| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] monetization of wealth | | Date: | Tuesday, August 16, 2005 12:34:50 (+1200) | | From: | W. McGunnigle <wmcgunn @.........nz>
|
Hi Peter
Again you have shown a very sound grasp of the way
international finance is operating. Answering your question (from my limited
ability), international financial organaisations are well aware of those
details, but the present system serves their purposes far more efficiently
than the modification you suggest. Companies could issue bonds, and, in a
manner of speaking, they do so in the form of debenture stock in the
company. This is a permanent liability and so most companies try to avoid
this method of raising capital. Government bonds however are issued to
provide working finance to keep the country's economy moving i.e.provide the
legal authorisation for the issue/minting/creation of money to provide the
means of exchange so that commerce and industry can procede. Those who buy
government bonds have a permanent and virtually risk free investment that
can then be used to issue loans etc into circulation. The liability is not
on the financial houses but on the government. Business organisations are
definitely not blind to the possibilities incumbent in monetary reform along
lines that Social Credit and similar monetary reformers advocate. They
simply see such reforms as a threat to their monopoly of money creation, and
hence easy, risk-free profit making. The system favours these predatory
financial actions and there is no incentive to change. Indeed they have
every reason to act against those who would try to change it. With respect
to the various stock and financial exchanges throughout the world, the best
description of their activities was given to me by my brother who refered to
it as "sophisticated controlled gambling". The world's "Reserve Banks" can
manipulate that "market" by adjusting the amount of "on call" finance at any
time. If you are "in the know" you can take advantage of stock-market
"Crashes" because these can be created by Reserve Banks simply by refusing
to issue "on call " finance to back speculative "future option" buying. A
private banking system has a vested interest in staging these crashes from
time to time because the inherent wealth represented by shares in a company
remains viable no matter what the share price may be. If share prices fall
people with " spare cash" i.e. finance not tied up in company shares, can
buy up shares in asset wealthy companies for a bargin price. The "Great
Recession" of the 1930's was not caused by the stock market crash in 1929,
but by the actions of the Reserve Bank of America" who reduced the money
supply to the United States (and hence the world) by I believe 75% by 1933.
This stifled commerce and prevented industry from having the necessary
medium of exchange to fulfil their normal purposes. It was Rousevelts "New
Deal" that forced the Reserve Bank to alter its policy. His means of
coercion were complex and need not be covered here. Nevertheless in 1938 the
Reseve bank of America caused a slight contraction of money supply that
resulted in a mini-depression until the start of World War Two. The effects
of this however were not world wide. At that time there appears to be a two
year delay between a recession in the USA,, and its effect on the rest of
the world.
All this material can be found in various historical textbooks and
there is a good video tape called "The Money Masters" that covers the
mechanisms used by international financiers to manipulate international
finances and stock markets.
A comment about the IMF and World Bank, these organisations were set up
by the Bretton-Woods conference in 1944 their pofficial original aim was
given as an attempt to even out and buffer world finances to prevent great
recessions like the 1930's. However it has resulted in progressive
indebtedness by third world countries to the extent that they are becoming
progressively more impoverished. The attitude of the governors of that
organisation is of little help because they can little advantage to the
major contributors to the IMF by reducing that debt. Indeed those debts are
being used to force indebted countries into selling the authority to exploit
their natural reserves into privately owned western companies, a type of
recolonialisation. I trust this explains some of the reasoning behind the
comments I have made.
Bill Mc Gunnigle
----- Original Message -----
From: <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] monetization of wealth
> Thanks for the complement.
>
> I was a little surprised at your comment that "normal free private
enterprise would encourage the larger corporations to make strenuous
efforts to control the banking system."
> I get the impression business people on the whole are as blind as anyone
and are few among the monetary reformers.
> Can you explain your reason for this comment?
> I cant see why the mindset that has created the futures and option hedging
tools cant also devise a similar 'programme' by which global corporations
could simply operate by their own system of accounting credit based on trade
backed by performance history ( corporate bonds instead of govt bonds)
whereby they could by-pass the banks for debt financing.
> I am not advocating this, But I have considered that the international
bankers must have considered these things going into the free market world.
> Peter H
>
> "W. McGunnigle" <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > May I complement Peter on his summation of the philosophical aspect to
> SC.
> > Sovereignty both individually and nationally are key aspects to that
> > philosophy. At present monetary control over its own finances by most
> > individual nation states has been removed and now lies with bodies like
> the
> > IMF and World Bank. This would not be a bad thing if those bodies were
> > really working to ensure all humankind were enjoying the benefits of
> > improved communications, health reforms, adequate food supplies, trade
> and
> > political stability. Historically however this does not seem to be the
> > case.those two bodies have saddled large sections of the world,
> particularly
> > the less well-developed and poorer nations, with a debt burden that
> appears
> > unsurmountable. It is this subtle corruption within our worlds financial
> > system that is responsible for most of the world's ills. Until this is
> > corrected even gestures like Tony Blair's move to forgive a large
> percentage
> > of the third world debt will prove futile. The core problem remains, as
> > Peter has pointed out, the lack of understanding about how the present
> > monetary system operates to everyone's disadvantage except the few
> governing
> > the world's banking system. Incidently before anyone starts crying
> > "Conspiracy Theory" may I point out that normal free private enterprise
> > would encourage the larger corporations to make strenuous efforts to
> control
> > the banking system. It would be excellent business practice. The
> profits,
> > virtually riskless, are enormous. Only a business fool would neglect
> > opportunities in that area. The trouble is that the rest of us are not
> able
> > to jump onto that "Gravy Train".
> > W.H.McGunnigle
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
> You're subscribed to this list with the email wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message