| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] the goldsmith "fraud" story | | Date: | Tuesday, July 1, 2008 11:32:46 (+0200) | | From: | Swieto Radosci <radosc @........pl>
|
| In reply to: | Message 5428 (written by keith wilde) |
Ratio between factor 1: money backed by tangibles and factor 2: credit
backed by reputation of the issuer - heavily matters.
Now we have much more credit than money. Diminishing world reserves of
food & oil (factor 1) and worsening reputation (factor 2) of the biggest
credit issuer - lead to global shortage of the basic means of exchange,
being a foundation for our civilization. That is a tragic fact and
everyday experience of the growing number of people. We have end of
civilization in those places, where the shortage happens.
Also matters liquidity of banking capital. In my opinion it was
aristocracy and than middle class which deprived modern banking system
from liquidity by promoting tangible but not liquid assets - real
estates inherited through many generations - as collateral for huge
credits. It is profitable for creditors and creditees but destructive
for stability of society as a whole, especially in times of depression.
Huge loans granted against those unliquid assets started abnormal
accumulation of capital and excessive drainage of resources.
Now - 300 years after that invention - we are drained by the same
mechanism, especially in neo-colonial countries like Poland, invaded by
foreigners with open credit lines. In such financing all administrative,
conceptual and construction work is done by Poles, but profit from
investment finally goes outside Poland.
Kristof Levandovski
keith wilde pisze:
> Bill, your response to Swieto is built on a premise that only gold is
> money. But the circumstances you recite demonstrate that money is not
> restricted in form to tangibles. Credit also serves as "money". The
> latter appears to be a somewhat ambiguous concept (not just in your
> essay, but in reality).
>
> Keith Wilde
>
> */William Hugh McGunnigle <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz>/* wrote:
>
> HI Swieto
> he contractual nature of the original "Goldsmiths promissory
> notes" does not alter the fact that they used the trust generated
> by their
> "gold stores" to issue promissory notes in excess of their actual
> gold
> stores in order to gain a monetary profit from "loans" they
> extended to
> other people. In other words they issued "promissory notes' for
> money they
> did not actually have. I believe that is defined as "Fraud" in most
> countries of the world in both secular and religious areas. This
> practice
> still takes place in our monetary system except that it is now
> legally
> approved by various goverenments. It enables those without assets
> to make
> money by simply manipulating money supplies using other peoples
> assets as a
> backup. Banks are allowed to call mortgage debts as assets when in
> reality
> they are liabilities. the present crisis in the US banking system
> has been
> brought about by banks issuing loans based on real estate
> mortgages. Now
> that property prices are slumping this is now being hammered home
> to those
> organisations. Their socalled assets are not solid at all but
> subject to
> fluctuations in the Property Market, therefore the solidity of
> these "loan
> investments" has proven to be a cloudcukooland dream. Thus the
> whole fallacy
> of the world's banking system is exposed. The castle of cards is
> delicately
> poised near collapse. It only needs a small push to create a new
> slump far
> deeper and far reaching than the 1930's debacle.
> Bill mc Gunnigle
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Swieto Radosci"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 10:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] the goldsmith "fraud" story
>
>
> > Replying to Bill Ryan:
> >
> > "It appears in actuality that their loans were promissory notes,
> promises
> > to pay on demand, which were contractual in nature and not
> warehouse
> > receipts. That isn't fraud no matter how you want to slice it."
> >
> > ------
> >
> > That reasoning is not accurate. The fraud starts when the
> promise "to pay
> > Bearer on Demand" is NOT backed by tangible assets being stored
> in their
> > liquid form, as grain, gold, silver or even cigarettes. The
> fraud starts
> > when a starter promises (by promisory note) without having those
> excessive
> > and liquid assets on stock, acting with hidden or speculative
> (based on
> > precognition) intentions.
> >
> > The fraud with money started when "on Demand" promissory notes
> were issued
> > to an anonymous public against frozen and unproductive assets
> (held by
> > elites), forcing them to expanding profit. Hence the neccesity of
> > interest, being an executor of that profit taken from nothing
> workable.
> >
> > The legal (contractual) status of a promissory note has nothing
> to do with
> > money fraud issue.
> >
> > Kristof Levandovski
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> kwilde@tc-biodiversity.org
> 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 radosc@waw.pdi.net
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message