|
I agree with your analysis Bill. One can only
pretend the world is flat for so long.
Reserves were a tribute to responsibility, a check
and balance, for protection of society. It was a form of
accountablity. Monopolies like dictatorships make these
obsolete.
A central tenet of what Douglas has had to say and
perhaps the greater part of his message to his generation is the the policy to
centralise power is will to power and typifies all types of dictatorships/state
control, ie fascism and communism, which is the opposite of social credit-
Christian philosophy, will to freedom.
We dont fall into centralisation or
decentralisation, we consciously do either.
The only reserve of a global system is its ability
to aquire state assets when needed by what ever means the most
expedient. If you have read the US
National Defence Strategy 2000, it quite simply says that where the IMF and
World Bank are unable to bring any nation under control/into line it will
use the USA military to do so, except it colours it so it appears to be
eliminating potential for terrorism.
Peter
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 2:08
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] U.S.
Economics Test
Hi Everyone
Taking up points raised by Bill Ryan and John Rawson I ask the question:- "If
the banking system is becoming more and more centralised into fewer and fewer
private hands, is this in the long term interests of the world's general
populace?"
The
monoply exerted by the banking system on the world's money supply at present
is being radically misapplied as witnessed by the vast amount of poverty in
countries like Indonesia where there is vast wealth of resources being
exploited for the benefit of those outside Indonesia. Surely concentration of
the control of the world's money supply into one single privately owned bank
would really ascerbate that problem?
Does anyone agree with
that analysis? or am I missing something in the arguments being
presented?
Bill Mc Gunnigle
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 10:31
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] U.S.
Economics Test
Thanks for making that clearer, Bill. That, of course, is why I object to
the term "fractional reserve" for the system, and why I suspect the bankers
encourage its use. "Nil reserve banking" or "creation banking" (pity
the latter is clumsy) would be a better description.
Regards. John R.
From: <william_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] U.S.
Economics Test
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:45:48 -0700
(PDT)
>John, Douglas' point is correct. Beyond
regulatory
>requirements, a bank needs reserves only to
cover
>deposits lost to other banks, as they are lost.*
>Banks
of course individually gain and lose deposits to
>other banks, but
if a bank has no net loss of deposits
>as it is granting loans, it
has no need for reserves
>to cover them. A perfectly coordinated
banking system
>has no need whatsoever for reserves, exactly as if
it
>were one large monopoly bank with many branches. As
>the
banking system becomes increasingly coordinated,
>the need for
reserves is diminishing.
>
>* Simple withdrawals are similar.
Individual banks
>do not issue their own banknotes and coins, but
must
>purchase them from the central bank. If deposits
of
>banknotes and coins equal withdrawals of banknotes
and
>coins, there is no need for reserves to purchase them.
>
Regardless of the volume of transactions.
>
>
>--- John
Hermann <hermann@picknowl.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> By
Mr. McMaster: Q. So they pay three per cent and
> >> invite
the public to deposit by advertisements just
>to
> >>
get a smoke screen?-
> >>
> >> A. I should say
that.
> >
>
>That is not correct. Banks and other
depositories
>invite the public to transfer their deposits
from
>transaction accounts to interest-bearing
accounts
>because the latter generally have a reduced
reserve
>requirement (in the U.S. we find that term
deposits
>have zero mandatory reserve requirement). This
action
>effectively frees up reserves, which may be used
by
>commercial banks in support of additional lending to
>the
public.
>
>In regard to this method of acquiring excess
reserves,
>the interest paid to depositors is generally a
lower
>cost to a bank than is the cost of borrowing the
same
>quantity of reserves from within the financial
system.
>This explains the incentive for banks to
offer
>interest-bearing deposits to the public.
>
>John
Hermann
>
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Moody
friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play
Sims Stories at Yahoo!
Games.
>http://sims.yahoo.com/
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
