As a monetary architect I’ve spent many hours discussing monetary innovations with hundreds of people. The notion of energy backed currency pops up often and it is easy to see why: energy is probably our most important resource and intuitively it seems attractive to use it as currency.

Mike Rivero’s Lectro is a case in point, so let’s have a look at it and analyze its pro’s and con’s.

It’s a simple idea. One Lectro is redeemable for 1kWh of energy. Everybody supplying the grid with 1kWh will get a note worth 1 Lectro.

Rivero states the following:
1. There is no central issuing authority. Every home can have solar panels generating power to the grid, which is redeemable in Lectro notes.
2. Because power is now the actual monetary system, this approach encourages efficient (and with the proper tax penalties for pollution) clean power generation as well as conservation at the consumer and factory levels.
3. Nobody can short the money supply because everyone can create their own power and monetize it through the treasury. Runaway inflation is impossible because all the coins and certificates in circulation are tied to the available power grid. As power is created, coins and certificates flow into circulation. As power is used, the coins and certificates are taken out of circulation.
4. In the long term, creation of an energy-based money system will smooth the transition from a human-labor to machine-labor society. At present, human labor precedes all capital, payable in a monetary system that pays primarily for human labor. In switching to a monetary system that pays for machine based power production, we evolve towards a society where machines become the primary creators of capital, and all humans shift towards the demand side of the economy. Instead of creating poverty, the push towards automation creates more wealth.

To evaluate the Lectro, let’s first recap the Goals of Monetary Reform:

1. To end the control of the Money Supply by the Money Power and bring it back to where it belongs: the individuals forming the Commonwealth.
2. To decimate cost for capital. We are Interest Slaves. Interest is per definition a wealth transfer from poor to rich, so our Money Supply must be interest-free.
3. To allow equitable access to all. As opposed to the current situation, where the Money Power only finances those it owns or wants to own and starves the rest from credit.
4. To have a stable money supply. It should never deflate faster than the economy and if it inflates, it at least should be clear that the means of exchange is not hoarded (‘saved’).

So does the Lectro help us achieve these goals? It transpires it does not. At this point energy is produced by strongly centralized Transnationals. Big Oil and the Nuclear Industry. These industries are tightly controlled by the Money Power, so the Lectro would not end control of the Money Supply by the Money Power. Big Oil and its sisters would become the new banks.

As a result, with the Lectro we can forget about interest free credit: the Money Power will continue to use its control of the Money Supply to rape us with extortionist interest rates.

However, it most probably would allow an attack on the Money Power’s control, because it would be very lucrative for individuals and corporations to start generating energy. It would create a massive innovation boom, although this innovation would also be fiercely combated by the Money Power and of course Government, which is controlled by the Money Power.

This is where a serious weakness in the Lectro comes to the fore. Mike states: “Because power is now the actual monetary system, this approach encourages efficient (and with the proper tax penalties for pollution) clean power generation as well as conservation at the consumer and factory levels. “

The catch is: ‘with the proper tax penalties for pollution’. This will be used by the Money Power to have its scientists ‘prove’ that her energy is very clean, while decentralized energy is very bad for the environment. The Money Power will make the Government distort the market with these taxes.

Also it does not provide a stable volume of the money supply. It would be very easy to manipulate. The main threat is runaway inflation as a massive boom in energy production takes off. When production goes up, prices go down. So the currency would be depreciating and asset prices would start to rise.

Also, if the Money Power would maintain control of the volume by managing to keep Big Oil and Nuclear Energy in charge and preventing large scale decentralized production, it could easily create a boom/bust cycle.
After all, they have no problems creating a ‘Peak Oil’ phenomenon. This would mean deflation when the Lectro is our money.

Conclusion
We need to keep the eye on the ball: who is in control of the money supply? The Lectro does not provide a satisfactory answer to that question. In its early stages the Money Power would firmly control it and although the Lectro would allow a reaction through decentralized production of energy, it is far from certain that this would lead to free energy. After all: there is every incentive today to create ample energy, but it is not forthcoming.

However, the main issue is that there are better solutions already available: Mutual Credit can provide interest free money, completely free from control from the Money Power or even Government. Social Credit and Public Banking are two other systems serving the goals of monetary reform.

Related:
The Goal of Monetary Reform
On Interest
Budget of an Interest Slave
Mutual Credit, the Astonishingly Simple Truth About Money Creation
Mutual Credit for the 21st Century: Convertibility

1. Bankers hate Gold
Nowadays everybody knows that the 19th century was called ‘the Age of Rothschild’. They controlled the Gold Market and became incredibly rich by lending the stuff to Governments.

The Money Power came to power through Gold.

They love it because it is deflationary, they can tax it with interest, they can create the boom/bust cycle with it and they control it completely.

Clearly Bankers don’t hate gold. Europe was on a Gold Standard for the entire 19th century and left it only in the thirties, due to the horrible deflation that was the Great Depression. Populists at the time finally managed to force their Governments to get rid of it. They had been warning about its deflationary tendencies for ever.

Gold is de facto World Currency.
Ron Paul: “Commodity money if voluntarily and universally accepted could give us a single world currency requiring no money managers, no manipulators orchestrating a man-made business cycle with rampant price inflation.” — Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001

In older days Austrian Economists would say Governments hate the Gold Standard. Alan Greenspan, one of the more famous Austrian Gold loving Bankers, wrote in 1966: “An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions.“

Government, of course, is Austrian Economics’s classic enemy, but the adversary du jour in the ‘Truth Movement’ are the Bankers. So to sell something we say Bankers hate it.

They did face the little problem that the American Populists would be very hard to convince of this. Not in the least because of the book ‘Secrets of the Federal Reserve’ by Eustace Mullins, who famously described who owns the FED and how it came about. Mullins of course was quite explicit in his analysis of Gold as the Banker’s favorite currency.

But Ed Griffin solved this for them. He wrote an even more famous book: ‘the Creature from Jekyll Island’. This is basically a rip off of Mullins’s book, with one difference: it proposes a Gold Standard to get rid of the FED.

In this way Griffin obscured the truth for millions of people, who assumed he was basically saying the same thing as Mullins.

2. Government is the main problem
This is the red herring that Austrian Economics is famous for. Just like the mainstream it completely ignores the Money Power.

Austrian Economics is also incredibly ‘naive’ when it comes to private interests controlling markets. Austrian Economics will always explain Governments shouldn’t mess with the economy, while ignoring the monopolistic inclination of Capital.
As a result Austrian Economics is the wet dream of the Trillionaires, as they will resist any Government action against them and their Transnationals.

Austrian Economics will actually blame Government for the fact that markets now are controlled by Transnational Cartels. Why they don’t seem to consider the shareholders and controllers responsible remains an open question.

To be fair, the analysis of Austrian Economics about the negative implications of many regulations is spot on and very enlightening.

However, to ignore the power struggle that is inevitable both in the market in and politics, is so naive and pleasant to the powerful that it is almost impossible to fathom how somebody else could have thought it up than these powerful interests themselves.

The fact is, that Governments all over the world have been subverted by private interests. And these private interests are quite homogenous. This international centralization of power, concentrated around extremely rich banking families, the Money Power, is the problem.

Government is a neutral institution, associated with a Nation. Public Opinion can always force its hand.

But when both Government itself AND Public Opinion are captive to the Money Power, Government will become quite unpleasant.

Soon, it will be obsolete, as it surrenders its sovereignty to World Government and World Currency. Governments and certainly Nations will never voluntarily surrender sovereignty.

These projects clearly belong to the Money Power.

3. Manipulation of the Volume of the Money Supply is the main problem with our money
Another red herring: manipulation of Volume is certainly quite a scourge. But it ignores an even bigger problem: Interest.

The Government currently pays 700 billion per year in debt service for the National Debt.
It matters not whether she pays this for Gold or for paper.

We currently pay $150.000 dollars in interest over thirty years for a $100.000 mortgage. Most of this mortgage was created by simple bookkeeping the moment we borrowed it.

45% of prices we pay for our daily needs are compensation for capital costs incurred by the producer.

We are Interest Slaves.

But if we can have credit by bookkeeping, clearly we should get the money interest free, because it is our credit, not the bank’s.

4. Gold guarantees a steady volume
This another very strange supposition. After all, the Gold Standards of the past saw horrible asset bubbles.

The boom/bust cycle has nothing to do with the currency, but whether the money supply is being manipulated.

The idea that Gold cannot be printed and that that give security about the volume is nonsense. Bankers routinely have withheld vast quantities of specie from circulation, only to inflate at a later stage again.

5. Inflation is bad
It is certainly true that inflation knows problems.

Inflation hurts savers,  creditors and people on pinned incomes. But it is pleasant for debtors, of which there are far more than creditors. And, very important, inflation is associated with economic growth. People stop hoarding cash and rather invest and spend.

The one sided focus of Austrianism on inflation, while actually promoting the horror of deflation (see next) makes it look like they’re demonizing inflation in order to make deflation more palatable.

6. Deflation is good
This statement is so incredibly favorable for the ultra rich, who are basically the only ones who benefit from deflation, that it puts Austrian Economics in a very bad light.

Austrians clearly promote the Deflation vs. Inflation dialectic, with all its nefarious implications.

Deflation hurts debtors. It makes their debts and the interest they pay over it worth more.

Deflation is a wealth transfer from those holding assets to those holding cash.

Deflation destroys economic growth because people rather hold cash than invest or spend it.

As a result, Deflation on all fronts makes the rich richer and the poor poorer.

7. We don’t want a Gold Standard, we want a Free Market for Currencies
This is such nonsense.There are two major reasons why it is.

1. In fact, the idea of a Currency Free Market is quite attractive. In the case that all different systems would receive the same funding and propaganda, such a market would undoubtedly see Mutual Credit Facilities providing interest-free credit prevail, see below.

However, only Gold and perhaps Silver, but not if they can avoid it, will receive all the attention and funding. In fact, Mutual Credit will be resisted actively by the Money Power.

This will not be hindered Government, who just by decree created this new ‘Free Market’, because that would be ‘statist interference’

Thus, only Gold will circulate.

2. Would there be a ‘free market’, there is Gresham’s Law. Bad money drives out good money.

It means that the units appreciating in value will be hoarded, while those depreciating will be used to pay.

Everybody will accept the depreciating unit (as long as it is not hyper inflating), because most will want to pay with it and firms will have to accept them to accommodate their customers. They won’t have a problem with that anyway. Firms don’t care what the money will be worth in a year. They want to know where they can spend it tomorrow.

This means nothing will happen if Ron Paul’s proposal to make Gold and Silver also legal tender is accepted. People will continue to pay with the Fed’s notes and hoard Gold.

Also, if you can get a Gold based mortgage costing 5% per year, or a 0% mortgage in Mutual Credit, which would you chose?

Case closed.

8. Austrian Economics is hated by the Main Stream Media
While it is true that Austrian Economics is a fringe, also in terms of Media Attention, it always has maintained a steady niche. It is not for nothing that Peter Schiff and Gerald Celente were predicting the crash in the MSM.

Lately, Ed Griffin was plugged by Glenn Beck on prime time T.V.

Judge Napolitano gets all the airtime he wants on Fox News, spouting his Austrianism. Amazingly, the fact that even Fox News will plug Austrianism does not ring a bell with people.

9. Fiat Currencies are always bad
Another typical device: a dialectic. Trying to frame it as Paper vs. Gold. Both ignoring interest.

But interest-free paper is of course something else entirely. At least it won’t suffer from the forced inflation on interest-bearing money supplies. Because the interest is not spent back into circulation, but lent back, there is never enough to pay off all the debt + interest. During a Gold Standard this is deflationary, because the money supply can’t grow. With paper, this is ‘solved’ by ever more debt. With ever more interest.

Modern Mutual Credit is inflation free. Or better: the market is in control of the money supply. It grows when it must, shrinks when it must.

Social Credit is probably inflationary, but everybody will be fully compensated for it because of the fact that they spend the inflationary cash into circulation themselves. Meanwhile, the inflation will stimulate production.

They are trying to promote the idea that Fiat Currencies are automatically bad ‘because the volume will be manipulated’.

This is the eternal clincher, killing all rational debate about how to manage all the different parameters in the different proposals.

10. The problem is the FED
The FED is a symptom, not the problem. The problem is that the Money Supply is controlled by the Money Power, which uses this control to enslave us with interest, scarce money and the boom/bust cycle.

The FED is their vehicle. We want to get rid of it, because we want to end the control of the Money Supply by the Money Power. It’s not a goal in itself.

Austrians use this to ‘fight the FED’ and gain sympathy and support, meanwhile maintaining the control of the Money Supply with the Plutocracy.

Related:
Recovering Austrians
Who is Ed Griffin?
The Ron Paul Challenge: Ten Reasons why the Alternative Media is Failing this Test
Alex Jones joins Alan Greenspan in Calling for Gold Standard

It will all have to be developed over time, but is is already becoming a good resource for people seeking truth about money.

Please support the effort and spread the word. Tips for content are also much welcome: classics against Gold, Usury, good articles.

Have a look at Recovering Austrians!

Muammar Gadaffi was comparable to Saddam Hussein. For decades he was a useful tool for the Plutocracy. Both as a solid supplier of oil and as a favorite boogeyman some times, good friend at others. And when he had served his purpose they showed no mercy and treacherously stabbed his back.

No doubt Gadaffi realized this was always a possibility. One doesn’t rule for almost half a century without common sense.

He did put up a heroic resistance, backed by a large part of the Libyan people.

Like Saddam, Gadaffi built a fairly modern nation. Of course he was no angel, ruling with an iron fist and making certain he had a little something on the side for a rainy day. But the average Libyan probably felt safe enough and Gadaffi shared the Oil wealth  generously with his people: extremely cheap fuel, interest free mortgages. Cash handouts of tens of thousands of dollars to newly weds. To name just a very few.

At the time he came to power, Libya was an impoverished ex Italian colony. When he was murdered, if he was, it was Africa’s most prosperous. It is now devastated.

According to Huffington Post 30.000 are believed to have been killed and 50.000 wounded.

Libya was one of those few countries with a truly National Central Bank, not (directly) under control of the Money Power. When the rebels were still just being built up by Nato in Benghazi, they did find the time, resources and most importantly, the expertise, to draft legislation for an ‘independent’ Central Bank.

As an Islamic Nation Libya is not friendly to usury of course. So the invasion also fits perfectly in the strategy to make Islam safe for Usury.

On the other hand, Gadaffi was promoting an all African Gold Dinar. A blatant Money Power project. Both because of its supranational character and because of its Gold aspect.

Interestingly, the Daily Bell’s Anthony Wile ignores the supranational character of Gadaffi’s Gold Dinar in his analysis of the situation.

The fact that Gadaffi is now a martyr is very welcome in associating him with an African Currency.

We await with trepidation who the next victim will be.

It’s an interesting interview, because it exposes so clearly the many problems that the ‘Truth’ Movement is currently facing.

Ted Anderson, interviewed by host Aaron Dykes, is a Gold Trader. Really very special, all these Gold Traders in the ‘Truth’ Movement. Really useful people for some ‘independent’ (harhar!) commentary on the economy and politics.

Also interesting is that Jones has no qualms calling it a Gold Standard. Many Austrian Economists try to downplay this label, explaining it will all be different from the past. They try to circumvent the issue by calling it a ‘free currency market’.

Now, I do support a free market for currencies.

But what is going to happen, if Paul gets his way, is that the FED is going to be closed and a ‘free currency market’ declared. But in this free currency market there will be only Gold backed currencies. You’ll quickly see all sorts of heavily funded Gold and other metal mints. Of course these will be organized in the same way as every Money Power cartel: as nominally competing businesses. They’ll probably believe themselves they’re competing, not realizing they have a common owner, or controller.

Mutual Credit will play only a small part. They, very strangely enough, will NOT find massive funding. They will also lack the full support from Washington, who will be very busy implementing the infrastructure for the ‘free currency market’. Notwithstanding, of course, the nominal resistance against Government interference that Austrian Economics is famous for.

But of course, people sending their man to Washington to end heavy handed Government certainly are prone to all sorts of interesting ‘logic’.

So the ‘free currency market’ will be a de facto Gold Monopoly, or Bi Metal Cartel.

Also funny to see Dykes and Anderson talk about ‘Honest Money’. Or ‘Sound Money’. Exactly the line the bankers used in the late 19th century.

During the 20th century one of the more famous people calling Gold Sound Money was of course Alan Greenspan. His essays from the sixties were all for Gold. The first sentence from the linked essay is really hilarious: “An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions.“.

Quite typical of the Daily Bell and other Austrian Economists. I guess now we know where they get their material from.

And here he is in 2007, promoting the ‘solution’ to the ‘problem’ he created himself, even before the ‘reaction’:

Yes, the Bankers really, really hate Gold.

Nothing much changes.

More:
Alex Jones: Disinformationist
Let’s consider Alex Jones MSM from now on
The Ron Paul Challenge: 10 Reasons the Alternative Media are failing this test
Who is Ed Griffin?
Faux Economics

It is no use introducing G. Edward Griffin. If you don’t know him, it’s highly unlikely you will be reading this. His influence on the ‘Truth/Patriot’ movement is hard to overestimate. He made a name for himself with his cancer analysis and Laetrile antidote. But his big break was ‘The Creature from Jekyll Island (1994)’, an expose on the Federal Reserve System.

Now, I don’t think I’m the only one that associates this book with Eustace Mullins’ ‘The Secrets of the Federal Reserve’. Mullins himself certainly did. And Mullins of course, was inspired and basically educated by the great Ezra Pound himself, who was then incarcerated in a mental asylum in Washington D.C.

So in this way by association I basically assumed Griffin would understand the basics of money and the Money Power’s control over it. At least the suggestion is created that Griffin is part of a tradition that has a very specific and concrete analysis of these matters.

It was only the last few years that I started to realize that Griffin, however, plugs a Gold Standard as the solution to what he considers the problem: the Federal Reserve Bank and its ‘fiat’ money.

And this is simply astonishing.

Ezra Pound was probably the greatest political commentator of the 20th century. He profoundly studied and explained the Money Power’s origins, ‘ethics’, methods, economics, sociological effects and of course its control over money.

And he didn’t call the Money Power ‘Fiat’, nor ‘Inflator’. He called her Usura.

Pound was very astute in his observations of money as a means of exchange and not a store of value. He proposed Social Credit. He also supported Gesell’s work.

And Gold? “The present war dates at least from the founding of the Bank of England at the end of the 17th century, 1694-8. Half a century later, the London usurocracy shut down on the issue of paper money by the Pennsylvania colony, A.D. 1750. This is not usually given prominence in the U.S. school histories. The 13 colonies rebelled, quite successfully, 26 years later, A.D. 1776.” According to Pound, it was the money issue (above all) that united the Allies during the second 20th-century war against Germany: “Gold. Nothing else uniting the three governments, England, Russia, United States of America. That is the interest–gold, usury, debt, monopoly, class interest, and possibly gross indifference and contempt for humanity.”

And elsewhere: “Gold is a coward. Gold is not the backbone of nations. It is their ruin. A coward, at the first breath of danger gold flows away, gold flows out of the country.”

That is the real face of Gold as Pound saw it and how right he was.

Pound, evidently, had no problems seeing the self evident: that the Gold Standards of the past and most certainly of modern history, beginning in Amsterdam, were banker operations.

Neither had Eustace Mullins, who left very little to guess in his book:

“The international gold dealings of the Federal Reserve System, and its active support in helping the League of Nations to force all the nations of Europe and South America back on the gold standard for the benefit of international gold merchants like Eugene Meyer, Jr. and Albert Strauss, is best demonstrated by a classic incident, the sterling credit of 1925.

J.E. Darling wrote, in the English periodical, “Spectator”, on January 10, 1925 that:

“Obviously, it is of the first importance to the United States to induce England to resume the gold standard as early as possible. An American controlled Gold Standard, which must inevitably result in the United States becoming the world’s supreme financial power, makes England a tributary and satellite, and New York the world’s financial centre.”

Mr. Darling fails to point out that the American people have as little to do with this as the British people, and that resumption of the gold standard by Britain would benefit only that small group of international gold merchants who own the world’s gold. No wonder that “Banker’s Magazine” gleefully remarked in July, 1925 that:

“The outstanding event of the past half year in the banking world was the restoration of the gold standard.”"

So where the currently popular notion comes from that Gold is feared by the Bankers is really very hard to understand. It was certainly not the opinion of Mullins or Pound.

Of course, neither Mullins nor Pound are saints whose stories we should accept at face value. But it is strange that Griffin is associated with them. Because he clearly vehemently disagrees with both his forebears.

Griffin on Gold
On his website Griffin addresses a number of questions about his position on Gold. They are arranged in a Q & A. Let’s have a look at them.
We will not go into the stuff we already discussed with Gary North and the Daily Bell, but Griffin mentions a few more typical pro Gold arguments and we’ll deconstruct them here.

1. On Social Credit
Let’s first see how Griffin responds to the question whether Social Credit would be a better monetary system. And let’s keep in mind that Ezra Pound favored this system.
Here’s what Griffin replies:
“Fiat money remains fiat money regardless of the formulas used to determine its quantity and distribution. Social credit systems are designed by men according to formulas drafted by men and enforced by men – all of which means the system is not fixed by supply and demand but by edict – and that is not fundamentally different from the present system. Eventually, if the rules for money creation CAN be changed, they WILL be changed to the advantage of those with the power to change them and to the disadvantage of everyone else.”

Now this is the typically incredibly lame clincher that Austrian Economics is famous for. ‘It’s Fiat Money so it’s bad’. They’ll mess up the volume!

And how about 700 billion on debt service per year for the Government Mr. Griffin? How about paying 150.000 dollars in interest over a 100.000 mortgage over 30 years? Ring a bell?
Again: the blatant ignoring of Interest. Usura.
In this case damnable because Griffin MUST know about interest, when considering his predecessors.

2. On the wonders of Gold
The question he replies to is fair enough:
‘If the Banks own all the Gold, why would we want a Gold-Backed Money System?’
Now that is a very, very good question indeed. Here’s Griffin’s reply:

“The Rothschilds do not own all the gold or even close to it. Most of it is still in the ground, in the ocean, and in private hoards. Even if they did own all of it that presently is in the form of bars, that would just drive up the price and stimulate gold mining so that new supplies would quickly come into production – as now is happening around the world. When the price hits several thousands of dollars per ounce, it will be profitable to extract it from the oceans, and there is a limitless supply from that source. It’s just a question of the natural balance between supply and demand – without a committee of politicians and bankers drafting a magic formula and using coercion to redirect human resources.

Bankers may hoard gold (because they understand its value more than most people) but they have always done everything possible to prevent a gold-backed currency. If they wanted it, they could have had it long ago, but (as you may have noticed) they always have worked against it. Why is that? It’s because they can acquire far more wealth by expanding the money supply at will and collecting interest on money created out of nothing than they can by having limits on their money supply and collecting interest on a much smaller amount of gold-backed loans. Bankers love to possess gold but they hate a gold-backed currency because that limits their money supply and, thereby, limits the volume of loans.

Any system other than precious metals is dependent on human decree and manipulation. It must inevitably end up no different than any other fiat money. I am familiar with the social-credit scheme and find it lacking in merit. It is a social engineer’s fantasy. It does not line up with human nature.

Gold has always worked well as a monetary base throughout history. It can’t be improved upon. We must not fall for the line about gold being just a pretty metal, etc. It has intrinsic value even if not used for money, it does not deteriorate, it can be divided into small units and recombined again if necessary, it is scarce so it has great value in a small space, and, best of all, it can be precisely measured for purity and weight, which allows for units that are beyond human judgment and human manipulation. It is the perfect money.”

Let’s go through this point for point:
“The Rothschilds do not own all the gold or even close to it. Most of it is still in the ground, in the ocean, and in private hoards.“
Now this is a completely unprovable statement. It is just as unprovable as the idea that they DO own it all. However, since the Rothschilds CLEARLY owned the Gold Market during the 19th century, it is at least a very serious possibility that they still do today. And considering the all importance of the control of the money supply it should be completely self evident that we should not take the risk.
Even Bitcoin is better than Gold: at least we know where these Units are. We don’t know where the Gold is, so we don’t know what the Volume is, and whether someone could manipulate it.

Therefore the rationale for Gold, stable Volume, does not stand: we simply cannot know whether it can be inflated and/or deflated.

Griffin himself seems to understand his treading on quicksand, because he continues:
“Even if they did own all of it that presently is in the form of bars, that would just drive up the price and stimulate gold mining so that new supplies would quickly come into production – as now is happening around the world. When the price hits several thousands of dollars per ounce, it will be profitable to extract it from the oceans, and there is a limitless supply from that source. It’s just a question of the natural balance between supply and demand – without a committee of politicians and bankers drafting a magic formula and using coercion to redirect human resources.“

Suggesting we could break a Rothschild Monopoly if it were real.
But Ed: who do you think controls the Gold Mines?
Cooperative Unions of Sovereign Individuals? 6 Billion wide awake Citizens of the World? The White Brotherhood? Ben Fulford’s Friends?
Or perhaps the Usual Suspects?

And it’s even worse. We are supposed to go Gold because its volume cannot be increased. But if we need more we can dig it up?

Huh? What kind of logic is this?

And last: the notion that rising prices would force Gold out of hoarding. The Daily Bell is also known for spouting this ridiculous nonsense: a Monopolist doesn’t surrender his stash when the price is right! He just lets the market set the maximum price it can bear and then proceeds to rip us all off for ever at that price!

So no, there is no free market for Gold. Rothschild DOES own a decisive stake in the World’s reserves. And rising prices due to scarcity is his wet dream: he can continue his monopoly pricing operation.

It’s just incredibly upsetting and annoying that we even need to have this conversation.

Then this:
“Bankers may hoard gold (because they understand its value more than most people) but they have always done everything possible to prevent a gold-backed currency.“

This is such a blatant lie. Are we to believe that Ed Griffin did not read Eustace Mullins? Just read Mullins’ quote above. His entire book radiates an absolute disgust for a Gold Standard. Mullins time and again explains it’s a banker operation.

I can understand people reading Griffin and ignorantly touting this lie all over the Blogosphere.
But Griffin is responsible for this obfuscation of the Truth. For this clearly blatant and well considered try to extinguish Mullins’ and Pound’s message from the Truth Movement.

“If they wanted it, they could have had it long ago, but (as you may have noticed) they always have worked against it.”
Again lying. And adding another lie: they could have had it long ago.
They had it. The reason they lost it, is because the Great Depression was SO bad through artificially deflated volume WHILE ON A GOLD STANDARD, that populists in both Europe and America finally managed to force their elites to dump the Gold Standard. THAT’s what happened in the thirties.

However, they were compensated for their loss by a new monopoly, based on the printing press. In Europe, anyway, because the Dollar remained redeemable for Gold under Bretton Woods, although not for American Citizens and only in international trade.

“Bankers love to possess gold but they hate a gold-backed currency because that limits their money supply and, thereby, limits the volume of loans.“

Another example of idiotic ‘logic’. What does the size of the Money Supply matter?? Even if we would have only ONE ounce of Gold, it would suit them fine. For the reason that is always explained so beautifully by the Austrians themselves: We simply divide the Gold through all the money there is, and that’s what the one ounce will be worth. We then divide the Gold through trillion and use these small nuggets as backing for the notes that will circulate.

It is completely irrelevant how large the size of the money supply is. What matters is who owns and controls it. So he can slap interest on it.

Griffin also makes the point that bankers want to inflate the money supply because that will make them more money.
Nonsense! Bankers are interested in their share of the whole, not in nominal profits. They will prefer a billion which is half of the total over a trillion which is only a quarter of the total.
They are willing to let the total pie shrink, if they get a larger percentage of what remains.
That’s why Bankers love deflation: it shrinks the total because it destroys economic growth, leaving less for us and increasing their share of the total.

Griffin ends with a love song comprised of erroneous and or unprovable statements quite typical of Goldbugs:
“Gold has always worked well as a monetary base throughout history. It can’t be improved upon. We must not fall for the line about gold being just a pretty metal, etc. It has intrinsic value even if not used for money, it does not deteriorate, it can be divided into small units and recombined again if necessary, it is scarce so it has great value in a small space, and, best of all, it can be precisely measured for purity and weight, which allows for units that are beyond human judgment and human manipulation. It is the perfect money.”

Gold has not always worked well as money. That’s why there was almost revolution in the thirties and the elite dumped it to save their asses. That’s why the colonists went to war with Britain in 1776, because Britain’s Gold Standard was impoverishing the colonies, which had thrived under their own scrip.
That’s why Caesar ended fiat money that brought the Roman Republic to Hegemony, when he perpetrated his Plutocracy sponsored coup in 44 BC. He introduced a Gold Standard and the newly formed Empire started Rome’s decline.
That’s why millions upon millions of desperate Europeans allowed themselves to be forced from the land they inherited through generation upon generation and left for the sweatshops in the cities: because scarce Gold forced upon them by the emerging Central Banks destroyed their ancient fiat currency based economies.

That’s why Bryan so brilliantly exclaimed: “Having behind us the commercial interests and the laboring interests and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their demands for a gold standard by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.“

Many Problems, One Source
The problem is that the enemy is everywhere. GMO ‘foods’, Pharmacide, Big Oil, Empire, Feminism, Global Warming, Environmental Destruction, Famine, DU weapons, left wing radicals, right wing radicals, Consumerism, the coming Iran War and WW3, Pornography, Television and other Mass Media.

Each of these represent a major threat. As a result everybody attacking one or more of these outrages is welcomed in the Alternative Media as a valiant knight fighting Power.

But we must understand that behind all these phenomenona there is one source: the Money Power.
And the Money Power rules through control over the Money Supply. It uses this control to enslave us with Interest first and foremost, but certainly also through the boom/bust cycle.

All issues must be addressed, but they cannot be addressed before we get it right concerning the money supply!

How are we going to finance green energy, healthy food and 21st century architecture? Do you really believe going to a bank for some interest bearing credit is going to work out?

No! We need Trillions of interest free capital to clear up this mess.

The Money Power rules through control of the money supply. It enslaves us with Interest and the boom/bust cycle. We cannot allow the Truth Movement to be hijacked by change agents who make moot points about cancer and like looking a hero by exposing chemtrailing in 2010 when even the UN is already admitting large scale terra forming and Geo Engineering.

We must not fall for the idea that ‘My enemy’s enemy is my friend’.

Not so! The Money Power is well known for organizing its own opposition.

Money is All Important!
People that hide behind credible information about cancer but in the mean time plug a Gold Standard, subverting the legacy of Pound and his pupil Mullins, should not be taken seriously!

Conclusion
We have cooperated with Austrian Economics because they hate the FED, abusive Government, Fractional Reserve Banking and inflation.

But in the final analysis these are ALL red herrings. The FED is not the problem but a symptom. The Money Power does not care about the FED. It is ready to dump this vehicle. As long as it controls its successor! And it will, because its successor will oversee a Gold Standard.

Inflation is way overrated and absolutely the lesser evil compared to Deflation. Deflation comes with economic stagnation and decline, inflation is associated with economic growth.
Deflation is good for creditors, inflation good for debtors.

Abusive Government is a result of it being subverted by the Money Power. But the Money Power fears Government, because it can be liberated by the Nation to which it belongs. That’s why they want their World Government, that will know no national affiliation and will be of their making only.

Considering the horrible damage done by the Austrian Economics Mind Control operation, as witnessed by Ron Paul’s ascent, it will no longer do to see them as allies against the Powers that Be.

Ed Griffin is a particularly nasty cookie, as he clearly purposefully tries to obscure the crucial messages of Pound and Mullins. Knowing the Money Power there is every reason to suggest that this is the main reason Ed Griffin exists and why we all know about him.

Related:
Austrian Economics still is ‘Jewish’ Economics
The Ron Paul Challenge: 10 Reasons the Alternative Media is Failing this Test
What Gary North is not telling you about Interest
Discussing Gold and Interest with the Daily Bell
Faux Economics

Here’s one from a young man, 31 years old, living in North Western Europe and working as a civil servant, making €37,200 per year. He has bought his own apartment a few years ago, so most of it is still property of the bank. He has a €10,000 credit line which he has used to decorate his place.

His monthly gross income is €3,100, of which €1,000 goes to income tax and other levies. Of this money, €500 is lost to interest on the National Debt and capital costs included in prices the Government pays.
His net income is €2,100.

Percentages differ per expenditure, depending on the capital intensity of the industry involved. The percentages in the left column are the fractions of the prices that are lost to interest.

So let’s see what his budget looks like:

Analysis:

• An astounding €1574,23 (610,75 + 963,48) of a monthly gross €3100,- income is lost to interest!
• Taxation (VAT + Income Tax) is €1221,50, but half of this, about €610,- is lost to interest the Government pays.
• Taxation (corrected for interest) + Interest takes away an incredible 75% of the disposable income.
• This example shows someone with a reasonable income, but a little less than zero net assets. This is quite common throughout the West: 50% of Americans have zero net assets or less.
• Had he rented a place instead of buying his own apartment, he would not have been better off: 75% of the rent we pay is compensation for the landlord’s capital costs.
• All percentages where available are taken from Margrit Kennedy, in the case of clothing and Telecom they have been estimated.

So while it is natural to complain of high taxes, it transpires that no less than half of taxes we pay is lost to interest. We would pay 50% less tax were there no cost for capital.

Worse still: approximately half our own disposable income is lost to interest, on top of the taxes we pay. Combined interest + tax takes 75% of our gross income.

Amazingly, a Medieval serf typically payed only 10% of his gross income to his ‘Lord’. Interest was unheard of then.

Would we end interest, our interest slave’s disposable income would triple: He would be left paying only 25% in taxes, leaving 75% for himself.

The only way we can escape being net payers of interest is by having assets ourselves. But this forces us to exploit others, to compensate for, instead of ending, being exploited ourselves. In this way the Money Power’s methods have become acceptable to the mainstream, whereas Usury has been a taboo for most of human history.

To add insult to injury: all the interest ends up with the rich: after all, they have money to lend, while the poor borrow. Margrit Kennedy also established that 80% of the population pays interest to the richest 10%. But also within the top 10% bracket the redistribution of wealth continues: the ‘poorer’ 8% pay interest to the richest 1% and eventually all ends up with the Plutocracy.

Conclusion
The Money Power has subverted almost every Government on the Globe. It has forced them to surrender their currency monopoly to the Money Power’s Central Banks. They use this monopoly to enslave both Government and us with interest and the boom/bust cycle.

It cares not whether her monopoly is paper or metal based: it owns all Gold and came to power through the Gold Standard. Gold as currency is interest bearing.

But the Government can be reconquered by the People and that’s why they want to consolidate their power in World Government and World Currency, both of which will know no national affiliation.

Our own goal must be to have interest free money. Both by reconquering Government and forcing it to end the Central Bank monopoly and by creating independent currencies, based on interest free credit. Modern Mutual Credit will destroy Federal Reserve Notes and the Euro in the market place.

World Government and Government tyranny are both Money Power projects and to defeat them an interest free money supply is a ‘sine qua non’.

Related:
On Interest
The Goal of Monetary Reform
Financial Warfare 2012: Boycott All Banks!

In many respects it’s heartwarming, the momentum that he creates. It does show how deeply felt the desire for ‘change’ really is. But on the other hand it’s sobering to realize how easy it still is to fool people with a promise of change. Even if it’s just four short years ago that millions were led to continuing disaster with that other change agent. How is it possible that after all these years of exposing Illuminati change agents it is still so hard for people to understand that ‘change’ can be a real threat and that it is not ‘change’ in general we want, but a very specific kind of change?

How is it possible that after all those years of digging in real history, exposing the Money Power and the Illuminati’s control of the money supply that we still can be sold a candidate like Paul?

How is it possible that when I write Ken Adachi about Ron Paul’s Austrian Economics and how he will maintain the Illuminati’s control of the money supply with a new Gold Standard, I get this reply:
“You are mixing apples and oranges. I have no quarrel with Paul if he favors a gold backed US currency. That’s what we used to have until Roosevelt ended the fixing of gold at $35 per ounce and took us off the gold standard……

…….. We have a congress filled with NWO traitors who are working day and night to bring about the destruction of this once great land. The only one addressing the real issues of the shredding of the US constitution and the insane fiscal and war policies that are destroying America is Ron Paul.“

Please understand I greatly respect Ken Adachi. I’ve been following his work for almost ten years. He was already exposing Chemtrailing when I was still explaining to people how wonderful our free market democracy really is.

But how can a man of his brilliance NOT understand that the NWO rules through their control of our money supply while using this control to destroy us with interest and the boom/bust cycle?

The fact is that of all the major outlets only Jeff Rense consistently provided links to Ron Paul’s real opposition within the Alternative Media. Most notably through the writings of Henry Makow and Dick Eastman.
And this shows that the Alternative Media is prone to the same myopia the MSM suffers from when it comes to ‘their own’.

All this is incredibly annoying. Ron Paul singlehandedly disabled the entire blogosphere as a source of opposition. He’s hijacked the voice of reason and we need to clean up our act.

So here’s a top ten of what went wrong.

1. Not understanding economics, not knowing of Interest Free Economics
How can we support a candidate offering a Gold Standard? What’s wrong with us? What does it matter whether the Government pays 700 billion in debt service for paper based credit or for gold based credit?
While it can print interest free money itself?

The choice is not to pay interest for Gold or for Paper.

The choice is to pay interest or NOT pay interest.

How can all the pundits miss that we had a Gold Standard up to the thirties (and via Bretton Woods actually up to 1971)? How can we forget the Rothschilds got rich from lending Gold to Sovereigns in the 18th, 19th AND 20th century?

How can all the commentators denounce the deflationary policies of the IMF and Brussels in Europe and next hail a man calling for a 1 Trillion austerity drive as the new Messiah?

We are falling for just another dialectic: Mainstream Economics vs Austrian Economics, or Inflation vs. Deflation.
It’s worrying that these dialectics still fool us so easily. Whereas they can be easily recognized: they always offer a choice between a rock and a hard place. Evil and lesser evil. When facing such a choice we should realize we’re being played.

I was lucky, I read Lietaer first and only then Rothbard. But it’s not too late: read up on Ellen Brown, Margrit Kennedy, Eisenstein, Greco, Dick Eastman, C.H. Douglas. These people are for real, because they show the way to end interest slavery. And the Money Power cannot be defeated without defeating Usury.

How are we going to end Usurious Usurpation with a Gold Standard?

2. The childish affection for ‘Capitalism’
That’s what made this country great, right? REAL Capitalism, not the socialized semi communist ‘capitalism’ we have now. Or so we say.

Why do we call it Capitalism? Because in this system Capital rules over Labor. That’s why.

Are the 99% of the Capitalist class? I don’t think so.

Why don’t we understand Capitalism is a Monopoly? Just like Communism? That Capitalism vs. Communism is just another dialectic?

Capital wants returns on its investment and it’s just another example of humanity’s severe case of Stockholm Syndrome that we are so enthralled by it.

Capital invented and financed Communism, because in Communism they can exploit their coveted Monopoly unhindered. Communism is Capitalism showing its true face.

Capitalism didn’t bring us prosperity. It brought us the despicable horrors of the Industrial Revolution, with forced urbanization and the hellish 80 hour work weeks in sweatshops for our forefathers.

What brought us prosperity was uncompromising resistance against these horrible conditions.

Capitalism has nothing to do with free markets. If there is one thing a capitalist despises, it’s a free market. He hates competition. That’s why he buys politicians to make laws excluding competition. That’s why all major industries are controlled by cartels of Transnationals.

Capitalism is a system where the few control Capital as a factor of production. Like it was said back in 1862:
“I and my European friends are in favor of for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers, while the European plan, led on by England, is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages… It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to circulate as money any length of time, as we can not control that. But we can control the bonds and through them the bank issues.”

That is Capitalism’s real face. Not some nice little fuzzy cozy all American kind of thing.

3. Lack of Historical Awareness
Yes, historical awareness in the Alternative Media is much superior to that of the MSM. But the first two points show it’s far from sufficient. History shows that humanity has been at war with the Money Power for ever. When reading the history of the Roman Republic, the recurring theme is the ongoing struggle for emancipation by the plebs. Continuously looking for ways to limit the power of the patricians and ending their own disenfranchisement from the political process.

The Plebs lost. The Empire was a consolidation of Patrician power. It is not for nothing that when Caesar ended the republic he also ended fiat money. Up to then, the Romans payed with copper coins, but from then on scarce Gold chained them until they were liberated by the Huns. They were ‘compensated’ with free grains and ever more bloodthirsty ‘games’ in the Colosseum. All payed for by the Empire’s plundering of the provinces, of course.

And what to think of Jesus Christ: we all know he physically attacked the Money Changers.

We must come to terms with these lessons.

4. Settling for Ron Paul’s 9/11 story
Of course Ron Paul knows Israel and the Bush clan did 9/11. But he supposedly avoids this because it would be ‘unacceptable’ to the Media and the wider public.

What utter nonsense!

Most Americans these days understand the truth or at any rate understand the official narrative is a lie. We don’t need a candidate spouting the Noam Chomsky nonsense that ‘Arabs attack us because we are so mean against them’.

Arabs didn’t attack the US!

Everybody saying they did is lying and setting us up for war with them.

Ron Paul is a coward for not speaking out about 9/11. We are cowards for not daring to wait for a candidate who WILL expose what really transpired that day.

How can a peace candidate be for real by coming to power with a campaign based on such a lie?

We need a Real Candidate that will blow the lies out of the water and thus destroy everybody who perpetrated this lie. We don’t need a candidate who is afraid of the truth or the Media spin doctors.

We need a man with the balls, the brains and rhetoric to completely wipe away these nasty lackeys of power.

5. Not noticing the risk of Ron Paul as a War Candidate
The Money Power, through its agents in the CIA, MI6 and the Mossad is well capable of creating ‘facts on the ground’ that would ‘force’ Ron Paul into war.

A ‘Gulf of Hormuz’ incident is easily created. It is hot at the moment too.

What is Ron Paul going to say then?

How is he going to explain to the American People that he is not going to strike in revenge, because he believes it’s a set up? After explaining to them Arabs attacked us 10 years ago?

The fact is, Americans would rally behind Ron Paul if he is ‘forced’ to go to war. And this is a real danger. We saw what happened with our previous ‘Peace Candidate’.

6. He’s a special interest candidate
So we are happy to point out our current ‘leaders’ have stocks in the Oil, Pharma and Banking industries whose policies they implement for them in Congress.

And what kind of portfolio does Paul, owning 5 million in assets, have?
Gold, Gold, Gold.

Seems to me he stands to gain a great deal when he is allowed to force a new Gold Standard upon us.

It would amount to an unprecedented wealth transfer from those holding paper to those holding Gold.

Now tell me: is it the 99% that have Gold, or is it the 1%?

7. His ties with Freemasonry
Flashing all sorts of hand signs all the time. Masonic handshakes with Bill Maher.
Why is he not being confronted on this issue?

8. The idea that he may not be ideal, but at any rate not worse than the others.
This only seems an attractive idea. The problem with it is, that by supporting the lesser evil we are basically saying we accept this system.

We don’t. Or at any rate we shouldn’t.

We don’t accept this system and we will only work with it if it brings a President that will reform it beyond recognition.
By going along with the lesser evil we are maintaining the illusion of choice.
We are empowering people to keep voting, and thus propping up this utterly discredited ‘system’ of ours.

We are hindering the advent of a real candidate.

Boycotting elections, like boycotting their Banks and Transnationals, is real opposition.
Not supporting the lesser evil.

9. He’s a Republican!
Come on!

True, party membership does not mean towing the party line and Paul certainly voted his own way.

But he did serve the party loyally for decades. The party that sprung the Bush Dynasty on us and all those maniacs in Congress and the Senate.

Evidently Paul does not mind being associated with them.

And of course we would make the same argument had he been a Democrat. Isn’t that what it’s all about? Yet another Dialectic: Democrat vs. Republican, Left vs. Right.

We are way beyond that so why are we so happy with a candidate who clearly is not?

We need an independent candidate.

10. Our own lack of a clear program
This is what haunts the Occupy movement too. We need to develop a clear cut set of goals.
Occupy tried to solve this in the same way the anarchists tried it during the Spanish Civil War: discuss everything endlessly and try to find common ground everybody can agree with.

Forget about that. It’s not going to happen. It’s never going to work. We can never agree on everything. These discussions are incredibly wearying and they are usually dominated by ego and won by those most determined, not those most intelligent. It usually ends up with the lowest common denominator.

What we should do is have everybody say what they want. Be on the lookout for people doing what they are saying. Decide for yourself whether they are for real or not. And when they are real, support them.

Don’t weary them down with discussions about how you see things yourself, although we should never be afraid to speak our mind. Just understand that when somebody is taking the initiative and you support him, he’s in charge.

Or start your own initiative, of course.

If we just support people and groups we believe are for real, we would automatically gravitate towards centers of progress.

And it’s not difficult to create a basic program. It looks something like this:

1. Interest Free Economics.
Based on an interest free money supply.
Nationalizing or preferably closing the Federal Reserve Bank. The immediate end of bailouts. Ending interest payments. Comprehensive investigation of ALL the culprits, including the absolute top of banking, politics, media and academics. Disowning all profits from collusion, conspiracies and fraud. Reclaiming all interest payments over fraudulent fractional reserve banking based credit from the plutocracy. Closing of all banks convicted of serious fraud. Trial by Jury.
Providing interest free credit (or debt free money) to both the Government and individuals.

2. Truth about 9/11
Actively investigating the real culprits, including those in Israel.
Prosecution of all war criminals, including Bush and Blair. But also exposure of what happened with all the false flags in history, including Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin, The Main in Havana, Fukushima and Deep Horizon.

3. Ending the bribing of politicians
By making it a felony.

4. Ending the ‘rights’ of Corporations to ‘free speech’ and being a ‘person’ with associated rights.
Including making them fully liable for damages they do.

5. The End of Empire
Decimating the budget for aggressive war (‘defense’). The US spends a trillion per year on its army. All this money ends up in the coffers of the Plutocracy, while the weapons are maiming and killing millions.
The incredible fact is, that the US spends more on ‘defense’ than all other nations combined.
The army should exist only to defend the American People. A decent navy and air force, a few thousand nukes and a well armed militia is more than sufficient for this. A 100 billion defense budget would do just fine.

Concluding
Whether he is aware of it himself or not, Ron Paul is a candidate absolutely typical of the Money Power. An agenda for ‘change’, because ‘change’ has been their battle cry for centuries. It is an absolute wake up call for us all that they can still be so effective with this strategy.

Apparently we still have not learned that ‘change’ comes in two varieties. The kind we like and the kind they like.

It is high time we get a better view of what we want, so that we can evaluate candidates according to our own standards, instead of being mind controlled with ‘Austrian Economics’ or ‘Capitalism’.

We are lucky the Diebold computers seem to favor Romney.
We’d had been hard pressed to explain how wonderful a ‘Free Press’ is, had we been responsible for getting Paul the White House.

Related:
On Interest
The Goal of Monetary Reform
Austrian Economics still is ‘Jewish’ Economics
Financial Warfare 2012: Boycott All Banks
Yes to Peace! No to attacking Iran!

With Christmas and the New Year well behind us, the next round in the war of the Plutocracy against the West has been opened.
Downgrading European Nations leads to increasing borrowing costs for them and will further increase the tensions in the bond market.

The Money Power’s goals are obvious. It is not just the massive multi trillion wealth transfer that is under way. It is about bringing the West down a few notches. The US seems strong with a nominal $30.000 per capita GDP, but when the dollar devalues against the Brazilian Real and the Chinese Yuan things will quickly look different. It will also end cheap raw materials.

In Europe it is clear that the credit crunch is used to consolidate (fiscal) power in the EU. Once the Nation States surrender control over their budgets to Brussels, the pressures will quickly subside. Until the next crunch, of course.

Both developments, consolidating Europe and bringing the US down, are crucial in their march towards their global despotism.

The reason this crisis exists is because the banks, politicians, the media and economists are colluding in fooling the many into believing we need banks for our money supply. Most of them probably even believe this is true themselves.

They say we need the banks, because otherwise the real economy would have no money to trade with.

The banks are busted and as a result cannot provide new credit. And since people and businesses are paying off debt, the money supply, which is based on credit, is dwindling. As a result the economy is collapsing throughout the West.

Central Banks and Governments are supposedly bailing out the banks to keep them operational so that we can keep trading.

All this is complete and utter rubbish, of course. If banks can create credit, then we can too. That’s just common sense.
And if they create a multi trillion dollar fiasco, they should be closed.
Can you think of any other approach for any other organization that would mess up things so badly?

Just imagine: we are led to believe that we need to cough up trillions just to have a means of exchange. One that is completely paper/computer based. I.e., almost free of cost.

Banking is part of the Babylon Mystery and bankers believe we are still enthralled with their ‘fractional reserve banking’ sleight of hand.

And they are right. Although people are waking up, they still don’t get it.

A good example of this is the ‘take your money out of Bank of America’ of last October. Bank of America decides to rake in an extra 60 dollars per year with a silly fee. This upsets people.

While they are paying $300k interest over 30 years on their $200k mortgage. Which the bank created the moment they borrowed it. Meanwhile, 45% of our disposable income is lost to cost for capital included in the prices we pay for our daily needs.

Penny wise, pound foolish.

Coming to terms
Of course, it was a great step and absolutely fantastic to see people finally showing a little teeth. It just shows how hesitantly people are coming to grips with the reality of banking.

Boycotting the banks is the blindingly obvious approach. If somebody is enslaving you with interest and fractional reserve banking while destroying the economy by not lending why would you patronize his business?

But only few even within the Free Media are willing to accept this simple conclusion.

The fact of the matter is: many are still enthralled with the ‘magnificent edifice of international finance’, as Rothschild mouthpiece the Economist once called it.

And how about this: “The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from its profits or so dependent on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class.” — Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863

Most people who are waking up are indeed trying to profit from the system and the crunch. Hence the popularity of ‘independent’ investor sites plugging their gold franchises.

How many of the people buying gold are hoping deep inside things will get worse and their gold/silver investment will make them rich?

One of the key reasons banks exist and why we are in the mess we are in, is because people are not looking at the system to reform it, they are looking for ways to move higher up the food chain themselves.
And this attitude does not only guarantee continued enslavement, it makes us accomplices.

In discussions I have with people about interest I often notice how strongly people will defend the rights of the lender. They will explain vehemently ‘capital will always expect a return on investment’. I wonder how many of these people are investors themselves. Or how rich they are.
My bet is, most of them are ‘poor’. In the sense that they belong to the 50% of Americans who own zero net assets.

So why is it that they are so enthralled by the excuses of the loan shark? Why are they not just saying: ‘this system is breaking my back because ‘capital wants a return’. What are we going to do about it?’.

Most people suffer from a paradoxical set of attitudes. They have a slave mentality, but they can’t bear the idea of being one. They believe the way to escape slavery is to enslave others.
This, at any rate, is my understanding of the implications of investing in Gold and explaining why we need interest.

All this is not meant in a vicious or negative way. It is just what I see happening. Knowing a little about man’s history and psychology it is understandable that we find ourselves in this mess. It is understandable that people think what they think. I used to share in this worldview wholeheartedly only a decade ago.

But it is clear that the Money Power stands to gain a lot from it. We are not going to get rid of it by hoping we will share in its rewards. We are not going to end slavery by explaining capital needs returns.

After all: how can lies liberate?

It is a lie to believe you or capital in general has a right to a return. Capital is soulless. Money doesn’t work.

People work.

You’re one of those, working for the ‘return on investment for capital’.

It is foolish to look at things from the perspective of capital. Only very few belong to the capitalist class and these people burn inside from avarice and lust for power. There is no reason to believe they are better off. That our salvation lies in becoming one of them.

The problem is that by not understanding money we have allowed capital, as a factor of production, to be the bottleneck in the economy. It shouldn’t be. Labor should be the scarce factor.

In a natural economy there would still be rich people. In fact, there probably would be more millionaires than today. The ultra rich would be far less wealthy, that’s true. Because their wealth is based on exploiting their control over the scarce factor of production.

Real wealth creation is based on producing useful goods and services. And when normal people can get abundant low cost financing, they will prove to be incredibly productive and this is the real way to prosperity.

And, of course, when people are no longer forced to compete with each other for scarce liquidity to pay off ever higher costs for capital, money and wealth will soon lose a lot of its attractiveness.

Most people will have other priorities than wealth creation when they have a solid and secure economic base.

It is unfortunate that there is still widespread misunderstanding about both money and our real problem with it.
People do not yet understand how pervasive the enslavement through interest really is.

That’s why they fall for the notion that Gold will solve our problems. But what does it matter whether we pay all this interest for Gold or for paper based credit?

The Money Power owns both and all the interest will end up in the same place.

The mind control of the rich, the social conditioning to accept the current order and its despicable ‘morality’, to defend it at the cost of oneself and one’s loved ones is very profound and pervasive in our beliefs. They are not easily uprooted, not even by the ‘Internet Reformation’.

In the mean time we are ignoring the real solution: interest free money. Either debt free, in the form of Social Credit, which would work out like a ‘Citizens Dividend‘.
Or interest free credit, through for instance Public Banking or Mathemetically Perfected Economy. Or why not even my own suggestion?

These solutions are real and we can implement them today.

We would no longer pay interest on a mortgage, which would also mean much lower rent. While paying 45% less for what we need. World Government would be dead and Big Business would face the competition of well and cheaply funded small business.

The reason we are not doing this is not only because Washington and Brussels are owned by the Money Power in the City of London.

The main reason is we don’t see the problem and therefore we miss out on the solution.

Fight Back!
But in the mean time a new class of warriors is standing up. They are not waiting for reform on a national level, but are building their own currencies, actively attacking interest. Their aim is not a business for profit maximization, but to build organizations that serve the Commonwealth. Of course these organizations must be viable, but to become so sacrifices are necessary. Financing is difficult to come by. There is much disbelief.

But these people can look beyond these difficulties and their own narrow ‘self interest’. The truth is that humans need each other. The truth is that strong individuals should take their responsibility. Strong men should stand up for the little guy. The women, children and our elders.

Free markets exist for one second. Then they are taken. The choice is to let the bullies and their self serving liars take it, or to take it ourselves.

The technology for free market currencies, interest free, is available and everywhere around me I see people reading up on Interest Free Economics. Lietaer, Kennedy, Eisenstein, Brown, Greco.

In Germany dozens regional currencies are operated by dedicated individuals in small organizations. They are growing explosively, although they are still very small, of course. But they provide real liquidity to the real economy in both cities and the country side. More and more people are paying with them. They already turn over millions.

Another example is Bitcoin. Although it is built on the false premise that it must be a good store of value (instead of a good means of exchange) it does show the way: free internet currencies. These will become available, I’m certain some smart cookie is already programming it. Based on interest free credit. Or even just giving his units away for the public to spend into circulation.

This is an important part of the future. It may even be THE future, if Governments don’t clean up their act and take the monopoly back from the Central Banking cartel.

And until it does, it must be clear that we should not have one dime in that system. Every dollar we put in the banking system gives them a dollar income per year. Remember that. The system, through fractional reserve banking, multiplies your dollar by ten and takes interest over each of them. Real interest (including credit cards) are probably close to 10% and that means they make a dollar per year over every dollar you have in your account.

Remember that 40 years ago nobody had a bank account. Before then there were no computers and the banks couldn’t have handled the administration.
You don’t need a bank to keep your money. The whole idea is insane! Nowhere is your money more prone to abuse and risk than in a bank.
And you can keep an account, just keep its balance at almost zero.

Take the money out and force the FED to print ever more. Pay cash only. Liquidate all your paper assets, both to blow up the system and to minimize your own exposure to the implosion. Let them squirm and lie ever more transparently with every new bailout that they need to force upon us. Let them show their hand. We’re not going to ‘repay’ odious debt.

We’re not afraid. We don’t need them.

Let them eat cake.

Related:
On Interest
The Problem is not Debt, it’s Interest
For Self Determination we need Free Currencies!
Mutual Credit, the Astonishingly Simple Truth about Money Creation
The Goal of Monetary Reform

Let us recap the classic case against deflation, before looking beyond it.

1. Deflation makes money worth more and all the rest worth less.
That includes labor, which is the commodity that most Americans rely on in the marketplace. Deflation is thus a wealth transfer from those that don’t have money to those that do. About 50% of Americans own zero net assets.
It is fair to say that only a very small percentage of Americans will profit from this wealth transfer.

2. Deflation makes debts and the interest payed over them worth more.
This is good for creditors. I.e. the banks and the billionaires.
It is very bad for Government, which owes $15 trillion and for the tax payer, who is on the hook for the whole lot.
As we know it is primarily the middle classes that pay taxes.
It is very bad for all other debtors, including those paying off their mortgages.

3. Prices decline because demand is crashing
Of course, declining prices sounds great, right? Well, if they are going down in certain sectors as a result of innovation or market pressures, yes, then we are happy if prices go down.
But if prices go down because demand is crashing, that’s a completely different scenario. Demand is crashing because the money supply is contracting and that is a very serious problem indeed.

4. Deflation hinders economic growth
The currency is appreciating. That is a good incentive to hoard the stuff, instead of spending it on investments and consumption, which is the real economy.
Inflation has the opposite effect: people dump cash and this supports economic growth. That’s why contractions are usually deflationary, while booms are usually inflationary.

So deflation has been utterly discredited, not just in theory, but in practice. Just think of the Great Depression, which was a monetary contraction. Europe dumped the Gold Standard in the thirties because it was so deflationary. Keynesianism was a reaction to this deflation.

And, more relevant today, just think of the poor Irish and Greeks. They know all about deflation and austerity and they don’t seem to believe it is doing them much good.

Also keep in mind what kind of people are calling for it. The IMF, the ECB, Brussels, the banking community. Are we really going to listen to the people who created this mess in the first place?

Just another Hegelian Dialectic
The fact of the matter is: we are being set up for yet another of ‘their’ favorite dialectics: inflation vs deflation.
Or more accurate: deficit spending vs. austerity.

Its synthesis: a wealth transfer to the rich, of course.

The deficit spenders a la Paul Krugman tell us debt is no problem. Austerity’s advocates tell us it is.

The key to understanding all dialectics is to see their hidden common ground. In this case: both discuss debt, but not interest.
And the problem is not debt, it’s interest.

But that’s a moot point, you say. Where there is debt, there is interest!
Capital will always want a return, it’s unavoidable.

Really?

After all: we know our money is generated in computers. Banks (or better: the banking system at large) create all the money we borrow.

Our $200k mortgage, for which we pay $300k in interest over thirty years, amounting to ten years of wage slavery for the average American, is created the minute we go into debt.

Nothing is backing the debt. Nobody is losing control over even one dime. Not even temporarily.

We consider this a disgrace, and say we want Gold to end this scandal.

But the real question is:
If the bank creates the money out of nothing for nothing, why am I paying $300k interest on a $200k mortgage?

Why don’t I get it interest free?

We all know the answer to this question, of course.

It is because we are slaves.

The next question is: would I be any happier if I pay this $300k interest for a Gold based mortgage?

The answer is: we would still be slaves.

Not to the printing press, but to those holding Gold. And don’t believe for a second that those few ounces you may be holding count for much. Nobody knows where all the Gold is, but it is a sure bet that the Money Power has a decisive stake in the World’s Reserves. Remember how they got rich? Lending to Governments while setting them up for wars against each other? They were not lending paper back then. Real Gold is what they were offering. And we can rest assured they didn’t dump all their Gold after Nixon ended Bretton Woods.

Fractional Reserve Banking is a fraud and an incredibly inefficient way of producing credit. The reason it exists (besides obvious historical reasons) is to obscure the truth: that we pay $300k for absolutely nothing. We are being defrauded. Ripped off.

That’s one of the key reasons the bankers want to reinstate Gold: they have a better excuse for enslaving us with interest. It all sounds a bit rich to enslave billions of people with simply credit. Just give ‘m some shiny stuff in return. It worked for yesterday’s Natives, so why not today?

But real money creation is simple and stable. You can find out how it’s done here.

If you have never seen the real costs of interest to society I very strongly suggest you read up here.
Reread it until you get upset. As long as you don’t, you’ve missed the point.

We can create all the credit that we will ever need at zero cost. That is the stone cold truth staring us in the face. It’s all we need to know to transcend the nasty little Inflation vs Deflation dialectic.

It’s all we need to know to get rid of the crooks and end the lie.

The simple fact of the matter is: we can end all interest payments now and the crunch would be over tomorrow. Nobody would lose a dime. All debts would be repaid. Only the rich would lose a massive income stream. But this income is their reward for enslaving us through their printing press operation. So I think we can explain to them they’ll have to find a job to replace that income.

Just think of all the purchasing power that would become available in all the levels of the economy, if consumers and producers are no longer weighed down with exorbitant interest costs in exchange for computer entries.

All this may be a little hard to fathom immediately. But rethink this question:
‘If the bank creates the money out of nothing for nothing, why am I paying $300k interest on a $200k mortgage?’

If you don’t have a mortgage, think about this:
‘Why is the Government spending 700 billion per year (the equivalent of a TARP every year) on debt service alone? For money that was printed the minute it was borrowed?’

Keep thinking until you get angry, that’s when you’re getting close. Study a few of the links in this article and things will start to become clear.

The choice is simple: start paying attention to these questions, or continue paying interest for nothing to the Money Power for the rest of your life.

This article was written for Activist Post

Recommended reading:

On Interest
The Problem is not Debt, it’s Interest
The Wolfson Prize, I win!
Why Bankers Love Gold
Usurious Usurpation
Mutual Credit, the Astonishingly Simple Truth about Money Creation