more proud of our history of religiouse tolerance and stop this crazy hate mongering that is going to get someone killed, if it has not already.
I do disagree with militant muslims but I disagree with militant anything actually (if that militancy means actuall physical violence or hate rehtoric) Any way what do you think, is it safe for an American to come to Jordan at this point or should I at least wait until this dies out or, god for bid, comes to a head? I believe I should wait and i am sure I will but I just wandered if you had a different opinion- or if you were interested in couch surfing and could show me around and help me stay out of trouble.
@ Alex B
Thanks for that link, that was one of Dawkins' that I had missed. Wow didn't he look young, never seen him befor he had gotten older. Also a valueable lesson that a computer could understand the value of cooperation for mutual gain insures long term progress and in the end nets the most money. Of course people that support the perverted idea of social darwinism would argue that to always find a sucker and default would net you the most.
What they fail to realize is that while in our country thier are tons of suckers in the long run you will run out of them as everyone learns you are a greedy defaulter. Then what happens, no more suckers for you and no one that trust you to cooperate so you go out of business. If you want to make it in the long run insted of making a large amount for a little while then closing down the cooperative stradegy is always the best.
Our true problem when looked at in this respect is the monopolies that the banks hold. If they all get together and decide to remain selfish and default (which it is obviouse they have) no matter what they still stay in business because we haven't the ability to go any where else to get a loan. What we need is some type of competion that would give us somewhere else to borrow at decent rates in a honest reciprocal environment. An institution that could do this would soon find that all of us would come to them. As a result of this enormouse clientel they would be the most successfull and stay in business as the others closed left and right. I would imagine however that this newly designed stradegy would not be allowed by the FDIC or other banks. They would find a way to shut this down as it only takes one honest man in a room to make the liars and cheats obviousey recognizable for what they are.
For instnace, befor I hurt my back and could no longer do it I ran a custom cabinetry and funiture business. I have 60 acres of hardwood timber and my own saw mill so I was able to get my materials at a very low cost. That was not what allowed me to sell at such affordable prices though. My father, the original owner of this business always taught me to price things according to what it was worth insted of what the market dictated or what I thought someone would pay.
I sold things for literally hundreds less than others in the same market while still providing craftmanship and dependability. Long story short- within three years i had put most of those that were greedy out of business. I did so much business that even though i was getting less profit per item I was still making much more than my competitors.
Now I could have easily charged what these other guys charged, my stuff was after all made from hand tools, true solid seasoned hardwoods, sported hand carved designs, dove tailed joints, and original mother of pearl inlays sometimes. This type of artistry in my work meant i could have charged much more than the other guys using particle boards and prefabbed designs. But then people would have seen me as they see the other guys, someone that is trying to get as much as someone will give them, as if they are scared they will never sell another peice and have to get all they can off this one. In the end it is evident that my business model was coming out on top and would have been around for ever, but I got hurt really badly and that was that.
Anyway this is has been a long and round about way of saying that contrary to what sceptic tank thinks the cooperative stradegy will all ways net the most money in a market that is not monopolized by short sighted, greedy, evil, twisted, pathetic, and plain uneducated business men. I mean what are these banks and other users going to do when thay have gotten it all and we have nothing more for them to steal from us? They are going to go out of business.
Me on the other hand, I'm going to find someone like sceptics house at this point and see just how superior he is when it is more than just talk. I know I can handle the consequences of someone this pathetic. then i will come back and all us normal compassionate people will live off his goods together. This way someone else in the group can go knock the next social darwinism supporter in the head and come back and we will all share that. Once again our cooperation will win the day as it always does. Better lock your doors sceptic man.
Just ignore sceptic tank, or what was it Skeptic- any way, Just ignore him as he deserves and he will go away (hopefully) I come to this site to learn and enjoy civil conversation, not listen to the distorted views of an obviouse loser.
I will say this much though. I am a huge fan of Dawkins and he would in no way agree with this trash talk. He has made it very clear that he does not mind expressing an unpopular view as long as it is his point of view. I mean he even calls himself a militant athiest, not a very pc thing to do. If he supported social darwinism he would say so or just not talk about it, insted he speaks against it very often. If you want to make yourself look uneducated and cruel go for it but do not drag someone like Dawkins into it. Someone with your ideals has no right to even say his name.
it's been a while since the money masters, very nice to see this gentleman again, excellent doc
You people amuse me with your attempt to add all these little fluffy features to evolutionary biology that just do not exist. Can't have your cake and eat it too, as they say.
Edward Stone did it for the money and the chance to secure his position in the world. Or in other words, it was an *attempt* to ensure his survival in a world of economics.
ez2b12 - I do express these ideas in person. Unfortunately, I can only speak freely on these issues by attending events like TAM! The world is an emotionally sensitive place.
Alex B - Balance of nature? Who's determining whether or not balance is to allow for 'ample time to evolve' vs accepting the fact that our current mess *is* a result of our evolution up to this point, and the next logical step is to acquire what you need to survive the impending disaster by any means necessary? You're trying to make evolution out be something it's not on a fundamental level. As for Dawkins, I can sympathize with his desire to not want to be hated. He needs to remain employed and he understands that most people don't always accept absolute truth very well. He may not be being 100% honest, but he's contributing to his survival.
Avidseeker - What I'm talking about here *is* survival against the environment. Resources are scarce, climate is changing, etc. and nothing will be done about it. So I recommend preparing in any way you can. Do you think the Hilton sisters are going to be worrying about food, protection, and a place to live? And yes, you do have the right to kick in the door and take whatever you want from me. If you can deal with the potential consequences.
rtm - "And maybe the fittest are the ones who will evolve to understand how much damage these degenerates are causing and put a final stop to it so we as a species can truly become fitter and survive for another millenia."
I actually considered this point at one time. But I think it's fairly obvious by now that this is *not* what nature has in mind. And yes, survival will be genetically determined by nature. What else could it possibly be determined by?
to sceptic,
survival of the fittest will be genetically determined by nature not how much money a greedy family bloodline can steal and currupt the human race. Science plays no role here and has not place in the undertanding of economy and munipuliation of it. Just because you learned about the evolution theory, it does not apply to every function of our lives. And maybe the fittest are the ones who will evolve to understand how much damage these degenerates are causing and put a final stop to it so we as a species can truly become fitter and survive for another millenia.
Also to add, the "truth" is a much more powerfull force than a lie, and "truth" eventually comes out one way or another and once it does however long it takes all the other forces have to either rize up to its power or desist. People who commenting against your opinions are quite aware of what the truth is and you are just a brainwashed drone who spews out someone elses vile sewage.
Great Doc,.. well worth the watch, and well worth getting involved. The greatest asset of the human race is our desire to improve, and inspire vision within others.
@skeptic: Of course I'm in business to make money. However, there is a fine line between being successful and being a greedy bas*ard. You're not comparing apples to apples. Keep spouting your rhetoric, skeptic. Just remember, when *you* pay your taxes every year (how ever you pay them) you're contributing to *their* bottom line, just like they told you too. The smarter man/woman would take their power back and find creative solutions to avoid paying such serfdom fees and tell the Corporation of the United States and their co-conspirators, the riding on your back is done. It's a truly liberating feeling, let me tell ya!
@Alex B: Nice rebuttal. Appreciate the reference to the Dawkins Doc - Nice Guys Finish First. I'll be watching it as soon as this reply is submitted!
@Avidseeker: Words and phrases are often used out of context. Just as you used the analogy of kicking in skeptic's teeth and taking his stuff, that too is "survival of the fittest" (aka natural selection as Darwin originally intended). It surely applied to the days of Cavemen and it certainly applied to The Donner Party. I get your point but, I'm just saying.
@skeptic_darwin
Ok I know many people have words about skeptic but he's simply that most dangerous of people. A fool with conviction.
First of all..let's not use evolutionary concepts we do not understand. Survival of the fittest is survival against the ENVIRONMENT not each other. Overlooking this small detail enabled the nazis to corrupt and absorb evolutionary science.
Human society is nothing like the law of the jungle. We try to live in a society where every individual has the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A society that is as fair as possible. Employing rules like "they are the fittest hence they deserve to be there" is BS. (Do u honestly think the Hilton sisters would fare better in the real world than the rest of us...due to their "powerful" bloodline?)
If you really believe that, skeptic, then you are a closet monarchist and i have the right to take whatever i want from u. Because if i can stroll into your house, kick ur teeth in and make u hand over all your possessions to me..then i clearly "deserve" to have your stuff more than u do. Nobody wants to live in that society, skeptic, not even you.
@skeptic_darwinian
Wow! I did not think that unicorns, ferries, lepricons, or people like you existed. I'm headed to the nearest rainbow for my pot of gold.
All kidding aside, please realize that your bold statements put you into the category of an outspoken sheeple. Following the herd over a cliff, and proud of it. No creativity? Really!? Who indoctrinated you? By your logic, flowers should be outlawed because they serve no practical purpose. Nature is full of creativity, which is why we have two sides to our brains. To continue with your logic, let's remove the unnecessary half of your brain.
When we say "survival of the fittest," it's best to take a better look at nature. In fact, Richard Dawkins put together a documentary (Nice Guys Finish First) examining the cooperative behaviors between species. You say there are no morals or ethics in natural evolution, but it would seem that respecting the balance of nature ensures a species' longevity and thus supplying ample time to evolve. At our rate of "evolution" we are sure to perish. Our current economy is unsustainable, and until we find new solutions, we will all suffer the consequences of our actions/inaction.
@ SimonTheSorcerer
Great Comment! Exactly what I was thinking. Though, at least the creators of this film can see that money as we know it today, is debt. Unfortunately, they fail to see the true "root" of the problem, which is the monetary system itself, no matter who controls it. It's like fighting fire with fire. Either way, someone gets burned.
Another way of viewing this is to see money valued as a religion. Never questioning how it works, how it came to be, or how it will solve our problems. To change from printing debt money from the banks, to printing Government issued money, is the equivalent of electing a new pope. Maybe the new pope is nicer or more likable, but it doesn't address the religious teachings and its dogmas. It doesn't put into question the religion itself. We will continue to have poverty, corruption, and pollution until we let go of our desires for "free" enterprise.
Resource-based economy all the way.
Amazing documentary, very informative and enlightening!
@ Achem
Block head is trying to promote social Darwinism. If he would express his ideas in person most would show him some physical darwinism. Thats why he hides behind the Internet. Sad thing is I would venture a guess that he doesn't have anymore than any of us, so by his own ideals he is inferior. He reminds me of the gay conservative movement, a walking oxyMORON!!
I had decided to stop posting on this forum, but I had to say something about this one.
@skeptic_darwinian:
They deserve what they have??
Survival of the most fittest? Survival of the most dishonest you mean.
Most of the old money was made by nefarious means, bootlegging, financing both sides of war, drug cartels, causing recessions, etc: etc: you may have opened up a can of worms here.
I suspect this is how "they" may introduce a world currency. This is a textbook example of the "Problem-Reaction-Solution" model.
They've created the problem, they're getting their desired response, which puts them in position to provide solution - A new monetary system. And don't kid yourselves, when it's implemented, no that the decision wasn't made the year before...
@ anthony
"Banks are in the business of MAKING money"
And you aren't?
"Since the dawn of time, life is (and always will be) survival of the fittest."
Which is why the wealthy and powerful hold all the cards. They deserve what they currently have. It *is* survival of the fittest. Why should the people running the banks, etc care what anyone else thinks? They've worked their way up to the 'fittest' level in society therefore deserve the spoils while the rest will meet their evolutionary fate. Why do you assume that morality figures into the process of evolution? There is absolutely no need for such emotional nonsense. We are thinking apes, and I know of no law of science, biology, or evolution that *requires* morality. At least not beyond the instinct for survival of one's self and offspring. This is why there are powerful families who preserve their bloodline. I am, however, aware of certain scientist and "thinkers" who attempt to sell the notion of ethics. This is ultimately irrational but in a sense necessary to uphold an appealing public image for science.
Hmm... It's not WHAT backs our money; it's WHO controls the QUANTITY. Interesting argument versus the "gold-backed money" solution. "No-interest, GOVERNMENT issued money". Very enlightening video.
@skeptic_darwinian
your a religiously scientfic oxym#$%@.
Money and any other medium of exchange (gold, shells, chicken:).
holds value only when people accept it and TRUST in it. Clearly this trust has been broken. As I hear it on the net especially in the US . Here in Hungary the Hungarian state bailed out our financial institutions during the worst of the recession. Now as things look better (at least here in Europe ) the state demanded that money back as special monetary instituion tax . Since the banks are making money and they recived a stimulus package we could regard this as investment and just as well they were able to pay it back. Can you see this happening in the US as well, if not something is fishy.
As we as species collectively progresses from Type 0 to Type 1 civilization - we will have no more use for the current economic system. Think about it with current rate of automatization not just in the industry but in the Tertiary, service sector of the economy. In Germany they opened up the world's first fully automated restaurant or I have seen with my own eye the Metro "Future Store" in Germany too.
We can conclude that the current system with build it's own way to self-destruction with mexican illegal aliens and imported parts from China. (interest on loan drives expansion ad infinitum with even slowing down equals catastrophe ) Let us turn the table for a moment then it paves the way for its sucessor, sounds better. Just as we evolved out of previous systems so will we once again. The resource based economy sounds very promising.
The only thing we can do is hasten the future which we do anyway the technological development is accelerating some say exponentially see "Jumping Jesus phenomenon". So I say let us evolve our brains and bodies and let us become Trans-Human. Support the Transhumanist movement ! Cheers!
This is a must see doc! For someone just coming out of their slumber, some of it may not compute. To fill in the gaps, just do some research on the creation of the Federal Reserve. Then... get on board to kick their a**es to the curb!
I like to read the comments before viewing a doc. I can't pass up the opportunity to respond to one of the most asinine I've read to date on this site.
@skeptic_darwinian: When you first said "take off your tinfoil hats," I was pretty convinced as to what you are. Then you said "This type of drivel shouldn’t be allowed on the internet! Nor should any comments agreeing with this trash," which solidified my assumption to be pretty accurate.
Then, you have the audacity to say... "Fractional reserve banking is the best we as a society have to offer." That really sold me my original suspicion to be spot on.
You're a pencil-pushing government schill by night and by day, you're yet another failure of the CIA (Central Insurgent Agency).
Banks are in the business of MAKING money, not managing it. The Federal Reserve (a private corporation ran by bankers, for bankers) is the grand puppet master who does nothing other than create debt... not money. Compound our fiat currency with Fractional Reserve Banking and what you wind up with is no gold, no greenbacks and NO CHANGE
Thank the gods of the universe that you do not have your way by eliminating creativity. Well, at least in others.
Since the dawn of time, life is (and always will be) survival of the fittest. Survival is neither a right, nor guaranteed. If you think big brother has got your back, think again.
In closing, I place the ball back in your court. Please shut up and accept your fate.
PS. Your nic is only partially correct. You clearly deserve a darwin award.
@ Achems Razor: Careful guy. You'll earn a reputation of being Anti-Semite with that "Religious Banker" reference. :) I'm sure you'd loose sleep over it too! ;)
Now, On with the show... you trolls! LOL
@Swytch:
How did we get to religion? the religee's got to us, religee's everywhere. Basically on every doc. I should not of said that, now they will come out full force. (LOL)
"What Alexander Graham Bell was doing was considered at the time to be sheer absurdity and he accomplished it through trial and error, not ‘rationality and science"
Actually pretty sure he jacked the idea from Elisha Gray. He was failing hard and then after getting a look at Gray's submission for a patent changed his approach.
"Trolling indeed. Sounds like a fundie religious crackppot."
by The Illuminator.......ya
Obvious counter trolling? Also how did we get to religion?
Benjinator3000:
You hate the word Trolling? Trolls? Tough! will always use it when I deem necessary or when I deem appropriate.
skeptic_darwinian, I don't normally bother responding to inane comments posted on these boards, but yours is by far one of the absurd, twisted and backwards comment I've seen.
Firstly, you are incorrect in presumption that banks are "in the business of managing money". They are not. They are in business of making money. They are a business and, like any business, profit is their first goal.
Secondly, blind acceptance is more dangerous than almost anything. Blind acceptance led otherwise normal men to commit the horrible atrocities of the holocaust. We must not "accept this and live as we are". We must demand accountability and a better standard of life.
Thirdly, holding a particular viewpoint does not make one non-scientific or non-rational because...
...Fourthly, creativity is essential to science. Without creativity there would be no science. Without critical though there would be no science. Without creativity never would have the light bulb, for example, been invented. What Alexander Graham Bell was doing was considered at the time to be sheer absurdity and he accomplished it through trial and error, not 'rationality and science'. Therefore if we are to advance beyond where we stand now, "if we don't get an answer, [we must not] shut up and accept what we're given.
It seems that you are familiar with the works of Richard Dawkins, but you have clearly demonstrated that you do not understand their message.
What is the scary is what will happen if the West starts to loose. In other parts of the world the monetary system is starting show its glory - as with us some years ago. As we invented the monetary system we need to invent something else, or it will end in flames, or lose.
Troll or not?
wow olny just started watching this and i believe in these ideas but the cutting of interviewed peoples words is horrid.
@Razor What's up with this word "Trolling". I hate it!!...Let that word stay in Dragon Ball z chat rooms....or anime forums.
hey skeptic,
When your done with my left one, and then might right one you can keep talking your nonsence.
One point I'd like to make. If countries adopt this system, then it will favour rich economies and grossly disfavour undeveloped countries. If countries can only spend the money they get from taxing their own citizens, then poor countries will never have the capital necessary to spur development, as they have very little tax base to speak of. It's a catch-22: can't spend what you don't collect from taxes; can't grow the tax base unless you spend.
The following countries would be nowhere as rich as they are today without the availability of credit: all of them.
Thanks for digging this one up. Not sure if my comment about did the trick, but good on ya. This docu has a few differing views as proposed in Money Masters, but is still a nice updated version. While these are the answers we need, I fear they maybe too late. An uninformed public has crippled this country. Arm yourselves with knowledge. It is the only weapon, along with civil disobedience, that could help cause a real change. Put you body against the gears so the machine will not work.
The orignal money masters was brilliant, so this should be worth a watch.
Could be, could be, or a religious "bankster" (LOL) the epitome of how low can you go, band of vipers!
Trolling indeed. Sounds like a fundie religious crackppot.
@skeptic_darwinian:
Ha,Ha, so funny, you are very good on your trolling attempt! (LMAO)
Take off you tinfoil hats. This type of drivel shouldn't be allowed on the internet! Nor should any comments agreeing with this trash.
Fractional reserve banking is the best we as a society have to offer. Banks are in the business of managing money, therefore they are most qualified to make these decisions. It's the most rational thing to do. Just because we don't like something doesn't mean it's not rational. Nothing is or ever will be perfect. We must accept this and live as we are, and stop trying to change things without the consent or aid of our rational institutions (ie. banks, science, etc). And I don't want to hear any non-sequitur, ad hominem, strawman attacks or arguments from you non-scientific, non-rational people. Nor am I interesting in any type of "creative", non-rational proposals for a solution. If I had it my way, so-called creativity would be eliminated. It's nothing short of a thorn in our collective side and has no basis in logic. Rationality is the only answer to our problems. We need to turn to science, and other rational, relevant institutions in times like these. And if we dont get an answer, then please shut up and accept what we're given.
You should read Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead if you haven't. You'd probably enjoy it. Ayn Rand was interesting and her objectivism makes 'rational sense', but she didn't know was also an idealist. People generally aren't rational and that's the way it will always be. I thought for a long time that it could work, but then I realized that reason isn't everything, at least, in terms of human relationships and our relationships to things.
Pascal once said, "The heart has reasons that reason cannot know." I used to think he was wrong, but now I know better.
"reason isn't everything, at least, in terms of human relationships and our relationships to things."
Doesn't that just mean we don't fully understand the reasoning behind it yet? lol
I was talking about Eva Cassidy before I started watching it.
Just started watching the doc. looks good!
what does it have to do with anything?
If you have to ask that question, then 3 things.
1. I feel pity for you.
2. Your perfect fodder for the MoneyMen.
Sorry about your luck.
Okay, but what does that really have to do with anything???
eva cassidy is amazing !!!!!!