Skip to content

More On Social Credit And A Letter By Dick Eastman

Dick Eastman

(Left/Above: the erudite Dick Eastman)

Recently, Social Crediters have been campaigning against the notion that Usury is the core of our monetary problems. To them it’s the Gap, the difference between purchasing power of the consumer base and output of the productive sector.

However, the Gap is mostly caused by Usury and it’s becoming more and more difficult to understand why the Social Crediters are not willing to admit to this.

(Here’s my analysis of Social Credit for those new to the issue)

Here’s a recent effort by Oliver Heydorn for the Social Credit camp on the socred.org website.

Dick Eastman convincingly took him to task on the issue of Usury being the Gap. Dick communicates via his email list, so I can’t link to it, but email me if you want to get on Dick’s list to receive his top notch work.

And next he wrote me a friendly letter (see below this article), looking to bridge our differences.

The Gap is the difference between what workers produce and the wages they receive. Because wages are lower than the value of production, there is a constant lack of purchasing power for the workers to mop up their own production.

Major Douglas was the one to point at this phenomenon. He proposed printing debt free money by the Government and allowing the people to spend the new money into circulation. If you print only as much money as is necessary to buy up ‘excess’ production, no ‘inflation’ (rising prices) will ensue, Douglas claimed.

I’m not really convinced that this will be ‘inflation’-free, by the way, and I don’t think Dick Eastman is either, he just doesn’t care much and correctly notes that inflation is really the very least of our problems as it stimulates economic growth and reduces the value of debts, things only bankers and the ultra rich hate.

Be that as it may, bottom line is that Social Credit to some extent compensates for Usury in this way and this is why I personally sympathize  with the scheme.

Dick Eastman, who wants to use Social Credit to end Rothschild tyranny, has been making the case for years that Douglas’ ‘Gap’ is basically the interest on loans of money. As Eastman correctly notes, the Bankers don’t spend the money back into circulation, but hoard it, to cause deflation.

I’m adding to this they also simply lend it back into circulation, as the extra interest drain of the interest lent back into circulation will only worsen the deflationary pressures both in the medium and long term. In this way they let compound interest also work to crunch us with ever worsening money scarcity (while printing ever more money! Neat, huh?)

The Gap is calculated to be around 50% of production by Social Crediters. Obviously, it’s no coincidence that about 40% of the prices we pay for goods and services are Usury passed by the producers. As calculated in Helmut Creutz’ ‘the Money Syndrome’.

It seems to me that this more or less speaks for itself and in the to and fro between the Social Crediters and Dick Eastman I also could not find any real rebuttal of this by the SC’ers. Dick’s simply right. It’s not an ‘accounting issue’ (as the SC’ers put it), it’s the interest-drain.

Downside of Social Credit
Clearly, this being the case, we need to solve Usury first and what remains of the Gap after we do, can be solved with some extra liquidity if needs be.

Social Credit’s main problem is that it compensates what people lose to Usury. However, people will still be paying, even with freshly printed notes.

Why do the Usurers need to continue to suck up Trillions per year? That’s the whole issue, is it not? We have a couple of Trillionaires at the top of the food chain who have stolen the rightful inheritance of the Earth’s masses through compound interest.

It’s all unearned income. All that these guys do during the day to ‘make’ this money is bribe politicians, newspapers and ‘economists’.

Compensating people for the interest-drain is not enough. The interest-drain itself must be stopped.

Responding to Dick Eastman
As Dick notes, we do agree on a great many issues and we share a hobby too: preparing Austrians for luncheon. Especially the Austrians’ criminal defense of deflation is something both Dick and myself feel very strongly about indeed.

Furthermore, while I do have a proposal of my own, I’m not at all hung up on it.

The Goals of Monetary Reform as I see them are to
1) end Usury and its associated scarcity of money
2) end artificial inflations and deflations, the boom-bust cycle
3) democratize credit allocation, so bankers nor technocrats can direct the economy.

These are the parameters along which I have analyzed the different monetary reform proposals out there, including Dick Eastman’s (the latter in email correspondence, not on Real Currencies).

I support with reservations anything that moves in the right direction, and unreservedly all proposals that achieve the three main goals of monetary reform as I see them.

Dick wants to replace the current usurious credit based money supply with Social Credit and allow for free full reserve banking, assuming that competition between banks will lead to low interest rates and decent behavior of these institutions.

In the diagrams in his letter we can see how his proposal would lead to constant circulation of all the money, including that used for interest-payments. So the interest-drain, or gap, will be solved.

However, in doing so Dick, like the wider Social Credit community, also overlooks that Usury is paid by those who don’t have money to those that do. Ie: the poor will borrow from the middle classes, who in turn will borrow from the rich. At least some of the wealth transfer through Usury will continue. It will still be the rich depositing money to lend in these banks.

Furthermore, while Eastman hopes to reach out to our Muslim brethren in the faith, he ignores why Islam rejects Usury: because it is unearned income. In Islam every transaction must lead to both participants adding to the greater whole. The Usurer just takes. He adds nothing, risks nothing and loses nothing.

In an interest-free environment there is no ‘risk’ as all risk is mutually insured, just as the credit is mutual. ‘Debtors’ (people promising to pay) pay a one off service charge to cover the risks for the community. Since most lending will come with collateral, risk is minimal as it is anyway.

This is in fact already the case today. There is no real ‘risk’ in the financial industry. For instance: houses going under water is because of the deflation the banks cause themselves willfully.

Last, I’m not as optimistic as Dick is about the disciplining effects of the market on bankers. Bankers will be bankers, experience shows. Eastman puts them in a cage, but a wild animal can find ways to escape, especially if its incentive, Usury, remains in place. They will be colluding again in no time. Such is the power of the love of money and its weaponization: interest on loans of money.

He puts my position as: “Your answer is simple enough. Kill the vampire  — and have government make the loans at zero interest.  Certainly that remedy would fix the problem.   Usury is killed.  You are happy.  Luther is happy.  Mohammed (pbuh) is happy.  God is happy.  Right?

But then points at the problem of Government being in control of credit creation and allocation.

And that obviously is indeed a major problem, if Government is the one to dole out the credit.

However, that is not my position. It would not achieve goal number three: democratic credit allocation.

I’m looking for interest-free credit facilities that work according to a clear cut charter, semi-private, semi-public not-for-profit institutions. And they should allocate the credit based on rights. The understanding must be that people simply have a right to credit as it is their promise to pay which is monetized. The Money Supply and the Credit of the Nation are part of the Commons and all commoners have rights to access to their fair share in the available credit. Based on rules that balance the needs and rights of both individuals and the community (other individuals).

They must be credit worthy, based on collateral and have a reasonable plan (a normal business, a mortgage). The credit facility must provide no more credit than stable prices allow.

In this way credit allocation can be to a large extent made to be predictable. No technocrats looking for control, but professionals simply facilitating people’s natural rights.

90% of society’s demand for credit can be covered in this way. What remains are risky ventures. These need financing too, but this can be reasonably done on an investment basis, where those providing the capital also share in the risk. Brokerages can provide the infrastructure for this.

What is more, and this is the key point: what Eastman proposes, full reserve banking, can just as well be done interest-free! People can just save with ‘banks’ (for lack of a better word) interest-free and their money can be used for lending, as long as the ‘bank’ guarantees the deposit, which can be well done by having borrowers pay one off charges to cover uncollateralized defaults. This is known as JAK Banking.

And let us not forget that Usury is the main cause of defaults to begin with. Clearly the credit worthiness of people vastly increases if they don’t have to pay interest on their loans.

Conclusion
Solving Usury will solve at least 80% of the gap. It’s really hard to see how the Social Crediters can get around this.

However, Usury is worse than just the gap. It’s a wealth transfer from those who don’t have money and thus must borrow to those who have already more of it than they can spend.

It is unearned income.

The whole idea that money should breed money is irrelevant.

The Time Value of Money is a hoax, cooked up by 16th century Jesuit monks in Salamanca, who laid the groundworks for what later became Libertarianism. This was the end of Usury prohibition in Europe. It paved the way for centuries of Usury and is leading directly to the destruction of the West and to World Government.

There is no need for Government nor Banks to control lending, it can all be done in democratic, decentralized, and not-for-profit fashion.

Let us end all rents and unearned income. The economy should be based on production, not parasiticism.

Having said this, I admire Dick’s work and I’m grateful for this opportunity to make this case against Usury once more, and to fire up everyone to take up arms against the Money Power menace.

Let us not rest until this Demon is defeated once and for all!

Related:
Social Credit
Social Credit With Demurrage
More On Mutual Credit
Rationalizing Usury: The Time Value Hoax
The Difference Between Debt-Free Money And Interest-Free Credit
The Goal Of Monetary Reform
Forget About Full Reserve Banking

Dick Eastman’s letter:

Dear Anthony,

Very good to receive this email from you.

We have been sharing thoughts and friendship for a long time.   We agree on almost everything  — including the deflation that results from the practices and systems of usury.  Our common goals might be better attained if we could agree on the same remedy.  I think we can.

As I understand it you are saying that usury is wrong in the sense of a morality that is a morality that best serves people.  The last I looked it appeared to me that you advocate the elimination of interest on loans under all circumstances and that you would have a government agency make all loans interest free.  Yes, that would eliminate usury.  The structure of the financial system would be so changed that the gap in purchasing power due to the draining of interest to financiers/capitalists/bankers would be gone.  End of problem.  End of story.

In my opinion, not without some thought,  you charging money to allow others to spend your money today instead of you spending it,  provided they promise and do give you that same amount of money later on,  is a freedom that in a well designed market economy/ money system/ lending system could be a positive benefit to both borrower, lender and society as a whole.

My idea has been to find out exactly where interest under the present system is killing us and to do something about that.  Why is the usury system killing us?

I think I have isolated what is good and what is bad about usury under the present system  — and what would be all good without bad under a different system.

The system of today’s usury I call the Bank-of-England/Rothschild system, named after both the bank that initiated the system and the family name of those who have most effectively used the system to the detriment of all nations and peoples except their own.

I have identified elements of the Bank-of-England/Rothschild system that cause the most trouble.   Sometimes the gold standard.  Always the private issue of the nations money.  The tendency to want deflation to make the money the monopolize to be worth more per unit so they can increase their real wealth by simply hoarding money and not spending — the cause of the leakage of purchasing power from the real economy, causing hardship and loss in the “lower loop” (most households, businesses, local government that provides public services).   The Bank-of-England/Rothschild system has always opposed national treasury money — the green-backs backed only by the word and authority of a good government.  Such a money system would cut down their power from that of just short of God to something more on a scale of of their standing among common humanity.

In the past I have just hinted at the problem with this diagram:

But now I have two diagrams that together, I think, captures the essense of the problem.

eastman2

 

New money comes in only a few ways —  all involve borrowing at interest.  These ways are 1) commercial bank loans at interest and secured by collateral or primacy lenders’ claims in any bankruptcy; and 2) bond financing  — where money comes when a corporation or government writes an IOU promising to pay some amount in the future — which is then sold for a lower price in the current bond market.  The new money is not really new — it comes from the interest earnings that are being hoarded by those who have been holding on to money simply to create deflation and to gain from deflation.  But bond financing also involves interest drain.  The hoarders give up the gain from hoarding for the bigger interest gain in buying an IOU (bond) — and the bond maker gets the money and spends it on war or new Wal Mart outlet buildings or high fructose processing plants  — which for a time increases money in circulation (monetary inflation)  — but as with bank lending and interest collecting  —  the IOU stipulates a face value that must be paid at a future date that is bigger than the bond price the bond sold for — and on many bonds their is a coupon amount that must be paid at regular intervals as well.  Soon the gain in money circulating from the buying of a new bond with money that was being hoarded — is soon followed by the payment of coupon amonts and bond face value back to the hoarders  — more deflation  — unless the corporation or government chooses to roll over the debt buy writing new IOUs to get money to pay the obligation on the old IOU.   This is the true heart of darkness  — both bond financing and bank loan financing have the same effect.  An upward jump in money supply followed by a decline — as principal and interest are paid and as coupon and face value are paid — that takes the money circulation lower than before the financing was undertaken.

There is one more mechanism for making new money  — the bonds themselves can be sold by those holding them to the central bank in exchange for funds — referred to by the concealing euphemism Quantitative Easing (QE) — but thise of course gives money only to the hoarding class  — the people who only part with their money deposits when interest rates are very high or when bankrupt assets and privatized public utilities come up for distress sales in extreme buyer’s markets.

The above explains everything.  Why depressions happen.  Why bust follows boom.  The debt increases to trillions upon trillions of dollars owed.  Why possession of the world is being transfered to the credit monopoly that provides the credit money (the all-borrowed money supply).

I know this has been your understanding of the matter too.  This is the great evil exposed.  The vampire has two fangs — the all-borrowed money supply and deflation-intensified-by-hoarding which only higher interest rates or a Greek Island or Chrysler Motors going up for auction in a distress sale can induce to spend.

This is the system we both do not like.  This is the system that grips our countries, Holland and the US, and everyone else’s country as well.

Your answer is simple enough. Kill the vampire  — and have government make the loans at zero interest.  Certainly that remedy would fix the problem.   Usury is killed.  You are happy.  Luther is happy.  Mohammed (pbuh) is happy.  God is happy.  Right?

But then comes the old crotchety American who says the government passing out money interest free is garl-durn socialism, even communism, where Congress (or the Tweede Kamer over there) , our federal legislature is the  biggest whorehouse in the world, I am sure the Tweede Kamer operates the same.  Buying votes.  Giving contracts to those who contribute to the elections or who control the political parties that decides who will be ministers will run the government.  BUT ONCE YOUR COUNTRY’S POLITICIANS OR MY COUNTRIES POLITICIANS HAVE THE POWER TO CREATE MONEY AND THEN LEND IT OUT AT THEIR OWN DISCRETION  you will have created a monster of state power that is just as terrible and corrupt as Bank-of-England/Rothschild power.  The state will be a god.  People will wait in line for loans like people wait in line for an operation or a CAT scan under socialized medicine.  And only those who contribute to the party and the politician will get moved to a shorter line.  The heck with that noise.  Can’t a European see the problem there?

I can’t join with you if you insist upon replacing usury with a government that makes money and then passes it out in loans to those the government chooses to lend them to, to those the state deems to be “deserving.”   They can’t just lend to everyone all they want at zero interest  — or everyone would borrow and borrow with promises to repay later until they die — and then try to collect after they are dead.  So there must be some kind of rationing, some constraint on who gets loans — and you would leave that up to the government, to politicians, to the political parties, to those who pay the bosses of the political parties  — in fact the same people who already own congress and the Tweede Kamer under the Bank-of-England/Rothschild system our two countries have now.

So I ask you.  Can we agree to be rid of the Bank-of-England/Rothschild system — but not replace it with the all powerful National Money Power that you have been so naively proposing.

Now you are not the only one I would like to come to full agreement with.  There are also the Moslems (peace be upon them all in this world and the next).  They too are against usury.  Like you they reject my proposals because they are simply evil and unjust  and socially destructive.

Well, I have extended an olive branch to you and to them — but have not gotten a response.  I propose a system where business people who want to make a new kind of device, for example, can get a lot of money from a lot of people on condition that those people get their money back after the device is build and selling, plus some more money for their willingness to lend.

But would not that not necessarily be usury?

No.  I thinking of a replacement for usury, that is not usury, but which does allow little people to pool their money to support an entrepreneur with a good idea in the hope of a gain for themselves later on.  What I propose to accomplish this will not be usury, but will be an actual silent partnership, where the vampire  “lender” is transformed into a small silent partner — sharing in risk, having the rights of a small partner rather than a creditor.   Here is how it would work.

The economy has plenty of money in it, coming from the state and being introduced exclusively through the new money dividend  — debt free money to each person in each household on a regular unfailing basis.

Now there will be people with great inventions or ideas for products that people would enjoy if only someone would make them  — but these inventors have no money to realize their idea and put it on the market.  They need money, and “advance” so they can pay employees and materials suppliers and tool suppliers until the product is selling and can pay for itself.    \

Now instead of going to a bank for a loan like they do now, and instead of writing up an IOU and selling it as they do now (bond financing), we would instead have, not a Bank, but a populist institution called a “Pank.”  I slightly change the name because I want to underscore  the idea that the “Pank” is something completely different for the following reasons.

Here is how Anthony Migchels would start a “Pank.”  He calls up his internet friends and says,  “I know a sharp young fellow named Daan whose wife Isa is a great dress designer, really different and cool.  And Daan has invented a new treatment for fabric that makes it really fantastic to touch and that draps in a really attractive way that every woman will want to own one.   We need to hire five hundred seamstresses and buy 500 sewing machines, plus the material, plus the building, plus the chemicals for the treatment and so forth.   I want to open a “Pank” to provide Daan and Isa with the advance they need.  Will you you subscribe  —  (this replaces becoming a depositor in a bank) ?     And what if I, Anthony Migchels the “Panker” am wrong  and Daan’s idea is no good, or the government will not let him use his chemicals, or the style of dress Isa designs just doesn’t sell?  Well then, in that case, we as silent partners must share the loss with Daan and Isa.  If you put up  ƒ300 (gulden  — post-euro)   and the business fails, you are only entitled to claim half of what you subscribed.  (Now THAT is what makes this no longer usury.  A banker would lay claim to the full debt obligation and would have priority before Daan and Isa could get one tiny penningen from liquidation.  But under the new Dutch “Panking System”  no such loan contract would be legal.  Pankers and the subscribers the panker attracts will not be insured by the governrment.  Panker and subscriber would be exposed to all the risk Daan and Isa are exposed to.

Then why would anyone every become a subscriber to Anthony Migchel’s bank?  Because everyone knows that since the early 21st century Migchel’s has been known as one of the most honest men in Holland, a man with good sense and an eye for a good deal and a man with a good heart who would not ask people to subscribe to his Pank  to a venture unless he was sure it would succeed.  In other words  — when you subscribe you money to a “panking” venture you are putting your trust in the integrity of the “panker” to pick the right entrepreneur with the right idea in the right market at the right time given all the factors that might affect the success or failure of such fashion design innovation.

Is then “panking” usury?  You might look at the fact that the panker takes money from people with an understanding he will return that much and more later on if the venture of Daan and Isa succeeds.  That looks like banking and therefore like usury.  But then again — notice that the “panker” and the subscribers are taking the same risk as Daan and Isa.  Notice that in the event that the business fails and cannot pay the “pank” what was hoped — that Anthony and Daan and Isa and the subscribers divide the loss among themselves.  That is partnership, not usury.  Under usury the lenders must get completely paid before employees, or other crediters get a penningen.

Furthermore it is not percent of the loan that is owed the pank and the subscribers — but a return of the advance plus a share of the profits.  And it would be the hard work and intelligence and shrewdness of Anthony Migchels the panker (remember a panker is one who creates the lending institution that replaces the usurous “bank” of today.

(Note:  There is a city called Panker in Shleswig-Holstein in Germany — and in northeastern Pennsylvaina “to pank” means to press down and compact soil or other loose type of material into a more compact mass — which is what in the present usage is what the “panker” does with subscriber’s money before handing it to Daan and Isa to start their dress company. —       but otherwise the word “pank” seems to be free for this use.)

Now in Islamic banking riba (usury) is haraam (sin) with no exceptions.  However partnerships are not haraam.  The pank, with Anthony Migchels, as panker in this case,  — anyone can be a panker if they have the name and reputation that earns the confidence of subscribers to take the risk  —  calls the shots for who gets the money — for whom to partner with, in this case partnering with Daan and Isa.

There is no riba or usury involved in repaying the amount of the advance (called the paying the principal in the Bank-of-England/Rothschid system, so the big question is whether the extra money that Anthony and the subscribers get back is riba or, in Christian eyes, usury  — or whether it is shared profit or some other thing.  For example, the arrangment could be a joint venture (Musharakah rather than a borrower-lender arrangment), or it could be set up as a work-and-earn-to-own arrangment  —  where the pank pays for the business and its early operations, paying  Daan and Isa fully for their contributions of entrepreneurship, management, know-how, and labor — enough for them to live on while the ownership of the business is sold to Daan and Isa in installments by a pre-specified formula. The pank would take profit left over after paying Daan and Isa what is owed them  — until the business —  Daan en Isa Mooie Jurken  — becomes completely owned by Daan and Isa.   The deal is this:  The Pank says, we will pay for starting the business you want and for its early operations, paying Daan and Isa a fee for all of their contribution, including Isa’s original designs, and the worth of the chemical formula as purchased by the pank from Daan.  The pank will take profits over that  — half of profits going to the Pankers (Anthony and his subscribers)  — the subscribers replace the savers who put their money in time savings accounts in the old Bank-of-England/Rothschid system.)  And that is enough about that — the point is that the pooling of money so that good business ideas can be undertaken can be done without usury, riba or “charging interest” . 

Whether Theologicans against usury and  Moslems against riba give American populist social credit a “pass” on avoiding sin  — the fact remains that the creation of a permanent money supply provided for free to every citizen  — and the ending of money creation by banks, and the requirment that banks only lend money that savers entrust to them to lend  — will end the tendency and the incentive for the financial system to deflate the quantity of money in circulation.  That in itself will end deflationary depression, end the waves of defaults and bankruptcies, end the mounting indebedness to lenders, end the transfer of real asset wealth from the borrowing class to the lending class.  It would make businesses more profitable.  It would allow businesses expanding and innovating from their own profit to replace borrowing from banks because money is not available to innovate without going to the usurers.

So, Anthony,  why can’t we agree that the Bank-of-England/Rolthschild system leads to national ruin all the time, that it is an instrument of class warfare and piracy of rich exploiting the helpless poor.  And why can we not also agree that with competitive “panking”  –  where anyone can become a bank if he has the reputation to attract subscribers  — buyer beware!  subscriber beware!    because we allow panks to fail  (if the panker cannot pick good entrepreneurs to invest in, cannot understand all that may affect  supply and demand   to pick the right entrepreneur with the right venture  — whether giving a retailer money to fill his shelves — or betting on a new invention  —  if he fails he fails  — no one will want to subscribe to his pank again.   

This would be highly competitive “panking”  —  a pank is only as good as the ventures it is investing in.   The pank would allow little people to get the gains that today only the rich can do  — get involved in investing in something big.

Today inder the Bank of England’/Rothschild system  — these is no competitive banking.  Interest rates are fixed.  Everything is fixed.  And the game is rigged all in favor of the lender and against the borrower.  That will end.

But remember this.  Companies that satisfy coustomers will never suffer a bad day because of macroeconomic deflation.  There will be no deflation, no laps in consumer purchasing power.  And firms will be as successful as the businessman dreamed when he started his business  — if he is a good businessman and entreprneur.  That means we will be back in a land of opportunity. 

There will be no more macroeconomics.  No monetary policy.  No tending of the national economy.  There will be no national interest rate, no international money markets.   (I have not gotten into the other phase of American Populist Social Credit  — the elimination of corporations and a return to having all businesses either single proprietorship (single owner) or partnerships  — with full liability to owners. 

There is no democracy unless the people — all of the people equally — are the ones who spend all new money into circulation.  The Rothschilds and Rockefellers owning Goldman-Sachs and JP Morgan-Chase should not be creating money and lending it to people at interest to give the economy its money supply.  Nor should politicians have that power to create money and spend it into circulation — because that power would lead to corruption and a totalitarian state at least as bad as what we have now.

Let the people have all new money and let them be free to pool their money and jointly undertake big things, if they want to  — with a populist banking system (or “panking system” if we want a new name to go with a new system).  The populist banks will not be able to create money — they will just be places where good opportunity spotters will find the best entreprneurs to provide money to  — ‘advances” can replace the term loans — or “investment money”  — or “partnership funds” 

let us have a system that Moslems and Christians against riba and usury can participate in with clear conscious that no sin is being committed against god and the ways of righteousness found in the Holy Books.

But most of all let us do away with the evil lies and theft of the Bank-of_England/Rothschild system that plunders the people who create the wealth from the world that God has provided us all to enjoy.

Two Interviews And A Recommendation


This is an interesting second interview with the guys of The Plane Truth.

We get to the bottom of the international situation. Is there a real struggle between Russian and the US Empires? Or is it a war of both States against the Peoples of the Planet?

Babylon is One and while the actors in the play often believe in what they do, ultimately their actions amount to manipulated events. States need war. It’s why they exist. The Money Power manipulates events from behind the scenes and Ezra Pound’s conclusions, that wars are caused by these Banker manipulations, still stands.

We also discuss the main monetary reform proposals out there and the need to improve on them.

Talking with Robert Stark on the Basic Income

Robert Stark

Robert Stark

This interview happened a few months ago (sorry for the delay Robert), but its relevance is ongoing.

In Greece Syriza has already shown itself to be what the initiated had long seen: a harmless (for the Bankers, anyway) Marxist outfit. In their program there is nothing about real monetary reform, or doing anything substantial about the Banks or Usury.

After some mutual huffing and puffing from Berlin and Athens, both parties have agreed to bury the hatchet for four months. Interestingly, at that stage the development part of the BRICS Bank will come on-line.

Will Greece dump the EU and walk over to Globalism Sino-Russian style? Putin has been proposing his Eurasian economic sphere and is building extensive internationalist organizations. Both in the former Soviet sphere and with the Chinese. The Russians have already indicated that they are ready to bail out the Greeks.

Furthermore, Syriza seems to be making serious moves towards some sort of Basic Income scheme. Interestingly, the EU seems to be all for it.

And this is where this interview becomes relevant, because this is the Marxist style of course, is it not? Just plunder the middle classes to ‘save the poor’ and thus work around the problems of Capitalism, instead of solving them.

Which could be achieved by paying off the National Debt to the Banks with some freshly printed interest-free credit, provided by a newly opened State controlled credit facility. Let alone allowing normal Greeks to refinance their mortgages and business loans too.

Redefining God

Ken, the man behind RedefiningGod.com

Ken, the man behind RedefiningGod.com

Thankfully, the infatuation with Putin in the Truth Movement seems to be subsiding somewhat. The more level headed are speaking up and there are too many questions.

Truth be told: Russia, notwithstanding the fall of the Soviet Union, has been preparing for war for decades. Putin used his oil wealth to revamp his military and the question is how ‘abandoned’ these massive underground facilities under Yamantau (the Urals) really are.

BRICS, including its bank, is just intended as a dialectical counterpart for Western Globalism.

For those looking for some much needed, effective deprogramming concerning the BRICS saviours, we can recommend Redefining God. Ken is very much on top of it.

He’s also got a very effective analysis of the Annunaki narrative.

Youtube is full of videos where people have used photoshop etc. to undo NASA editing of the materials they are disclosing to the public. Obviously, this indicates that NASA is disclosing these secrets purposefully and the question is why and how they will spin it.

The wider picture
There is a huge disconnect between the level of awareness of people on the Web and the atrocious propaganda that parades as ‘science’ and ‘news’ in the Mainstream.

But in terms of political movements, it’s hard to point at anything substantial. All political parties globally are operating within the paradigms that the Matrix provides. Whether it’s Nationalism or Marxism.

Nobody is calling for anything serious and even within the monetary reform scene there are really very few who will speak up against the Banks as the monolithic central power globally. And who will discuss serious solutions in terms of fundamental monetary reform, which by their nature are both radical and simple.

So for the time being we can conclude that, while awareness is growing, the Money Power is still very much in control.

Because the chaos that is mounting has been created over many years and while the exasperated masses are waking up to the need for change, they are still clueless about what change they exactly need.

And as usual the Bankers have their ‘solutions’ ready instead.

Related:
The Plane Truth: Usury And The Rise Of The Bankster Dictatorship
The Basic Income
The BRICS Bank: Next Stop On The Road To World Currency

 

 

Occupy Wall Street and Marie Antoinette

Mrs. Baars

(Left/Above: Mrs. Baars waving to the peasants)

In an iconic 2011 moment, Occupy protesters met Wall Street bankers enjoying themselves with drinks. A veritable Marie Antoinette greeted them by toasting with her champagne. The divide between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ could not have been clearer.

By Anthony Migchels for Henry Makow and Real Currencies

Here’s the famous clip.

A source close to the Baars family, E.A., 21 years old, has come forward. Living and very much enjoying ‘the lifestyle’ herself, she is also worried about the blowback against the banker decadence.

Here’s her story.

The Baars Family
It turns out that the lady in pink is Mrs. Baars, wife of Goldman Sachs managing director Willem Baars, who hails from Holland. He has been making a career for himself with the infamous vampire squid that is at the core of Wall Street’s pirate nest. Managing Directors are the second management layer at Goldman Sachs. Only the partners, of whom there are only a few dozen, are higher up the ladder. Partners are allowed to use their own private funds in the Bank’s insider trading rackets, guaranteeing enormous private wealth for the few who make it.

Still, a modest ‘managing director’ can look forward to a $500k base salary. Bonuses for Mr. Baars typically amount to about $8 million per year. Additionally, there is an options package worth about $30 million.

God only knows what Mr. Baars must do for that kind of money. He maintains all his actions are legal. Which is not completely unbelievable, since Goldman Sachs employees in Congress write the laws.

He seems to be involved in mergers and the like. Typically, the insider knowledge that consulting about these matters brings is exploited by the traders of the bank in the markets.

How they see the protests
To Mrs. Baars, the protestors are just ‘peasants’. Losers, jealous of the riches of the bankers. The bankers really feel like ‘Masters of the Universe’. They see themselves as ‘the new Aristocracy’. To them, what they do is all ‘legal’ and thus justified. They deny any wrongdoing, or that their riches come at the expense of others. The protestors are basically just whining scumbags, in their view.

In the aftermath of the meeting in Wall Street on that day in November 2011, hundreds of protestors went to the Baars residence in New York and spent hours at the gates there. One of the Baars cars, a Bentley, was thrashed.

The thrashed Baars Bentley

The thrashed Baars Bentley

This was certainly a tense moment, but to the Baars family this just shows what losers the protestors are.

The Lifestyle
It’s all about ‘the Lifestyle’. The Baars family owns 15 luxury cars. Several mansions in America and Europe. A $20 million, 46 meter yacht in St. Tropez.

Says E.A.: “Wall Street and the City are driven by money, status, luxury, trophy wives and more money.” She continues: “just walk into any Mayfair club and you’ll see models and bottles.”

While Mr. Baars makes enormous profits for Goldman, Mrs. Baars’ job, as a banker wife, is to look good and let the money flow. Shopping is the lady’s main pass time. Trips to Milan with her girlfriends to buy shoes a routine matter.

For the kids, there are endless parties. Spraying expensive champagne is a routine device. The fun is in knowing that the peasants would have to work for months for what they blow away in just seconds.

Spraying $1000 dollar per bottle champagne, necessary for any good party.

Spraying $1000 dollar per bottle champagne, necessary for any good party.

Luxury, looking good, asset positions, new stuff. Glimmer and glamor make life nice. Are what gives status in the social scene.

Within the Baars family, there is a strong sense that the money must keep coming in to keep up. Addiction to money comes with fear of loss.

Conclusion
They’re children with their hands in the cookie jar. Mrs. Baars is just an uppity blonde who likes to shop for shoes. Avarice and narcissist ambition unchecked.

And it’s end of life. Soon, the American economy will face the crunch of an era. The banking families that employ naive upstarts like the Baars family, are ready to ditch the vehicles, including Goldman Sachs, that have allowed them to usurp all the wealth of the nation and indeed the entire West. Their executives, no longer useful, will be thrown to the wolves. The angry masses will gladly devour them when the time comes.

The ‘solution’ to the problems they have been creating has long been prepared.

And our source? She loves both the people with whom she grew up and ‘the lifestyle’, but she is haunted by the venom of the disenfranchised. She faces a choice.

But: it’s a choice that, in different guises, we all face at some point in life and it’s the same choice that humanity as a whole will finally have to face up to too.

Related:
Ten Atrocities That Would Not Exist Without Usury

'The New Aristocracy'

‘The New Aristocracy’

The 40 meter, $21 million dollar yacht in St. Tropez.

The 40 meter, $21 million dollar yacht in St. Tropez.

What is it with girls and shoes?

What is it with girls and shoes?

One of the Baars residences

One of the Baars residences

Banker Babes doing what they do best: shopping

Banker Babes doing what they do best: shopping

 

Merry Christmas and a Happy 2015!!

merry christmas

Dear friends,

I hope you have a blessed Christmas with your loved ones and many blessings for the coming year.

For me personally, 2015 will undoubtedly prove very exciting, with the Talent going national in Holland very soon now.

Internationally, I think we’re all waiting for the next phase in the controlled demolition of the American Empire and the West. It does seem that the Money Power is moving on to Asia. The collectivist mindset of the Chinese is closer to our masters’ attitudes and ambitions. While the West was indispensable for conquering the globe for them, now that it has, it has become a liability.

Mass immigration, feminism (destroying the family) and the ongoing rapid destruction of living standards all throughout the West are making life more and more difficult and many people are becoming desperate with the tyrannical nature of ‘democracy’ and its petty laws, fines, and victimless ‘crime’. We will see growing numbers of people leaving the West in the years ahead.

And let us hope it will be just that. The idea of war between the US and Russia (which will quickly involve the Chinese too) is simply unspeakable and it would be just so devastating if the foolish peoples of these Nations would allow their heinous ‘elites’ to pull this one off. It seems hard to believe ‘they’ could, but there can be little doubt they wouldn’t mind some more slaughter.

Wars and rumors of wars……..it must all come to pass. They are worldly affairs and we must not allow fear or anger to overtake us when considering these matters.

The Spirit is in complete control and all is well. This fundamental truth we must keep hammering home to our dying egos, who thrive on negative emotions, however justified they may seem from a worldly perspective.

Our task is to ‘crucify self’ (ego death), and executing the simple tasks the Spirit wants us to do each day. And leave the rest to Him, difficult as it may be. We are, after all, just very unsubstantial dots in a vast universe.

Christmas
Christmas celebrations are under attack all over the West. Multiculturalism is being used to mind control Jews, Muslims and other immigrants into claiming they are ‘insulted’ by this ‘non-inclusive’ celebration.

All bollocks of course. Immigrants have a duty to integrate and show respect for the traditions of the host nation. Mass immigration in the US in the 19th century was a success because immigrants were expected to learn the law and language of the land and partake in the norms of the nation. Jews, of course, never have been known for their integrative skills and are often behind the Marxist pressures against Christmas.

The attack is multi layered. On one level it’s an assault on Western Tradition, on the other against Christ himself. Because ultimately the whole war is against Christ.

Jesus Christ is not the man that was born 2000 years ago. It’s the Spirit that came into the flesh in the man. The Word, that created everything. The Son. He spoke through Jesus of Nazareth.

Creation is pervaded by, and springs from what physicists like Tesla call ‘the ether’. This ether is self aware and a person. It animates all beings. He lives in us all, whether we realize it or not. He is all knowing, all powerful. It is this being that spoke to us through the man whose birth we celebrate today.

A human being consists of a number of ‘aggregates’, as Gautama called them: the body, the senses, the emotional body, the mental body and volition. Our identification with these aspects is what we call ‘ego’.

Spirit is immaterial and precedes matter. We can learn to observe Him by realizing that he is what remains after excluding everything we can observe via the other ‘aggregates’. He is not what we see, not what we hear, not what we think, not what we feel. What we ‘see’ beyond these materialist experiences, is what the Buddhists call ’emptiness’, and Jesus the ‘the Holy Place’. It is here that we are ‘in the shadow of the Almighty’.

Learning to break our identification with the material aspects of our being and identifying with ’emptiness’ instead, is what the Spirit during his stint on earth called ‘dying to self to be reborn in the Spirit’. Obviously, few ‘born again Christians’ have died to self or would know what Spirit is. Likewise: a true Taoist would know very well what this is all about.

True believers, then, are not recognized by their knowledge of scripture. ‘One knows a tree by its fruit’ and the Spirit knows his own and True Israel, since the new covenant, is among all the races. It is they who have ‘crucified self’ and do the Spirit’s will. Because only those that do the Spirit’s will, as they have learned it in communion, can say they believe.

It is not for everyone. Even today most people don’t realize they need saving, so why would they look for the Savior living in their hearts, anxious to befriend them?

But if you do realize that you need saving, than study these matters. Go to the Spirit, as he so emphatically requests through Jesus of Nazareth: ‘come to me and I will give you peace’, he promises. And he delivers too.

And it is this awareness that is the real enemy of the New World Order. People dying to self and doing the infallible will of the Creator is what they fear, for obvious reasons. Clearly the Banker’s power quickly starts looking a whole lot less impressive, once you realize that the Spirit can work through selfless people.

And let us not forget that they were already beaten, back then. What we are facing today are basically just mop up operations after the enemy’s back has already been broken.

And this is the real reason why Christmas is under attack.

So don’t worry about Christmas being in fact a ‘pagan’ celebration of the winter solstice. Some of the pagans were infinitely closer to the Spirit than the ‘christians’ who destroyed them in the name of that spiritual tyranny known as the Vatican.

All our traditions are suspect in many ways and most obviously the world is at war with the Spirit and we should not take it all too seriously. But we should also not become unwitting stooges of the adversary, trying to alienate us even further from our traditions and way of  life, sinful as they may be in many ways.

So with this in mind, enjoy Christmas and this chance to rest, to be with those closest to us, who love us and bear with our many faults, just as we struggle to bear with theirs.

May the Spirit be with you and all of us in these troubled times. Soon, real soon, love will again govern all our relations.

your brother in Christ,
Anthony

Two Brilliant Films: ‘Renaissance 2.0 – Financial Empire’ & ‘Princes Of The Yen’

Richard Werner

(Left/Above: Richard Werner, whose thinking is behind ‘Princes of the Yen’.)

Two films expose in no uncertain terms the core issue of our time: how the financial system has come to dominate the globe by centralizing wealth and power through Usury, the manipulation of the volume of money, and centralized control of credit allocation.

This is the core of the conspiracy industry: that history is not so much a matter of competing nation states, but that a shadowy elite rules the world from behind the scenes, and that the core of their power is through control of money.

There has been, and there will continue to be, an endless debate about who is ultimately behind it all. Some clarity is slowly emerging there too, not in the least because of the light that has been shed on the long term history of the human species, including the advanced old civilizations that once dominated the planet. And of course the profound spiritual implications of these matters.

But surely by now it should be clear that “The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.”

We are indeed slaves and the Matrix owns us, lock, stock and barrel.

Understanding how it all came about is impossible without a basic grasp of how their control of money governs our lives.

And these two films, ‘Renaissance 2.0 – Financial Empire’ and ‘Princes of the Yen, Central Banks and the Transformation of the Economy’ paint a crystal clear picture of the main issues.

The first focusses on the effects of Usury, the second on how Central Banks create booms and busts through the manipulation of volume. It also explains in simple and direct terms what power there is in credit allocation.

These are the three main issues with money as we have identified them and both films strongly reinforce the message. They certainly widened my horizons.

Renaissance 2.0 – Financial Empire

This film was created by Damon Vrabel. Here is an interesting article by him on Usury. His basic take is very sound, focussing on its exponential nature:

“The exponential math not only creates exponential debt growth, but also exponentially increasing:

  • Scale – government and businesses keep getting bigger; we get smaller and local communities lose their meaning
  • Velocity – the hamster wheel keeps spinning faster; human life suffers
  • Consumption – we buy more and more things that break more quickly
  • Production – we make more and more things that break more quickly
  • Inflation – the dollar buys less and less; we can’t seem to make progress

None of these things have to happen in an economic system. They only happen in ours because of debt-based money, usury, that greatly benefits the top of the pyramid while everyone else suffers to a certain degree depending on their level in the pyramid.

So this system is guaranteed to fail due to not only the impossible math, but also the fundamental immorality. Taken together those five issues paint a horrible picture.”

The film is basically a presentation he put together. It’s well done, with clear cut visuals that center around the pyramid of power, similar to this one:

Usury's Pyramid

Usury’s Pyramid

It greatly helps to keep this picture in mind always. It’s simply the nature of power and it’s behind all their schemes, from Libertarianism to Marxism.

Vrabel points at the two tier society that is automatic with Usury. He discusses many interesting dynamics of the monetary system, pointing at the different implications for those in their respective layers of the pyramid. For instance how cost for capital rises when you go lower into the pyramid.

Another great feature is his critique of ‘modern economics’. He makes a solid case, showing once more how ridiculous it all really is. It’s very important. We must rid ourselves of the heinous nonsense that they pay their academics to produce. It’s all rubbish, existing only to explain why we must be in bondage.

Princes of the Yen, Central Banks and the Transformation of the Economy

The film begins by saying: ‘This is a film about the power of Central Banks. Central Banks have the power to create economic, political and social change. This is how they do it’.

And that’s exactly what the film shows. It’s based on a book by Professor Richard Werner, who is well known for his work on credit creation and management of the volume of money. He worked in Japan for years and knows the monetary situation there from the inside.

The film discusses Japan’s economic development since the war. First its rise to world prominence, then the despicable, purposefully engineered boom of the late eighties, and the even much worse and equally well planned 1989 and beyond bust.

Its analysis is very clear cut: the post war rise was a result of strongly centralized financial management by BoJ, which basically ordered the banks to lend so and so much to this and that sector in the economy. Japan was actually operating a war economy in those years, but directed at production and consumption, instead of destruction.

BoJ’s technocrats ruled like emperors, completely controlling the economy by exact management of who would be financed and who not. They created the second biggest economy in the world from scratch in only a few decades.

Undoubtedly this was part of the Money Power’s larger designs. However, in the film the focus is completely on solid information that can be well gleaned from what is visible in the public domain.

Werner shows how BoJ’s officials then changed tack and wanted to force on Japan a change to a ‘free market’ and consumerist economy with associated growing gap between the rich and the rest. It wanted to break the classical control structure of Cartels and Government (especially the Ministry of Finance) power. They called this ‘the need for structural reform’ in typical banker fashion.

To foist this on an unwitting public, they first created a huge boom with insane credit expansion, ordering the banks to expand credit at 15% per year. This led to maniacal real estate speculation, where at its peak the small island of Japan was worth four times more than the entire United States. Then the bubble was popped suddenly and prices contracted up to 90%.

Japan never recovered, mainly because BoJ has sabotaged every attempt that the Government made to reflate the economy. This was simply done by taking out of circulation whatever extra money was pumped into the economy by the State.

The film makes abundantly clear, in neutral and understandable terms, that the whole boom and bust thing was and is purely driven by inflating and deflating the money supply. The case is undefeatable and it’s so vital to understand. The volume of money is what drives booms and busts. Nothing else. It’s all pure banker manipulation.

The volume of money must be managed, it’s unavoidable, the idea of a ‘free market’ doing it is irrelevant. The only question is how the volume is going to be managed: by megalomaniac fools running amuck, unseen by a brainwashed public, or in the service of the public with sufficient people understanding what is going on. It’s not brain surgery, all that’s needed is some basic education concerning the facts.

The film then continues to explore the implications of such blatant banker control and manipulation in the cases of the Asian Crisis in the late nineties and the current Euro Crisis. There too, the situation could well be (or have been) resolved by sound policy, but it was and is simply sabotaged because nobody understands monetary policy and bankers have their own plans.

Werner focuses on Central Banks and paints the banks themselves as the flock following the piper. But of course the Banking System is One and the major commercial banks are well on board with these machinations. But let this minor issue not distract from the film’s achievements. This is a hard hitting exposure.

Conclusion
Watched together, these films show how the monetary system completely controls the economy and by extension everything else too.

‘Financial Empire’ focuses on Usury, ‘Princes of the Yen’ on the volume of money, and credit creation and allocation. Together, they paint a comprehensive picture of what is really going on on a monetary and economic level and its implications for the human condition.

Devising and implementing strategies to stop this Behemoth is actually what should be keeping everybody awake at night. A reasonable deal for everyone is well within our reach. Both films help us keeping our eye on the ball.

Also highly recommended for the uninitiated, as they are both very accessible.

Ideal for the quiet days between Christmas and the New Year.

Related:
How Usury Encloses The Commons
Banking Is Institutionalized Murder!
Capitalism Is Jewish Usury
Rationalizing Usury: the Time Value Hoax
Derivatives, Or: How The Money Power Created The Greatest Depression
The Goal of Monetary Reform
Understand that the Banking System is One
The Silly Pseudo Science that is ‘Modern Economics’

More On The Talent

Gelre

Very soon now, we’ll start crowdfunding for the national implementation of the Talent in the Netherlands, called the ‘Florijn’.

We will very much need every cent we can get to get things going so we can build a truly flourishing network, with many thousands of businesses and consumers.

It’ll be an opportunity for all to actually DO something about this most pressing of issues………….

Here’s some more input on the Talent’s specifications.

Money Creation:
Hybrid: some units created as debt free units, and sold for Euro. The euros are put in a ‘stabilization fund’ which can be used to buy up units on the exchange if there is excess supply/insufficient demand.

But most of the units will be created simply as mutual credit: double entry bookkeeping.

Business Model:
No transaction costs! Transaction costs discourage transactions. The last thing we want.

Businesses pay (typically) 10,- per month in the Talent based unit. Because of the convertibility that the Talent allows, the issuing organization can accept payment in Talent too, which obviously enhances both ‘liquidity’ in the network and the credibility of the unit.

Of course these costs are very, very low and it does mean that the unit needs a fair few businesses to be self-sustaining.

Software:
We use Cyclos software. A high end on-line banking system, created by STRO, a Dutch think tank in Utrecht. It’s a brilliant tool, allowing comprehensive and subtle configuration.

The on-line exchange, that allows convertibility, is our own software, as Cyclos does not support such functionality.

Modes of payment:
On-line telebanking, pay per phone (SMS). Paper money is optional.

Demurrage:
Configured at 0%, but depending on the circulation of the unit in practice, the Talent is ready for it.

Convertible:
Yes.

Interest-free credit:
Yes.

Abundant money:
Yes.

Secure against manipulation:
Full control within the network for the system’s management. Management can guard against speculation, rent-seeking activities, hoarding (with the purpose of sabotage and manipulation of volume) etc.
True: centralized management brings responsibility and risks of its own, but Bitcoin shows that non-centralized, user based control sees quick cornering of the money market.

And below a presentation, juxtaposing the Talent vs. the main architectures currently available.

The Basic Income

Basic Income1

The call for a Basic Income is both old and mounting. Success of the scheme is dependent on funding. If it’s some sort of National Dividend, sharing the bounty of the Commons, it’s necessary. If it’s a Marxist tax based redistribution scheme, it’s worse than the disease it’s supposed to heal.

A Basic Income, in whatever form, is very much on the agenda at the moment. And it’s eminently transparent why: growing desperation for economic justice in the face of the blatant centralization of wealth in ever fewer hands. Through Usury, badly exacerbated by the crunch, which saw huge increase of wealth for the 0,001%, while the rest continues to suffer badly.

The idea is very simple: give every adult a guaranteed monthly income. On average proposals foresee an income of about EUR 1000 ($1300) per month, which comes down to about $15600 per year.

No means test, no requirements, for every citizen.

$15600 sounds like a big sum, but a Canadian study showed that the State at this point pays $7800 per head of the population in welfare, which is already half of what is required. Part of the Basic Income scheme is that it would replace all current welfare, including the bloated, humiliating, expensive and ridiculous bureaucracy that welfare has spawned.

The Basic Income would alleviate the worst excesses of wage slavery. In this day and age ‘finding a job’ is considered a success, but it’s not long ago that the common man scoffed at the idea of working for a boss. Men that did were frowned upon, suspected imbeciles. This was still the case in much of the US of the 19th century, for instance. It was certainly the norm in Antiquity and much of the medieval era.

Furthermore, with the now quickly escalating robotization, it’s becoming more and more difficult every day to conjure up more and more ‘bullshit jobs‘ to keep the illusion of ‘inclusiveness’ and ‘the American Dream’ and ‘the work ethos’ going. There is simply no way that we will have enough ‘jobs’ (as we know them today) in the decades ahead to have all able bodied men (let alone women, who are taking over the labor market anyway) work for 40 hours a week. Already many 40 hour jobs are sufficient for the survival of only one person.

Earlier this year, an initiative in Switzerland was launched, aiming at a referendum giving the Swiss a ‘guaranteed income’ (not exactly the same, but much in the same direction) of SF 2500,- ($2800) per month. A substantial amount in the world’s most affluent country. And while it’s unclear whether a referendum will take place, it was an important development.

The idea is at the moment widely discussed and promoted by many think tanks around the world, both on a national and global level.

The Good and the Bad Basic Income
Whether the Basic Income is positive or not is really all up to the way it’s financed.

If it’s to be done by ‘taxing the rich’, Marxist newspeak for gutting the Middle Class with income tax, it’s bad. ‘Tax the rich’ in reality should mean a progressive tax on wealth, including the wealth stored in special purpose vehicles like trust funds etc. This is most certainly not part of the plan.

But the good version, which is definitely necessary, is paying out to the people the proceeds of the exploitation of the Commons

For instance, a Georgist Land Value Tax all paid out to the commoners in equal shares. This hits two birds with one stone: we’ll have Land Reform and the basic downside of the LVT (empowerment of the State through extra taxation) is solved, because the proceeds are handed back to the people.

Such a tax would also aim at the proceeds of natural resources associated to the land, which are also part of the Commons. Enough of Transnationals bribing politicians to get their hands at resources and then ripping off everybody ‘ad perpetuum’! Just look at what they’re doing to Oil. We can do without all that kind of mayhem.

This is close to the idea of a National Dividend, as also promoted by Milton Friedman. Social Credit, printing money and giving it to the people to spend it into circulation, also has the practical effect of a ‘Basic Income’.

On principal, all profits acquired by exploiting the Commons, including Land, should be returned to its owners, the People. If people want to call that a Basic Income, that’s grand.

Is the Basic Income any good?
Some sort of National Dividend, provided by the wealth of the Commons is necessary, but financing of the scheme is not at the heart of the discussion and many Marxist/Globalist outfits are promoting the Basic Income. There is little doubt the Basic Income can easily be coopted by the Money Power to nuke the Middle Class with it. If a Basic Income comes with extra taxation for the Middle Class, it should be rejected.

While every individual has a right to his share in the Commons, he does not to the fruits of others’ labor.

The Welfare State is a key Marxist goal. It comes with redistribution, centralization of power in the State and dependence. The idea that a man should be dependent on the State for income is clearly against Nature. The idea that another man should pay for it is even much worse.

Furthermore, ‘the State giveth and it taketh away.’ There is only one State guarantee that has stood the test of time: that you will be taxed.

In fact: there can be no Justice with 'equality'. Some take a bigger place in life than others. The old precede the young and merit is what counts among men. With 'equality' the weak are empowered at the cost of the strong. With Justice, the strong take their responsibilities towards the weak and receive higher status in return.

In fact: there can be no Justice with ‘equality’. Some take a bigger place in life than others. The old precede the young and merit is what counts among men. With ‘equality’ the weak are empowered at the cost of the strong. With Justice, the strong take their responsibilities towards the weak and receive higher status in return.

It must be also understood that there is no ‘right’ to sustenance. So there is no ‘right’ to a handout, if someone else is sweating for it.

We have a clear mutual interest in making survival as easy as possible. We have a sense of Charity, wanting the best for all. The wealth of the Commons must be shared. But these are quite different issues.

In reality, Humanity is slowly erecting itself from the mud and this is associated with struggle, not with ‘rights’ as such. It’s not for nothing that the Bible rightly states that ‘he that does not work shall not eat’.

The Basic Income is very much about ‘equality’ also: everybody the same income. ‘Equality’ is contrary to Nature and Justice and very Marxist. Especially if it proactively hurts the Middle Class.

The Basic Income based on taxation does nothing at all against the ongoing plundering of everything and everybody through Usury and the wider monetary system. It does nothing against Plutocracy. A National Dividend through for instance the LVT would, however.

The main thing is, people are clueless about the kind of abundance we would create in an interest-free economy. We should think in terms of five times the current standard of living combined with a fifteen week working year. Combined with a Cultural and Architectural revolution that would be implicit in such a scenario.

Compared to this, the Basic Income just looks like a bone thrown to us by our betters.

There is also the issue, that all wealth is created through hard work. Every man should share in that. The fact that robotization is now replacing many jobs does not at all change that. The problem is not robots, the problem is that they are in the hands of the usual suspects, who get all the added value they produce.

Not only that, while it’s wonderful that much boring, dangerous and dirty work is being automated, this does not at all mean that there will be no work in the future: people by their nature are a creative force and creation is work. We will simply turn to different, more enjoyable and challenging fields of work. There will never be a shortage of work! Much remains to be built and undertaken.

That is: if we have a just monetary system that allows the commoner access to his fair share in society’s credit. Otherwise he will never be able to gain real independence from Plutocracy.

It is for these reasons that the Basic Income is widely promoted by all sorts of shady ‘Green’ and other leftist/Marxist outlets. These are typically funded by Globalist institutions like the UN, Governments and leftist ‘social justice’ funds.

The Marxist Globalist Super States that are now slowly manifesting everywhere in the world have little to fear from current Basic Income schemes.

Conclusion
The Basic Income in the form of a National Dividend based on the commonly held wealth of the Nation is definitely a very serious proposition. It would go a long way in the liberation of the Commons, although the need for interest-free credit would remain pressing.

Obviously, this is not likely the way it’ll pan out. The focus is too much on wealth redistribution and too little on the how and that’s why the scheme is easily coopted by the Bankers.

Too much on a ‘right’ to sustenance, instead of the right not to be slaves.

Currently, it mainly deflects from the core issue: the right not to be robbed from the fruits of our efforts. We lose up to 90% of our income to Usury, taxation, rents and high prices through Monopoly and associated artificial scarcity.

Ending that would see a hard to imagine and sustainable spike in living standards for all but the very richest.

From a Marxist point of view, the Basic Income is clearly designed to obscure this and replace this fundamental right not to be robbed with a handout by the State. It will definitely also reinforce the ‘useless eaters’ meme as many people, disenfranchised and without funds, will do very little to add value to the Commonwealth.

As it stands now, we should be very wary that the Basic Income is not going to be used by the Powers that Be to further gut the Middle Class by taxing them for this purpose.

Related:
How Usury Encloses The Commons
Socialism is not the Answer to Capitalism
Social Credit

 

An Interview With Red Ice Creations!

Anthony Migchels on Red Ice Radio

I was elated to be invited by Henrik Palmgren from Red Ice Creations for an extensive interview.

Unfortunately I don’t know how to embed a Flashplayer in WordPress, here’s the link to the show.

Here’s the intro as published on Red Ice Creations’ website:
Anthony Migchels – Hour 1 – Usury: The Problem with the Economic System & Alternative Currencies
November 28, 2014
Anthony Migchels is an Interest-Free Currency activist and founder of the Gelre, the first Regional Currency in the Netherlands. He joins us to talk about the very central problems of economics today, usury or interest, alternative currencies and more. We begin by discussing the problems with our global usury economy, which results in the rich owning the majority of the wealth – a scheme that will inevitably lead to an economic collapse. Anthony explains how the money powers that be have plans spanning centuries and this predatory system, disguised as a free market strategy, is backed by the extremes of Libertarianism and Marxism, philosophies that contradict the very nature of mankind. We’ll also take a look at how the workforce produces the majority of the wealth for the rich, yet their wages, food and basic commodities are taxed, resulting in total slavery to the state. Then, Anthony talks about the monetary reform movement, which is concerned with the creation of money out of nothing, as opposed to the problem of usury. In the second hour, we discuss the shift of power and the crunch to destroy the west that occurred when the U.S. exported its entire manufacturing base to China. We’ll also talk about capitalism, mass immigration, feminism and the destruction of the nuclear family, and the degradation of the brotherhood of men. Then, we’ll consider the implications of revisionist history concerning WWII and the Jewish banking system’s involvement. Anthony then discusses the Euro-crisis and the inevitable crash of the global economy. We’ll wrap up with some reflections on possibilities of a mass awakening and the improvement of living standards.

Introducing The Talent

Gelre

(Left/Above: the logo of the Gelre, the first unit based on the Talent. Soon we will launch a national unit for the Netherlands)

Alternative currencies are a crucial component in addressing our monetary problems. However, the monetary architectures that are currently available are wholly insufficient to provide serious relief for Main Street. The Talent is the first independent currency model that provides all functions that modern currencies need to truly compete within the Dollar/Euro paradigm. Not only that: it is now available for immediate implementation at ultra low cost.

Interest slavery and the ongoing gutting of the West through the credit crunch continue to erode living standards everywhere. Small and Medium business is suffocating for lack of credit and demand in the economy, while Big Business is reporting record profits and claiming larger and larger shares of the market.

High class units, operated professionally by people who know what they are doing, have every opportunity to provide small and medium business with both the liquidity they need to operate and new customers. Alternative currencies are not only a great customer loyalty program, as people can spend the units only with the businesses who accept them, they also have the potential to seriously alleviate the liquidity problems of the business’s customers.

In hard times, alternative currencies tend to boom. During the Great Depression literally hundreds of them were operated in the United States. In Spain and Greece, hit hard by the Euro Crisis, have seen dozens of units spring up. Argentina has been surviving because of them since its 1998/2002 collapse.

Most famous is the Swiss WIR, which has been turning over billions since its inception in 1934. It’s famed for its stabilizing effect during recessions, when capital scarcity makes it more worth while for business to deal with its limitations.

Limitations of Alternative Currencies
However, the Alternative Currency market remains handicapped by major problems. Amateurism and lacking monetary architects of the units being the main ones. The currencies that manage to thrive are typically run by energetic people. The WIR shows how far even very primitive currencies can go if run by a professional organization.

This shows both in the superficial analysis of both the real nitty gritty of the monetary problems that we face and the political context. The field is dominated by idealists. Over the last few years a marked improvement in terms of political awareness is definitely palpable: say five years ago most in the alternative currency business were oblivious to that bankers behind it all, for instance. Nowadays this is no longer the case, everybody is used to ‘conspiracy’. But this creates a new problem: the disconnect between the awareness on the web and the stone age conversation that is still the norm in the mainstream.

At the moment the discussion about the monetary architectures that are available is mounting and that is indeed very important, but still much remains to be desired.

Entrepreneurial ambition is really key to make it all work, but this must be combined with level headed appreciation of the monetary and this combination has shown to be very elusive indeed.

The Key Challenge for Modern Currencies
There are two major architectures that hold sway: Euro/Dollar backed units and Mutual Credit based units. Most units work with the basic agreement that 1 Unit = 1 Euro/Dollar, meaning they use the Euro or Dollar as unit of account.

The Euro/Dollar backed units, for instance the American Berkshares, the German Chiemgauer or the British Brixton Pound, are created by selling units: A Berkshare is sold for $1. The Dollar is held by the issuing organization, the Berkshare is spent into circulation at a local business. The local business can spend the unit with a colleague or pay an employee. If at some point a business acquires more Berkshares than it can spend in the network, they can reclaim a Dollar for every unit with the issuing organization.

The great boon of this system is that it allows convertibility of the unit. However, the great downside is that there can never be more Berkshares in circulation than the issuer has Dollars at hand. This means that there can be no interest-free credit. Money scarcity remains a real issue, as the money supply is dependent on scarce Dollar.

Mutual Credit based systems create money as credit: participants, businesses in particular, can just get a credit line in the unit and start spending. The minute they do, new money comes into circulation. When a debtor repays, money is taken out of circulation.

The great upside of this system is that there is no money scarcity: people will typically experience an abundance of money and a shortage of places where they could spend the units. The exact opposite of the Dollar/Euro situation, where most have less money than they would need to invest. There is interest-free credit.

But this comes with a price: there is no Dollar/Euro in the bank to back the unit or to convert. And this is a real problem, because there will always be businesses, usually the more succesful ones, providing popular goods or services, who obtain too many of the units, more than they can usefully spend in the network and they will have to limit there intake, creating serious bottlenecks in trade.

The Talent
The Talent answers these challenges by providing the first fully convertible Mutual Credit based unit in the world. By providing an online exchange where people can buy and sell the unit. See here for a full breakdown of the system.

The Talent is a complete set of software and best practices, that is now available to everyone who wants to start his own currency. It can be implemented at very low cost and provides the start up with everything he needs to operate a truly comprehensive currency backed with high class methodology, incorporating the lessons learned with 80 years of experience with these units worldwide.

Implementation of the Talent comes with full consultancy for the starting initiative by the system’s developer, the writer of these lines.

The Talent’s proposition is particularly ideal for entrepreneurial people who know what is at stake, who see the clear business opportunity that creating high class, professionally run units provide for both participants and the initiator himself.

By implementing the Talent, the entrepreneur can focus on building the network and the organization necessary to run it, resting assured he’s offering his participants the best complementary currency currently available anywhere.

The Talent is the first unit in the world that provides everything we expect from money:
– It is sufficiently available (‘abundant money’)
– It provides interest-free credit
– It is convertible to Euro/Dollar
– Allows payment on-line and by mobile phone
– Connects both businesses and consumers and potentially (local Government)
– Implementation comes with full consultancy.

All in all the Talent is the first architecture that truly allows head on competition with Dollar or Euro in the marketplace.

The Time is NOW
Years of research and development have been invested in the Talent. It answers all the major issues facing those in the field today. The first unit based on the Talent is the Gelre, which is in pilot phase and for which we are currently raising funds for wider marketing. Soon a national variant for the Netherlands will be launched.

Implementation is seriously considered in the United States, Britain and Ireland.

Funding remains a huge issue. It’s sad: not so much money is required, but while there are Trillions available for saving banks, it’s very hard to get even a few thousand to save us from the banks.

However, we will soon launch a major crowd funding initiative, where you will have a hands on chance to make a difference in the struggle against the Banks and their Usury and deflation and for normal people looking for a reasonable deal!

Concepts of the Gelre, or: What is ‘High Powered Working Capital’?
Mutual Credit for the 21st century: Convertibility

How Usury Encloses The Commons

Martin Conway

(Left/Above: the Trillions that they rake in in Usury every year allow the Bankers to hire endless numbers of fools in pretty suits to explain it’s all for the greater good and they have their media parade these people before an ever more desensitized public. This particular specimen, Fine Gael Senator Martin Conway, while trying to sell water meters to the Irish, managed to say on television ‘water does not just fall out of the sky, you know’.)

The Enclosure of the Commons is an ongoing process, in which the peoples of the World are disowned from their natural heritage. Paying for their own land, their own water and soon their own sunlight and air. It’s an integral part of our complete enslavement.

Usury has, throughout the ages, driven this disownment of the commoner.

Complete liberation of the Commons is a key goal in the struggle for real economic freedom. Commoners have a right to access to their fair share of the Commons at cost price.

The Commons are “the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of a society, including natural materials such as air, water, and a habitable earth.”

The difference between the Commons and Capital is that Capital goods were created by men, the Commons were created by God.

Capital should be owned by its creator or by those who have purchased it. The Commons are part of our common heritage and every human being has by natural law rights to his fair share in them.

Capital goods that were created in the common interest, with public means, must also be considered part of the Commons. For instance a public railway system.

The commoner is anybody with rights to the Commons.

The historical context
Throughout history, there is an ongoing battle between the rich and the many for control of the Commons. It’s a key part of our economic history.

Currently, we are in the endgame of this process: the people have been basically completely disowned already and after the coming collapse, the ultra wealthy and the State will consolidate what up till now remained in the hands of the middle class.

The same process brought the 1000 year old Roman Empire down: when it collapsed, all land and most other assets had been centralized in the hands of a very few through Usury and this unsustainable situation was ultimately the reason why it was brought down.

In Medieval Europe, the Landed Aristocracy and the Vatican owned the Land and the commoner lost about 10 to 20% of his production in rents and taxes to his ‘Lords’. Unskilled Labor worked about 15 weeks a year to feed a family. A Craftsman could afford to work even less.

There is no reason to idealize the situation. Life was brutal in many ways and the distinction between the Aristocracy and the common man was enormous. Serfdom is hardly what we are looking for. The spiritual tyranny of the Vatican came with many outrages.

Still, there can be no doubt at all that the standard of living in Britain in the late Medieval era was much higher than for instance during the 19th century. While Britain ruled the waves, the British common man faced an abject fate in the sweatshops, should he manage to escape the press gangs.

Only after the war did things really improve for the commoner. But over the last 40 years real wages have been declining constantly, meaning all economic ‘growth’ is being gobbled up by the 0,001%.

So what’s going on? How is it possible that in the ‘rich West’ the commoner must now work 40 hours per week, up to 50 weeks a year for sustenance? That 150 years ago, normal people were far worse off than their ancestors in the Middle Ages?

What happened?

Well, Usury happened, and Usury started buying up the Commons, gaining rents, while raising them too. People are more and more forced to pay more and more for what was always theirs.

Usurpation of the Commons

Usurpation of the Commons is sold as 'privatization' and is also known as 'enclosure'.

Usurpation of the Commons is sold as ‘privatization’ and is also known as ‘enclosure’.

It’s an ongoing process, continuing very much today. Globally. Water is the main front at the moment. An excellent example is Ireland: the IMF (Usury) forced the Irish Government to install water meters at private homes. Part of the ‘structural adjustments’ ‘necessary’ for making available the next tranche of loans (which are needed service the old loans). This prepares for the next step: privatizing the water utility.

This step has already been taken in Detroit, another place ‘needing’ bail outs after it was suckered by the bankers’ derivative hoax. The obvious result: rising prices, people being cut off from what is of course basically their own property.

Meanwhile, they’re creating artificial scarcity, by destroying competition and alternative sources. Fracking is undoubtedly a huge part of that.

And it’s not just water. Even sunlight is now under attack. In Spain draconian fines are threatened to those who dare use solar panels. The Solar Police is allowed to enter Spanish private quarters without a warrant if they suspect somebody may leeching off of the sun, which is just another finite resource, that ‘doesn’t just fall out of the sky, you know’.

‘Next they’ll tax us for breathing’, is an old running gag. But it’s not a joke and there is every reason to believe that at some point either the State or a Corporation will claim ‘air is not a human right’ and is a ‘finite resource’.

How the Money Power busted the Landed ‘Aristocracy’
In Medieval Europe, say starting around the 13th century, when urbanization started and the first Kings managed to forge the basics of the Nation States, Usury was already on board. Lending to the Kings, not even at interest, but in return for concessions. Taking over sources of income from the State.

Providing the Landed Aristocracy with mortgages (who would then default), slowly but surely started centralizing Land in the hands of richer and richer Plutocrats. The Protocols extensively describe this process. They boast how they managed to make the Kings believe that borrowing was in their interest, while at 5% already after 20 years the whole principal was paid in interest, without even denting the debt itself. While the Kings could have taken everything in taxation from their people directly.

They also report on slowly but surely pushing out the Landed Aristocracy, both through Usury and marriage. They point at the French Revolution as the coup de grace for the Aristocracy as a political force. But they remained a problem, because their land holdings allowed them and their people to at least live freely from their own lands, allowing them real sovereignty. This issue was finally settled in the 19th and 20th century by taxing land holdings.

While 1789 settled matters in the West, the Protocols predated 1917, which destroyed the old arrangements in the East. Even in America the basic conflict is visible, with the Landed Plutocrats framing the Constitution, while the Bankers established control in the early 19th century through Hamilton.

Another infamous example is post 1066 Britain, when William the Conqueror allowed the Jews into England. With them came Usury and the shetar, their contracts, subverting classical English common law. Within decades Jews were the richest people in the country.

Jews were, like most Gentiles, forbidden to own land, but ways were found to make it possible for debtors to collateralize land holdings and the issue quickly became a major plague. The Magna Carta was the first reaction against their practices and in 1290 they were kicked out of the country, until that despicable (ask the Irish) Calvinist stooge of Jewish Amsterdam Finance, Cromwell, let them back in.

Usury leads to escalating rents
Usury not only allows for enclosure of the Commons, it also allows for higher rents. For instance: to buy some land, most people will need a mortgage. A mortgage costs 150% of the principal in Usury over 30 years. Landlords pass these costs on to tenants. Even when the mortgage has been paid off, and there is no cost for capital to pass on anymore, there is the wholly artificial idea of ‘opportunity cost’. The money invested in Land could have been profitably invested elsewhere and the ‘loss’ of this ‘opportunity’ must be ‘compensated’.

Nowadays about 75% of rents for housing are Usury or ‘opportunity cost’ passed on by the landlord.

Conclusion
The idea that people need to pay for the land they live on from the moment they were born is strictly for humans only. No other species has a brain powerful enough to spin reality into such absurdity.

Nobody can call himself free if he’s a slave to landlordism, just as he cannot be free as long as he is chained by Usury and scarce money.

Classical Economists, like Adam Smith, Ricardo and the people before them, considered Land, Labor and Capital to be the factors of production. 

Modern Economics‘, beginning with Karl Marx, managed to obscure this.

We need to reestablish again the difference between man made goods and our natural heritage, so that we can have a clear view of our rights and duties.

Land reform and the wider liberation of the Commons is a key target in the struggle against the Plutocracy.

As we have seen, it is Usury that has managed to usurp the Commons, overtaking the Landed Aristocracy that preceded it as the main power, so monetary reform is obviously the main goal.

But Land reform is definitely its younger brother and part of the same fight.

Related:
The Public Vs. Private Dialectic, Or: Money As Part Of The Commons

Unfortunately, current land reform proposals, most notably Georgism, are lacking, mainly because of their mistaken trust in the State and taxation.
In a forthcoming article we’ll discuss how we can equitably reform land, without empowering the State and/or its opulent owners.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,873 other followers