|
Hi everyone
I have watched with curiosity the various arguments being forwarded on this
topic. While my comments on this could be offensive to many of our
contributors particularly some of those from the North American continent surely
the easiest method of bringing the banking system under direct treasury control
is to have a treasury controlled reserve bank that would provide local councils
and even government departments with the same services as the commercial sector
but charging interest rates substancially less than the commercial sector.
Infrastructural maintenance and developments would be a fraction of their
present costings because that bank would only need to charge interest rates
sufficiently large to cover administration costs. It would be restricted to
those functions but since the commercial banking sector has a substancial amount
of its trade tied up in those departments they would have to lower their
interest rates to be competitive. Admittedly this would be a very heavy club to
wield at the banking system, but we are talking about a monetary system that is
totally inadequate for modern uses and too
vunerable to the whims and fancies of private individuals owning the commercial
banking to be allowed to continue as is. Quite simply the present financial
system is not creating sufficient debt-free funding to ensure proper
exploitation of the world's resources for the benefit of all. The early fathers
of the USA emphasised that the issuing and maintenance of the money supply was
the perogative of the government i.e. treasury. It is only since that perogative
was usurped by the passing of the Reserve Bank act (1917) allowing a private
organisation to control and issue its money supply that the USA
has moved from being a creditor nation to the most indebted nation in the world.
The vast bulk of US debt is to the Federal Reserve as a direct result of its
position as the monetary controller of the US economy. I believe all the
arguments forwarded by our correspondents seem to be overlooking this basic
axiom. Until the fundamentals are cured all other arguments become irrelevant.
Mechnisms controlling interest rates will always be available, but we need the
WILL to change the way they are operated before the present financial
system will begin to operate for the advantage of all. Sadly, predominantly,
financial circles operate under a hunting rather than a farming
attitude. What is needed is a change of attitude to convince the financiers of
the world that they will make more money in the long term by allowing more
prosperity in the lowest echelons of society by means of less exploitation on
"loans" issued to enhance the developement of the worlds natural resources. I
believe this is one of the fundamental tenets of the Socred movement. We should
not lose sight of this in our arguments about mechanisms.
Bill Mc Gunnigle
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 11:39
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Economic
Democracy
Under the system we had, trading ("commercial" in your terms, I think)
banks had to lodge a proportion of their deposits (i.e. equivalent to) with
the Reserve Bank, our central bank. Is/was there a ddifferent system in
vogue anywhere else? If so, I have never heard of it and therefore thought my
comment needed no interpretation. The underlying assumption, obviously, was
that banks lent their deposits. In effect it had very little effect on
lending, which presumably is why our Royal Commission accepted evidence that
the method was "a blunt instrument" and placed that comment in its Report.
If the nation is to have any direct control over bank lending, Martin's
suggestion sems to me to be the only really practical one anybody has come up
with.
Regards. John R.
From: <william_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Economic
Democracy
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:03:12 -0700
(PDT)
>"And do they apply, quite inappropriately
to
>deposits?"
>------------------------------------
>-------------------------------------
>
>I
don't even know what this is supposed to mean, John.
>Perhaps you will
interpret.
>
>
>--- John G Rawson
<johngrawson@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>What reserve
requirements do you have in the US? NZ
>has none, and I thought you
had gone over to control
>by interest rate changes too.. And do they
apply,
>quite inappropriately to deposits?
>
>Regards.
John
R.
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Looking
for earth-friendly autos?
>Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo!
Autos' Green
Center.
>http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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 johngrawson@hotmail.com
>For
more information, visit
http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Live Search delivers results the way you like it. Try live.com
now!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
