Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
whenever I hear someone trying to convince me about Secret societies, Global warming, Veganism, Aliens and other BS like that I automatically lump them into the nutjob catagory and go about my business.
What is "credit"? More importantly - how bankers come up with new "credit" since "credit" (as space) expands to infinity? Why they charge what they charge for "credit"? The way "credit" is created (and distributed) creates "haves" and "have nots", parasites and peons within each and every society run by the abstract financial instruments. I don't think, one has to have a conspiracy theory to understand the obvious (but not emphasized) truth.
Widespread failure to understand even the basics of how the system works is not the fault of the system. The unsophisticated who desperately grasp at straws instead of simply educating themselves do come in for some of the blame however.
Their quotes about unhappiness at banks holding a lot of wealth in the hands of a few people doesn't mean there is a vast evil banking conspiracy. There's no logic in that. There is no identification that there is a conspiracy, who the conspirators are, how they are doing it, and what conspiracy is true. You can't tell which of all the crazy conspiracies people rave about on street corners is true. Were they talking about Jews, Mole people, shape-shifting lizards, or grey space aliens?
I guess that is a boon because as people disprove each conspiracy the lunatic can jump to a new one claiming these exact same quotes.
If the only way this makes sense is to believe in it like a 3rd grader believes in Santa, there is nothing reason can do to shake the belief. Also, like a 3rd grader that still believes Santa is a real person living in the North Pole making toys with elves as an adult...people who believe in these conspiracies need professional help. Included is a link to the behavioral health centers of San Diego for help.
If you think you can add credibility to an illogical argument by using the word conspiracy in every line you should know that it only makes you appear uneducated.
In addition you apparently do not understand the difference between banking and the topic of this thread which is central banking.
Perhaps if you spent some time educating yourself you could add something of value to this thread but for now I am afraid your simply another troll who calls names and tries in vain to derail discussions of subjects you are not educated intelligent enough to debate.
Widespread failure to understand even the basics of how the system works is not the fault of the system. The unsophisticated who desperately grasp at straws instead of simply educating themselves do come in for some of the blame however.
You wasted an opportunity to educate us all.
1. What is "credit"?
2. How new credit is created?
3. Who creates new credit. Why them and not me?
4. Who appropriates interest on new freshly created out of space vacuum credit. Why them and not me or "society" for that matter?
5. Who gets new credit (money) first? New money buys things at the old prices, by the time new money reach me, inflation kicks in. This unequal access alone creates real poverty (and very real riches) in the economies with high inflation rates. All you have to do - be the first in line for the fresh money and prosper.
6. Why interest is charged on new (never existed before) credit at all, by what moral right? Every college dropout should tell you that (1+i)^n series never converge if i>0, but this formula is used to calculate compound interest; financial systems run on this formula demand expansion of the new credit to infinity to pay off debt+interest on the old credit.
It's a remarkable money mechanics. Bankers are not allowed just to create new money at will, they must find a sucker to take a loan out. Then magically, out of nowhere, the principal for that, let's say $200k, loan appears. Can you estimate the real physical efforts it would take for you to earn $200k tax free? What about $350k to pay principal+interest on your loan? But bankers created just 200k of the principal just for you, $150k to cover interest payments don't even exist (yet). For 150k to appear new loans must be created for the new mules, and so on, to infinity and beyond.
In essence bankers just traded their credit creating (no sweat involved) authority for $350k of your real physical efforts. Not a bad deal at all. If you don't find anything parasitic about the scheme, what is parasitism in your opinion? Let me guess getting $200 in food stamps . Why bankers must charge 150k in interest, by what moral right? As it is, you paying back 200k gives bankers 200k cash they didn't have before. It's not just Central Banks that create new credit, if that would be so, no new credit/money could be created. Banks use central banks deposits to run their own credit creation machines according to the fractional money mechanics, and that's where the bulk of new credit/money comes from.
Obama' bank "bail outs" were nothing but suspension of the leverage rule (designed to punish bankers frivolously creating new credit/money for the work mules unwilling (or unable) to apply real physical efforts in order to earn transfers of money to pay bankers off for their "efforts"). Prior to housing crash, bankers "insured" their loans with AIG and likes. If a loan is insured, leverage rule doesn't apply (a rationale sophisticated Federal regulators agreed with), if leverage rule doesn't apply, banks can use very modest deposits to create as much of new credit as they have eager customers for. Since loans are insured, repayments are insurance company worries. Bankers bankrupted their insurers (inflated with FEDs money to boot).
If you understand credit mechanics to answer 1 through 6, you can explain it briefly in the simple terms. I wouldn't bet on that though.
Last edited by RememberMee; 07-28-2013 at 10:04 AM..
If you think you can add credibility to an illogical argument by using the word conspiracy in every line you should know that it only makes you appear uneducated.
In addition you apparently do not understand the difference between banking and the topic of this thread which is central banking.
Oh yeah, obviously a group of people working to take away our freedom and control our lives using currency referenced in the article is not a conspiracy. It's a ham sandwich. Central banks certainly aren't banks, they are woodchucks.
/sarcasm
This is basic as it comes English. Trying to creatively redefine it is funny to watch, but useless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom
Perhaps if you spent some time educating yourself you could add something of value to this thread but for now I am afraid your simply another troll who calls names and tries in vain to derail discussions of subjects you are not educated intelligent enough to debate.
I have stated that the first thing that should be proven is that it is true before discussing it. There is a place for discussing fiction elsewhere. All you have given is some quote mining, and declared this conspiracy true. When I asked for more you just call me uneducated and claim I am insulting you by saying you believe things that have not been proven true. Some one with actual evidence would have just presented the evidence. That's how reality works.
The truth maybe insulting, but it is not an insult. I have told you before that calling people who lie liars, or people who steal thieves, is just describing the truth. I know I have told you this before a small handful of times. I am not sure if this is beyond you, or you are just willfully ignoring it, but I felt it needed another shot. I need to say though I have seen parrots learn concepts faster than this.
If you spout crazy conspiracy theories with no evidence...then expect to be called a crazy conspiracy theorist that fails at basic reasoning.
Oh yeah, obviously a group of people working to take away our freedom and control our lives using currency referenced in the article is not a conspiracy. It's a ham sandwich. Central banks certainly aren't banks, they are woodchucks.
/sarcasm
This is basic as it comes English. Trying to creatively redefine it is funny to watch, but useless.
I have stated that the first thing that should be proven is that it is true before discussing it. There is a place for discussing fiction elsewhere. All you have given is some quote mining, and declared this conspiracy true. When I asked for more you just call me uneducated and claim I am insulting you by saying you believe things that have not been proven true. Some one with actual evidence would have just presented the evidence. That's how reality works.
The truth maybe insulting, but it is not an insult. I have told you before that calling people who lie liars, or people who steal thieves, is just describing the truth. I know I have told you this before a small handful of times. I am not sure if this is beyond you, or you are just willfully ignoring it, but I felt it needed another shot. I need to say though I have seen parrots learn concepts faster than this.
If you spout crazy conspiracy theories with no evidence...then expect to be called a crazy conspiracy theorist that fails at basic reasoning.
As you enjoyed my last set of quotes so much I have decided to provide a few more for you to feast on.
You see, it appears as if our history is simply filled with tin foil hat conspiracy theorists who just happen to be some of the most powerful and influential people in history.
Of course feel free to stick you head back in the sand and refuse to acknowledge both the existence and the content of these words, as you are most certainly an individual who marches to your own definition of truth and lies.
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.
The real truth of the matter is,as you and I know, that a financial
element in the large centers has owned the government ever since
the days of Andrew Jackson… -Franklin D. Roosevelt
"This [Federal Reserve Act] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Wilson} signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized....the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill." — Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. , 1913
"We are completely dependant on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar
we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system.... It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the defects remedied very soon." — Robert H. Hamphill, Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank
"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." — SIR JOSIAH STAMP, (President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain):
The father of the theory that government stimulus is the way to fight severe downturns – John Maynard Keynes – famously said about inflation:
"By this means government may secretly and unobserved, confiscate the wealth of the people, and not one man in a million will detect the theft".
The wasted opportunities at education are all your own. Instead of actually learning about the world as it is and operates, you subscribe to a flying-saucer school of finance and economics that has no actual relevance or meaning at all. Big mistake on your part. So, man up and manipulate your own eraser in correcting the follies of your earlier ways.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Why bankers must charge 150k in interest, by what moral right? As it is, you paying back 200k gives bankers 200k cash they didn't have before. It's not just Central Banks that create new credit, if that would be so, no new credit/money could be created. Banks use central banks deposits to run their own credit creation machines according to the fractional money mechanics, and that's where the bulk of new credit/money comes from.
