Biggest financial scam in history

lostinrates

samclam wrote: »

I wasn't quoting bloggers. And the guy who offered to help California 'Robert Ellis' "worked on Wall Street and has been involved in setting up several banks".

If you follow the financial markets they are so in sink with each other it's uncanny. The various central banks all talk together and many of their decisions have been coordinated of late. The UK's notorious for kissing America's behind and we only did well for the last decade because they passed so much of their unregulated banking over to London. I think we have enough in common to learn from what is happening there.

Why are people on this forum more interested in picking holes than addressing the overwhelming issues at hand?

The only reason I started this thread is because I'm concerned for our future.

samclam, a belated welcome, you're right, we can be rude. But picking holes can also be seen as ''tough debate'', 'd hate it if we got too nicey.

New opinions are welcome and necessary, however different.

Lots of us are worried about the future, to varying degrees.

samclam

lostinrates wrote: »

samclam, a belated welcome.

Thanks.

I don't mind defending / building on my arguments but I don't see the point in arguing just for the sake of it. I don't have enough spare time for that.

Curious_Moose

samclam wrote: »

Thanks.

I don't mind defending / building on my arguments but I don't see the point in arguing just for the sake of it. I don't have enough spare time for that.

And thank you for bringing Fractional Reserve Banking into the discussion. Your point about the capital being created from debt but the interest needed to make payments not being created is the most fundamentally important point.

I'm sure you already have a good idea of how the Federal Reserve was created in 1913.

purch

It depends where you read your news:
investment-blog.net/chinese-to-destroy-feds-by-refusing-to-honor-fraudulent-derivatives-contracts

Yes I see.......certainly not a Blog :rolleyes:

samclam

Curious_Moose wrote: »

And thank you for bringing Fractional Reserve Banking into the discussion.
.. the Federal Reserve was created in 1913.

That's one of the main reasons I started this thread. Because people aren't talking about the fundamental issues and the Fractional Banking System is definitely one of them.

Getting people on this forum to focus is hard work, they seem to want to split hares and score points rather than work together.

Yeah I know about the Fed and how they aren't constitutional and how they are privately owned and secretive.

purch

Yeah I know about the Fed and how they aren't constitutional and how they are privately owned and secretive

1. How/Why is the Fed unconstitutional ?
2. Why should that bother you/me ?

nearlynew

purch wrote: »

The problem you have when you take the rantings of American Bloggers, and try to apply them to the U.K. is that these 'Bloggers' look at all things in terms of the U.S.A.

The U.S. has a written Constitution. It lays down 'rules' concerning the currency, and who 'owns' the currency, rules which for many years the U.S. Governments have totally ignored, which is why these 'bloggers' get their knickers in such a twist.

We do not have a similar Constitution, and no clear rules about how our currency is created, nor who 'owns' the currency.

That is exactly the point.

Americans rebelled against the british king over this !!!!!! over 200 years ago and set up their constitution to ensure that never again would they be held ransom by a select group of people setting punitive taxes based on unsound money.
And their constitution gave them a means of address to reign in the power of bankers and politicians.

We never had that revolution and have been left with all of the dregs of this system without any recourse.

Our time may have arrived.

samclam

The US Constitution forbids private institutions from creating money because the Founding Fathers knew that this would unfairly tax individuals in the form of interest payments. Remember these guys were trying to break free from the grip of taxes imposed by the King of England.

If you have a system where a public body such as the Treasury creates money without debt obligations then you don't make a few people rich for doing nothing, and the rest of the country is better off.

This is relevant to us because all the Central banks cooperate with each other, so what goes in the US is very similar to what goes in the UK.

I tried to figure out who owns the Bank of England but couldn't get to the bottom of it. It was privately owned and then nationalised in 1946 but it is still paying interest on the bonds used to pay it's original share holders and half the profits it makes go to HM
Treasury, where ever that ends up.

But to me it's suspect that unelected by us ex private banking sector exec's run the BOE. What's the chances they have kept loyalties with their original companies? An example of the living unfairness in this system is that large private banking institutions can borrow from the BOE at next to nothing currently while we as individuals find it very hard / expensive to borrow. Yes the big banks have to pay it back but what does that matter if they can invest it in another country which pays higher interest - that's FREE MONEY! And that's the kind of stuff they are up to all the time.

samclam

nearlynew wrote: »

That is exactly the point...
We never had that revolution...

Thanks man!

At least someone understands where I'm coming from. Felt like I was banging my head against a brick wall.

Vive la ...

nearlynew

samclam wrote: »

Thanks man!

At least someone understands where I'm coming from. Felt like I was banging my head against a brick wall.

Vive la ...

Welcome to the board sam.

We could do with some more enlightened people like you.