Skip to content

From Chattel Slavery To Capitalism

“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

A cliché, and yet so pertinent. So many people think that the struggle against the New World Order is about preventing becoming their slaves.

But we ARE their slaves!

The essence of Slavery is that someone else controls the value of our production. 

Under Capitalism, people depending on a wage (the 90/99%), typically consume only about 10% of the value of their own production. The entire System is geared to sucking up our production with unearned income: Usury, Landlordism, Speculation, high prices of Monopoly.

By Anthony Migchels for

In Capitalism, this was achieved by first driving the common people off their ancestral lands by systematically destroying the abundant money systems of the medieval era by forcing Gold Standards everywhere.

This caused a deflation that first savaged the country side.

In this way, the People lost their means of independence, and were forced to work for others for a living, in the cities. Instead of being independent farmers and craftsmen, they were demoted to wage slavery.

By giving him a wage, immediately a large chunk of the value of the worker’s production is taken by the shareholder. The value of the worker’s production is always much higher than his wage.

With Multinationals, profits and shareholder dividends are typically higher than cost for labor. Meaning that more than half of the workers’ production is taken by the owners of the company.

The reason that they get away with this, is because Capital is kept artificially scarce, both through Cartels and through the artificial scarcity of money. In this way, Labor is oppressed, forcing them into low wages and humiliating conditions.

The worker receives his wage, and the remaining value of his production is next sucked up with scientific precision.

A wage slave making $2000 per month has a budget something like this:
$300 for the State
$700 for the Landlord
$100 for Energy
$200 for ‘health’ ‘care’
$150 for Transportation
$50 for Telecom
Total: $1500

What remains, $500, about a quarter, is to eat and try live a life. A fraction of what 40 hours work produced, at least $4000 worth.

The beauty of the System is, that when wages rise, prices, debts (and associated usurious cost), rents, rise along, sucking up the extra purchasing power.

Residual wealth that the Middle Class retains during booms, is disowned a little later with the inevitably following crunch, forcing them into liquidation at depressed prices.

Free Markets, Right?! Supply and demand!
All good and dandy, we think. Fair enough. We use stuff, so we pay.

But when we take a closer look at where all this money ends up, it transpires that all supply chains we depend on (energy, automotive industry, telecom, ‘health’ ‘care’) are dominated by massive International Cartels.

Cartels keep supply low, and prices high, so a lot of their profits are unearned income, not really related to their production, but to their market power. They use this to keep competitors out, and the Capitalist’s core value is ‘Competition is Sin’ (John D. Rockefeller).

What is more, a great many people are enslaved by Landlordism, which is a vicious Tyranny, first established by the Sword, later overtaken by mortgages, the Money Power’s method of disowning the Landed Aristocracy. Landlordism is pure parasitism, and all the Land is owned by a really very small group of mostly very old families. For instance: all the homeowners in Britain combined own only 6% of the Land. All the rest is in the hands of a minute percentage of the population. Many of the main Land holders go back all the way to William the Conqueror.

Usury massively raises all these prices. As we know, Usury is about 40% of prices we pay for all goods and services: cost for capital passed on by the supplier.

This include the land we live on, and on which we are utterly dependent. In fact, Usury actually QUADRUPLES Landlordism´s rents.

But this is not the only way International Finance profits from everything: they also have a decisive stake in most of the Transnationals that dominate the supply chains we are completely dependent upon. Only 20% of Transnationals (there are about 40,000 of them) are independently owned.

In the past, people enslaved in the mines and the sweatshops, say late 19th century Britain, they were even forced by their employers to do their groceries in factory owned shops that charged outrageous prices.

We think we have outgrown this. It’s really time to think again: all that has happened is that Capital (Finance) has upped their game. Local shops on factory compounds are now international supermarket chains. But they are owned by the same people, and serve the exact same purpose: reclaiming Capital’s losses to wages, usurping our production.

People even go so far as to say ‘Capitalism has lifted people out of poverty’! What is so insane about this, is that a man, in 1694, worked about 15 weeks per year on his own farm. Then with the ascent of Capitalism, two centuries later, he worked 80 hours per week in some soul crushing ‘job’, and it was still not enough: his wife and his kids had to work too, just to pay for the rent and some potatoes.

Even today, we work at least twice as much as three centuries ago.

The most galling of it all is that people claim ‘freedom’, because once every four years they get to give away what remains of their power to some Kleptocrat insider with ‘democratic elections’.

This is the reality of Capitalism, which is centered around International Finance and its Usury (Banking).

No solution to all this is thinkable, without the end of Usury by interest free credit for the People.

What Is Capitalism?
Capitalism Is Jewish Usury
How Usury Encloses The Commons


Bernard Lietaer Has Died

Bernard Lietaer has died yesterday, or by now the day before yesterday, February 4th.


I only met him once, and know nothing of him personally, but his work has a special place in my heart.

When Bill Still’s Money Masters film suddenly shook me out of my political immaturity, the first real question I had was: ‘ok, when Bankers rule, they’ll rule through money. So I better find out what the hell money actually is.’

This was a quite pertinent question, and I remember that stage vividly. And within days, in a completely natural synchronicity, Bernard’s essential book, ‘Het Geld van de Toekomst’, ‘The Future of Money’ landed in my lap.

This book is brilliant, and quite groundbreaking. It lays out in detail what money is, what the current problems of money are. Including an introduction into the problems of Usury. And it provides one of the first (to my knowledge) rational comparative analyses of several major basic complementary currency designs.

Something I later built on quite substantially in the articles consolidated in the interest-free-economics page on the blog. ( And of course in the research and development of De Florijn (and the underlying Talent Architecture).

To this day I use (ok, very slightly improved) his basic definition of money: ‘anything that is agreed upon within a community to be used as a means of exchange). In fact, I was just mentioning it earlier today in an interview for Alwareness TV, an Amsterdam based independent media outlet.

Lietaer, in his seldomly astute and truthful analyses most certainly laid a solid groundwork for my own work, and I’m positive he had quite an impact on many more people.

He was definitely a key thinker in the European monetary reform movement, which is much more concerned with Usury and scarce money than the wider Alternative Media´s fascination with ´money printing´ and ´inflation´, which are only symptoms of the core disease. Although in America too, Lietaer had his impact.

Of course, there were also limitations. For instance, when I had the pleasure of meeting him once, in Antwerp, I was actually a little bemused to find he supported the Chicago Plan. Which, as we know, does not really do that much against Usury, and leaves the backdoor (to put it mildly) wide open for the Money Power.

He also was rather mild in his ambitions for complementary currencies. Promoting sustainability, taking off the worst edges of poverty, promoting social cohesion.

All fine and dandy, of course, but in my view there can be no doubt that every self respecting currency designer should have no other goal than working towards the complete obliteration of the Tyranny of Banker Money, by meeting society’s need for credit with stable, easily accessible and ultra cheap interest-free credit.

And while Lietaer undoubtedly realized that the Bank rules, I don’t think he really would have (more than theoretically) agreed with this.

But in life it’s nice to quibble about these trifles, in death what remains is gratitude for such a major contribution to interest-free economics, both in theory and practice.

For what amounts to creating such a ripple in the Matrix.

Usury: why we don’t build Cathedrals these days….
Positive Money and the Chicago Plan
Margrit Kennedy Dies

Can We Do Without Money?

As it is clear that money throughout most of history has been the key source of domination by the ‘hidden’ World Government, it is natural that many conclude that money itself is the problem, and that it must go.

But the issue is not money, it is the abuse of money. Money is just a simple tool, a means of exchange. There are good tools, and there are bad tools. Tools can be used positively, and negatively.

It is hard not to sympathize with the ‘no money’ crowd, though. Just think of the Bible book of Acts: it describes how Jesus’ followers, after his ascension, relinquished private property, and lived together in communes.

On the other hand: the same Bible vociferously rejects Usury, while not at all outlawing money. The Bible is against ‘making money with money’, but it is not against money itself. Jesus and his students had money, and used it for daily living. Jesus was against money grabbing, unearned income, against living for money, against sitting on your money while other people need it. He was not against people using a means of exchange for trade.

Of course, the Bible is only one source, an important one, but its conclusions must be validated by Science, ie. by observation of material reality. And it seems reality DOES bear out the fact that money can be a useful tool.

Just have a look at this article: it competently discusses the problems with our money: Usury, speculation, etc. Next it concludes money is bad: “We must cooperate to end the existence of money and thereby end the power of those that currently control our civilization and refuse to stop destroying our planet.”

But this is a logical fallacy: to suggest that to get rid of those that control our current money, that all money must go. If the problem is that bad people run our money, we could also execute the Bankers, and take control of the monetary system ourselves.

Also: if the problem with money is (among others) interest on loans of money, is the solution to eradicate money, or to eradicate interest on loans of money? If speculation is an issue, is the solution to do away with money, or with speculation? If derivatives are bad, do we need to dump derivatives, or money?

We have seen the positive effects of organic money: the miracle of Wörgl for instance, where bad money was crushing the locals, and Mayor Unterguggenburger circulated just a few thousand worth of his own scrip with demurrage, solving both debt and unemployment in his community.

And on a larger scale, the prosperity of the American Colonies under Colonial Scrip, and how the real cause of the War for Independence was the Crown’s destruction of these monetary systems.

But also Germany under Hitler, where Schacht did not even solve Usury, but did end money scarcity through deflation, which unlocked the German Folk’s productive capacity, catapulting them to World prominence on the economic, military, cultural, and scientific levels, in just a few years.

So apparently money CAN support the legitimate aspirations of the People.

The Venus Project
There are basically two schools of thought promoting the end of money. The writer of the article we were referring to is part of a tradition that promotes the way Jesus’ followers lived after his death and resurrection. Decentralized, local communities, demonetized, self sufficient.

But there is another ideology that promotes ‘no money’, and that is Jacques Fresco’s Venus Project. However, I suspect that the Venus Project is pretty much what the NWO have in mind as their endgame.

It is a high tech Communist Utopia, where ‘the computers’ manage everything. People don’t get to consume the value of their own production (which is the key goal of economic decentralization and interest-free economics), but they ‘get what they need’, basically the equivalent of a living wage, which will typically be much less than the value of their production.

The Venus Project suffers from the typical delusion that our human problems can be solved with technology. That Utopia comes when High Tech solves the limitations of the human condition. Which is typical Luciferianism. The Luciferians are looking to become gods through technology, that is a key part of their game.

Another issue, is that those programming the computers will be the ones that control society. Of course, it will be ‘managed democratically’, but this is the kind of ‘democracy’ that we recognize from the Soviets. Soviet means “an elected local, district, or national council” in Russian. Such power structures are in fact easily managed top down.

What is more: under the Venus Project there will be no private property. And nowadays we all know that ‘no private property’ means that the King owns everything. It is the ultimate victory of one Ego over all the others.

This is anathema to Usury-free economics, where the State has NO rights to the Commons, ONLY the People, which is the collection of free men and their families that comprise the People, have rights to the Commons: we are not ‘free’ when we are paying rents to the State, instead of some private Plutocrat. We are free when we pay NO rents.

Jacques Fresco has also intimated that he is against the Family, and that the State should run child rearing. Because these evil families might mind control their children into believing in God, and the State is so neutral and scientific, and loves the children and Truth so much, that they are in a much better position to decide what the child will think. Ok, that is slightly exaggerated, but the point is clear.

A couple of years back I had the pleasure of interviewing Michael Tellinger, not just a great truthseeker, but also a man that has been known to pick fights with the Bankers head on in South Africa.

Tellinger is solidly in the ‘no money’ camp, and is driven by his philosophy which he calls Ubuntu, a Zulu/Bantu concept. It’s about solidarity, sharing, and the realization that nobody can be happy if one is unhappy. It’s basically the bright side of the outlook on life of the Africans. And obviously quite congruent with how Jesus’ friends lived for a while.

But Tellinger, who has a firm grasp of the monetary issues at hand, and I totally agreed that even should the ‘no money’ idea prove correct, to get there, the migration to a Usury-free economy was indispensible. There is simply no way of demonetizing the economy cold turkey. We CAN, however, create positive units solving our current financial problems.

Tellinger himself continues to promote monetary reform, even though he believes we will ultimately not need money at all.

Generosity is great, but fair exchange has a right to exist too
An important issue is, that with the end of scarce money, abundance comes to the many, and the constant fight for survival of the masses will come to an end. Under these circumstances people can certainly be expected to be far more generous among each other. When money is abundant, it will be valued far less.

For instance, in the hundreds of different LETS systems in operation worldwide, we see that people exchange services among each other with these units, and because these units are abundant, people actually start doing things for each other without accepting even payment in LETS.

Which is all wonderful, and there is no reason to resist this. However, what also seems likely, is that there will definitely continue to be circumstances where people, individuals, or local communities, would rather not surrender this or that item to a brother in need, but on the other hand wouldn’t mind a fair exchange.

What is more: when sharing is the only value, a problem can become the lack of incentive to produce something more than we have a direct use for. But local communities will always only be able to produce their basic needs plus a few specialties. To acquire special goods from elsewhere, they will have to continue offering their own specialties in exchange.

Fair exchange benefits both parties. The purpose of commerce is distribution. Commerce has been corrupted by the effects of Finance, as Finance corrupts everything, but in itself it provides a vital function.

And for fair exchange, we need fair money. Because longstanding clear cut human experience is, that without money by far most exchanges wouldn’t take place.

Usury-free living in itself would lead to huge demonetization, as Usury forces people to commoditize everything in order to continue to be able to finance ever growing debt service.

People are right to reject a socioeconomic system based on money grabbing.

But the issue is not money itself, but that it is in the hands of Evil, and used to enslave us through Usury, scarce money, inflations and deflations, speculation, rents, usurping our production, and redistributing it to the idle classes.

It is completely possible to create currencies that do not redistribute wealth to Kleptocrats, without Usury, inflations and deflations, speculation, and which simply serve for what money is supposed to be in the first place: a means of exchange. Nothing more, nothing less.

Thankfully so, because honest exchange and commerce are vital to our economic well being, and for honest exchange, honest money will continue to be needed, albeit far less so.

Cause And Effects Of Money Scarcity
Interviewing Michael Tellinger

Gilets Jaunes: Take your Money out of the Bank NOW!

In an interesting development, the Yellow Vests of France are calling for a run on the Bank: January 12th, they are planning to pick up their savings.

I’m reposting this 2012 article, because it seems relevant, Henry also posted at his site, and as a bonus, here’s a long chat I did with my old friend Wayne Walton. We talk about the Gilets Jaunes Bankrun, and just about everything concerning the monetary, the stuff you won’t even hear in the Alternative Media:
– Bankrun
– ‘Time value of Money’
– Usury as the core issue with our money
– Christ in the Truth Movement
– Gold and Bitcoin, the Liberty Movement, their defense of Austerity and Deflation
– Intricacies of interest-free currency design
– De Florijn
– The true nature of Capitalism


The Credit Crunch is not some natural phenomenon but an all out assault by the Money Power. What is worse: even without the crunch we are paying trillions per year in interest for absolutely nothing.
The solution is simple: quit their banks.

By Anthony Migchels for Henry Makow and Real Currencies

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.

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.

All this is complete and utter rubbish, of course. If banks can create credit, then anybody can. That’s just common sense.

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.

In other words: Penny wise, pound foolish.
People still don’t understand how badly they are being raped. They still don’t understand how they are fleeced through interest on fictional debt.

Coming to terms
Of course, it was a great step and absolutely fantastic to see people finally showing a little teeth. But it 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?

To say this is irresponsible as it will worsen the crunch is ridiculous: propping up a system that only exists to enslave us is irresponsible, not disconnecting from it.

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.

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 Mutual Credit.

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, because there would be no longer any cost for capital included in prices.  World Government would be dead and Big Business would face the competition of well 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!
We don’t need to wait for reform on a national level. We can create our own currencies. High powered currencies, not just the simple barter units that are now starting to float everywhere in the world. We can create extremely effective, interest free credit based units, convertible to dollar or euro. In effect providing us with a printing press with which we can back the world interest free.

But these will take time to build up. Meanwhile, isn’t it the obvious thing to pull our money out of the banks?

How is it possible that this is being resisted by many well meaning people in the Alternative Media? Is there really anybody out there who still believes the banks will mend their ways? That they somehow will stop being the psychopathic enslavers that they are?

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 maintain an account for monthly payments, just keep its balance at almost zero. Pay your bills and take out the rest.

Force the FED and ECB to print ever more for bailouts.

Pay cash only. Don’t support their cashless society. 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.

The Swiss WIR, or: How to Defeat the Money Pow
Mutual Credit, the Astonishingly Simple Truth about Money Creation
Understand that the Banking System is One
On Interest

Budget of an Interest Slave

This is an abridged version of Financial Warfare 2012: Boycott All Banks

The Economy Of The Promised Land

One reason why we have a few money lenders and landlords running the whole world, with the rest of us toiling as serfs to pay their monthly dues to them, is because we have no real inkling of how we would live without them.

And the difference is so enormous, that one shies away from speaking of it, for fear of being condemned as a foolish Utopian.

But here are a few characteristics of a Usury free society with a liberated Commons and current technological levels.

– A man would work a maximum of 15 weeks per year to provide for his wife and children.

– Self Employment and Small Business would be the norm. Wages would be for the young and the simple.

– Men and women would see stress levels decline dramatically. They would spend far more time with each other, their children, their families, and their friends.

– By far most people would live a very comfortable middle class existence. There would still be a few rich people, but they would be much less rich, and not able to dominate society because of their wealth.

– Building would see costs decline by 80 to 90% (!). An architectural revival and boom of uncanny proportions can be expected.

– Every man and his family would have access to decent land and living and working space at very low cost. By far most people would own some land, but vast landholdings would no longer exist, because there would be no renting.

– Food production would be heavily decentralized, and many families would grow at least some food themselves. Food quality would improve incredibly.

– Poverty would be out of the question. There would still be differences in class, but they would be more about genetics and education and not about wealth. But there would be no disenfranchized underclass, and only the most problematic people would be unable to join the general well being. The barbarization of the poor would end, and a great emancipation of those now oppressed by Usury and wage slavery will result.

– There would be no Big Pharma (owned by the Banks) to war on Natural Health. Combined with low stress and excellent nutrition, health, both physical an psychological, and longevity would grow substantially. Substance abuse would decline.

– There would be no Trillions for the Plutocrats to fund all these problems aimed at distracting us and centralizing power. No Migration, no Climate Change, no Bankers orchestrating many and enormous wars. There would be no funding for endless fake news, bogus ‘science’, devious ideologies aimed at dividing people.

– Families and local communities will have plenty of funding for their own needs, though.

– General corruption levels would decline immensely.

– Urbanization would decline and the country side would be repopulated, as abundant money would revive local economies, and there would be no Plutocratic land holdings keeping people out.

– There would be still inequality, but based on merit, and added value, not on property. Hard work and achievement would be rewarded. Wealth inequality levels would be far lower, though. What is more, money will no longer be the main driver of status. Aristocracy will be based on service. On spiritual and intellectual excellence, not on the acquisition of treasure.

– The State could decline very seriously in scope and impact, returning to its basic jobs of providing a basic legal system and defense, not endless nannying and other massive overreaches. Although this remains an important issue in itself. National Socialism, for instance, created a massive totalitarian State supposedly to ‘fight unearned income’ and ‘provide for the citizenry’. But the real aim and focus of economic decentralization is to promote autonomy and economic independence for the common man. This is the core issue. When this goal is achieved, nobody will need a big State to depend on.

– And there is of course Lietaer’s question: ‘What would the Cathedrals of the 21’st Century look like?’. With interest-free lending, major, very long term investments become viable again. It took European cities a century to build a cathedral, back in the days of the Usury-free Catholic economy. What would people build today, if they had a hundred years to create it?

This is what is at stake, and this is what they have stolen from us. This is how we would live, without Usury, without the landowners, without the speculators. Without the parasites who add nothing, and have everything. Without their silly ‘making money with money’ schemes, which have no other purpose than exploiting the toil of the masses, aka Capitalism.

Note that for all this no ideology is needed. Just the acceptance of reality: that money does not grow automatically in a bank account, and that only labor creates wealth.

That we all need a fair deal.

A man produces easily enough for at least five people to live well. This is the reality. We have the duty to ourselves to claim this production for ourselves, and our loved ones.

To say No to Slavery, and Yes to what basically amounts to the Promised Land.

How Money Rules

The World is run by the Banking Cartel, who is the real hegemon, not some Nation State.

When Banks rule, it is obvious that they rule through money. Here is how they do it.

By Anthony Migchels. This article was written for, and first published by

How we know the Banks rule
Let us first ascertain that the Banking Cartel is indeed the hegemon. And this can be proven by one simple statistic: the World is indebted to them to the tune of $247 Trillion Dollars. That is three times World GDP.

This debt costs about $12 Trillion per year to service, which is about one sixth of World GDP. It is known that all this money ends up with the richest 10% of the people worldwide. Even much worse: about a third of this money (about 4 Trillion) ends up with the richest 0,0032%. These are the people that control the Banks.

Compare this to the income of the US Federal Government, which sits at a paltry $3 Trillion. US Government debt to the Bank is about $21 Trillion, and US total debt (including households and corporations) is perhaps as high as $70 Trillion.

Not only is the Government’s income markedly lower than that of the Banking Cartel, it is dependent on them for money.

These numbers are self evident. They expose the true nature of power, and they also show how ridiculous it is to speak of ‘economic growth’ and ‘wealthy countries’. Obviously, the United States cannot be ‘rich’ when it has $70 Trillion (3,5 times GDP) in debt. There will be wealthy people in the US, yes, but the country itself is poor and broke, as is also proven by the fact that 80% of Americans own nothing, and live paycheck to paycheck.

Besides the obvious implications of the massive debt, it has been established that all the major Banks in the World (European, American, Chinese, Japanese) own each other. They ARE a cartel. It’s not speculation, it’s a fact.

Controlling the Money Supply
To control means to be able to start, sustain, and stop something. Banks control the money supply. They create the money, they decide how much money there is, who gets it, and they destroy the money (when debts are repaid).

And they control all the money supplies in the World. Including that of Syria and Iran. And North Korea. Which is not surprising, as the Communist Manifesto demands ´the centralization of all credit in the State, by means of a national bank and an exclusive monopoly’.

Libya seems to have been the last country with monetary independence: Gaddafi ran an interest-free monetary system, with the issueing organization securely in his own hands. People got interest-free loans for business ventures and mortgages. When the ‘rebels’ (Zio-Capitalist-Wahhab proxy goons) were still a bunch of start ups in Benghazi, the first thing ‘they’ (in reality their sponsors in the State Department) produced was a charter for a Central Bank.

All ‘national’ currencies worldwide, are created in the same way: as an interest-bearing debt to the Bank. Which is noteworthy in itself, because there are many natural ways of creating currency, and this uniformity is a key tell-tale sign of centralized control.

It is sometimes hard to fathom for people why money is so incredibly crucial in the economy, but it’s really very simple: money is half of all transactions. The seller provides goods and services, the buyer provides money.

So on the one hand, there are all the goods and services in the World, on the other hand, there is the money.

Money is the gateway to everything else. Without money, most transactions would not take place. By controlling the volume of money, one controls price levels in the economy. By keeping money scarce, one creates artificial scarcity of everything.

By controlling money, one controls the entire economy.

How they translate control of money into control of everything
Here are the three main Banker tools of exploiting control of money:
1) Usury, which is interest on loans of money.
2) Creating inflations and deflations, the boom and bust cycle.
3) Credit allocation: Bankers decide who gets money, and who doesn’t. They control who can invest, and in what.

We have already seen what damage Usury does: working people pay $12 Trillion per year to the idle classes, parasites who inherit billions and suck up billions more in interest, without ever producing anything that is of use to anybody.

Usury is the main driver of debt. The last 25 years or so, States, Corporations and individuals have paid more interest than they currently have debts outstanding. Without Usury, there would hardly be any debt.

By controlling the volume of money, both in the general economy, and in specific markets, they control all price levels. Yes, ALL price levels, in all markets. Even Oil (the biggest market) they can just increase prices tenfold in a matter of moments. They did this in 2006-2008. This is true of all assets and commodities.

By lending liberally, for instance for speculation on the Stock Exchange, or real estate, they create booms, inflations causing higher prices. Next, they cite ‘lack of confidence’, or ‘bad fundamentals’, and stop lending, which diminishes money in the market, and lowers prices, leading to busts.

During the busts, most people are forced into liquidation at depressed prices. Only the Plutocrats have enough money to pick up the pieces for pennies on the dollar.

The 2008 Credit Crunch alone has created about $50 Trillion in damages worldwide (bailouts plus missed economic growth). Unsurprisingly, the wealthy became much wealthier in the last ten years, while working people (the 90/99%) saw income and asset positions decline massively in real terms.

And last, but not least, the Banker privilege of deciding who gets credit: the implication of this is obvious: the absolute worst people in the World get to decide who gets money, who can invest, and in what. Therefore, Bankers decide in what direction society will develop. So obviously we have mass poverty, people working 50 hours per week, 50 weeks per year while having nothing. That is how the filthy rich like it.

When Bankers decide who gets money, then the Fed can just print $16 Trillion for Bank bailouts, while politicians will tell everybody we can’t afford food stamps and social security.

Yes, the Bankers rule, and they rule through money. They prey on our ignorance. We don’t understand they are a Cartel (a Monopoly), we don’t understand how they create the money, how they set all prices, how Usury automatically concentrates all wealth with the very richest.

But once one does understand the problem, the solution is obvious: take control of the money supply, create usury-free credit, manage volume to allow stable prices (which is really not complicated), and allow local communities to allocate credit for their own needs.

Note that the problem is not fixed with some Gold Standard, while they own all the Gold, and will only lend it at interest to us. The problem is also not fixed with letting the State create the money, but leave all credit (at interest!) to Banking. Crypto currencies are bogus items who do not solve any of our monetary problems. Mindless speculation is not going to solve Banking.

Nationalizing the Fed is also far from sufficient, and at best a minute step in the right direction. The Fed only exists to facilitate Commercial and Merchant Banking, and was created by the Banking Industry.

Keep this in mind: the essence of Banking is not ‘money creation’ as most of the Alternative Media will tell you. The quintessential nature of Banking is lending at interest. THAT is what a Bank does, and that is how they have conquered the entire World.

Only interest-free credit can solve Banking and the New World Order.

Real Currencies on Facebook

Game On!

This is it folks……….September 22nd will be the official opening of ‘De Florijn’……..

We’ll come together in Utrecht for a small party, and even though I realize most reading this will be too far away to accept the invitation, I want all of you to know you’d be most welcome to partake in the celebrations.

At last! It has proven a thorny path to get it all programmed, but it’s here now!

Sure, in the years ahead, we’ll keep developing, but this is our version 1.0, suitable for ‘production’. Now we can at last start the business of building a viable network of businesses and consumers paying with ‘De Florijn’.

Honestly, I have difficulty believing it myself, but this is my dream of ‘the future of money’. De Florijn, and the Talent architecture upon which it is based, has got it all:
– Fully interest-free with zero cost (!!) credit
– Convertibility to Euro
– Always sufficiently available
– Impervious to foreseeable international financial shocks
– Impervious to speculation and ‘making money with money’
– Providing much needed liquidity where it matters: on Main Street
– Taking only one minute for individuals, and a few minutes for businesses to open an account
– Ultra low cost: free for individuals, only F 10,- per month for businesses
– Seamless payment with a smartphone or even older mobile
– Ready for paper money (although we will be offering that at a later stage)

Our first priority now is to build a network of paying businesses that allow us to operate professionally. Already there are about 250 accounts, 30 businesses and 220 private individuals/consumers.

We have a solid marketing plan, based on good contacts with the Alternative Media in the Netherlands (who reach hundreds of thousands of people) and resellers, who we offer good compensation for every business they connect to the network. We hope to activate a lot of people in this way.

Our second goal is to work with people everywhere who want to open up high powered alternative currencies to support their own communities and countries, based on the Talent architecture.

Surely, this is not for everyone. But if Usury is the problem, than obviously lending interest-free is the solution.

A fundraiser
This is always the challenge when embarking on basically any product that requires wider acceptance to gain usability and effectiveness: how to survive until you are breaking even?!

Raising funds for this project has proven an uphill struggle from the beginning. Alternative currencies are both esoteric and clearly anti-establishment in nature. Hardly very attractive to State, Banker, or Venture Capitalist types.

So we, me and my colleagues, are turning to you. We need your help. This project needs and deserves wide(r) support. Monetary reform cannot be left to a handful of people, and it cannot be achieved overnight. At least those who understand the issues need to be involved, or it will never work. A lot of money and years of research and development has gone into it already. M., the man who has programmed everything, has worked with me since 2012 and has spent hundreds of hours on different versions of the system.

We are looking to raise some money to help us get through the first year of operation. We are hoping to raise at least ten thousand dollars. This money will go to operational expenses (travel, telephone, hosting, meetings, marketing materials) and if at all possible subsidizing our cost of living, so we can focus as much as is humanly possible on building the network.

We are looking for donations, but if you would be interested in investing a larger sum of money, that would be great too. We can offer you very reasonable terms. Please contact me at ‘realcurrencies(at)

If you would like to support monetary innovation along the lines as we have been discussing here at Real Currencies, than this is your chance.

Please use the Donate button on the right -> Under the ‘Believers Only’ picture.

Thank you so much.

PS: We’ll keep you posted on further developments!

Exciting Times!

Two interviews, one with Mike of, and one with Marco Janssen of the Janssen Report.

The first interview focuses on the threats to the dollar, and the monetary system, how it really works. Mike is used to talking to people coming from a more Libertarian perspective, with an emphasis on Gold and ‘money printing’ (instead of Usury) as the core issue.

The second is with Marco, my colleague board member of the Florijn Foundation. Marco has come on board earlier this year. He has been researching the financial system and Usury for years now and has been reporting on the economy on his Youtube channel.

In this interview we discuss how the financial system is the underlying source of really most problems we are facing. From about 16 minutes onwards we discuss solutions and the Florijn/Talent.

Another status update
We’re moving on splendidly with our payment app. We’re also implementing ‘pay per SMS for the 30% or so folks who don’t have a smartphone (yet). Combined, this will guarantee a simple and seamless payment experience for all mobile phone users.

It’s going to be very soon now, that we can at last launch officially!

And a little reminder of why we need monetary innovation:
Bad stats

As we can see, any notions of ‘economic growth’ and ‘recovery’ are just complete baloney.

All these ‘journalists’ out there, all these ‘economists’, they should be profoundly ashamed of themselves for plugging all these lies.

There is no economic recovery. There is only wholesale money printing and deeper and deeper indebtedness of both sovereigns and private borrowers, including corporations.

Real incomes and asset positions of normal people are plummeting. All the ‘economic growth’ of last few years was just putting extra liquidity in the economy and making sure only the insiders would share in it. The incomes and asset positions of the 0,001% have been ballooning over the last 8 years.

The only way this is heading is further South.

We’re getting tired of waiting for the next round, it’s wearying with this sword of Damocles over our head, and with all the fear porn out there.

But the fact is, the West is doomed and we need solutions now more than ever.

More On The Talent

A Much Needed Update On The Talent And ‘De Florijn’!

Dear Monetary Reformers

Here’s a much needed, short update on our great adventure: the implementation of our Talent architecture in a nationally circulating currency, ‘de Florijn’.

We had been planning to crowdfund for ‘de Florijn’ and next create the website, but as always, things turned out differently: we decided to first create the product, before looking for financing.

Unfortunately, things always seem to must move slower than either hoped or anticipated, but as they say: things go as they must.

But we have spent our time well: in December last year we opened our site in beta phase: you can find it at Before we open up officially, the design will be further revamped and modernized, to make it focus completely on our simple, but revolutionary new currency.

We have also opened up a foundation to manage it all once we open. With me, Barry Annes and Marco Janssen as board members. The latter two gentlemen are consummate professionals and fully aware of the issues at stake. Marco regularly reports on the economy with his ‘Janssen Report‘.

We have about 130 account holders already, which is a nice start, although we will be looking for a few more before launching.

The main issue we’re negotiating at the moment is that we need a solid app for smartphones, to guarantee a modern and seamless payment experience. When done, working with ‘De Florijn’, buying them on the exchange, paying with them in stores, will be easy, safe, fast and up to speed with what people expect from today’s mobile applications.

Once this final hurdle has been taken, we will launch and start a funding campaign.

Working without money has been the bane of the whole project and we desperately need funds to keep going while we build the network until it reaches a size that allows the operation to self finance. This will be with about 1000 paying companies on board, something we hope to achieve within the first year after launching.

If you, in the meantime, can find it in your heart to make a donation to keep us going while we finish the final stages of the development, that would be really very much appreciated. We need all the help we can get, and we need to get it from you, because, as you will appreciate, there is plenty of money for saving banks, but not so much for solving banking.

Please use the donate button on the right. Thank you so much.

The whole thing is really very exciting: ‘De Florijn’ really stands a credible chance of developing into a widely used complementary payment device, directly addressing the key issues in the economy: scarce and expensive credit, small and medium business being savaged by deflation, the Internet and Transnational competition.

Not only that: the Talent infrastructure can be implemented by any ambitious monetary reformer who would like to create a truly comprehensive complementary currency anywhere in the Western World and beyond. There is nothing available anywhere, that comes even close to it. Remember: we are creating interest-free credit that is convertible to Euro or any other dominant banking unit. We’re currently working with several people who are looking to make a contribution in the need to bring people real monetary solutions.

Thanks again for your ongoing support of Real Currencies, ‘de Florijn, and the Talent!

More On Social Credit And A Letter By 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 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.

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!

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.



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.