If you were to counterfeit $22 million [equal to our pop],it dilutes the wealth of all Australians by $1.00 per person.Our banking system is also able to conjure money into existence by what is called the fractional reserve system.In some cases banks can conjure into existence up to 9 times of the real money they have in reserves.Most of the money that is created comes in the form of debt when you take out a loan for a car,house or investment.

Since 1970 we have had an expodential growth of money as never seen in our previous history.The end result is what we are experiencing now.When banks conjure money into existence ,they are actually taking wealth from the rest of society and loaning it back to them.I think that a little inflation is good since the availability of finance encourages entrepreneurial and innnovative people to create new wealth.

Some say that Govt alone with their Reserve Banks should be soley reponsible for the generation of new money.This however gives Govt even more power over us.

Why not have a high tax on what is becoming kown as cyber money so that banks will then be encouraged to borrow from existing sources thus keeping inflation under control? Instead of increasing interest rates,Govts could soak up liquidity by increasing the tax on cyber money.We are then able to target the problem at it's source.What do you think?

See Paul Grignon's "Money as Debt" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVkFb26u9g8

Maybe it would help if you defined "cyber money", Arjay.

In my daily life I reckon that I actually touch maybe one tenth of the money that I use - the rest is in electronic transactions, either at the store using EFTPOS, or paying bills online.

Is this "cyber money"?

Are you proposing that this money is taxed, and that we all revert to using bits of paper?

How will this be a benefit to us?

Perhaps you might also explain how Banks "conjure money into existence".

As far as I am aware, they are liable to the same penalties as anyone actually printing notes, if they "manufacture" money in cyberspace.

In short, I don't believe you have either described a real problem or offered a workable alternative to the present system.

But, as I have no axe to grind for the Banking system, I will be sure to keep an open mind on the topic.

So, a little bit of explanation might be in order.

Perhaps if you start where it all seems to go wobbly - that "conjuring" bit would appear to be at the heart of the problem, so maybe you could start there..

Pericles,cyber money has been recently invented by the IMF.They created $1.4 trillion to be disbursed around the planet and had only one fourteenth of this in gold reserves.It is created from nothing and not borrowed from existing institutions.

Cyber money,is money created in a computer that is in excess of the real production in the economy.It has nothing to do with teller machines.Each year every economy must produce new money to equal the increase in the GDP.The new inflationary money above the value of GDP is cyber money.The amount of money in the US economy has doubled in the last 8 months.Most of this money is cyber money.It has yet to trickle it's way through the system.When it does ,the US dollar will halve in value.The chinese won't be happy since they are owed $ 1 trillion by the US.The collapse of the US $ will see another downward spiral.

Ron Paul has bill HR 1207 that wants to audit the Fereral Reserve to see where this cyber money has gone.Congress has not the power to see where their own tax payers debt is being spent.They suspect that this tax payer debt cyber money is being used illegally by the Federal Reserve to buy up cheap assets instead of loaning it out to businesses for which it is intended.

Unbeknownst to most people,banks do create money from nothing,but this very secret practise needs to be regulated.My question is ;should we give this power to Govt only,or should we just have proper regulation on the banks so we evolve a fairer system?

Crikey Arjay, that’s a hell of concept to grasp, for an ordinary dumbarse like me.

All I can say is; that I wouldn’t be surprised if what you express is entirely true. Afterall, nothing could be as hopelessly mad as the monetary/economic system that we’ve been living with for decades, that is based on GDP as the primary indicator or success/prosperity and the utterly absurd notion that the size of the annual economic turnover has to be forever larger, to the tune of about 3% a year, with no end to this continuous expansionism ever even thought of, let alone planned for.

GDP includes all sorts of things that should appear as negatives on the economic/financial slate, and continuous-growth economics flies totally in the face of us achieving a sustainable society and planet.

So yes, the creation of ethereal cyber money and the dilution of the value of real money as a result, with presumably the lower socioeconomic sections of society suffering much more so than their upper-class counterparts, really doesn’t engender much reaction from me, other than to raise one eyebrow!

/ :>\

arjay quote<<Unbeknownst to most people,banks do create money from nothing,but this very secret practise/needs to be regulated.>>its a bit simplistic..to say banks..create..anything

12 banks control the fed,..and the fed orders the worlds govts mint's to print all the money..its bankers need..[what the fed does do is control credit/currency exchange values..via its banks creating/trading in finate currency[infinate credit],..that it recieves intrest..[ursury]on

the problem is that the fed/creates the debt..but not the ursury/to repay the debt..[so there is a real need to issue debt that will default,..so that created..'money'..can repay..the ursury..thus we have this ongoing boom/bust,.inflation/deflation cycle

the big problem is the inflation cycle..[needed to bankrupt those chosen to die for the monetory system..[so to speak]..so we get the middle-classes going into poverty..[for cents in the dollar,[+]losing their houses,buisness,livelyhood and honour

how it's..solved..is to make all repayments repayment/of the origonal debt[ie..intrest-free/loans][no debt could be wiped out,..and in time all debt gets repaid]

bankers have grown so huge/the rothchilds own one third all the real assets and control the gold-reserves,shares,industry etc[these day-traders,..arnt trading in real/shares..nor real/gold..[everyday 3 times the ammount of real-gold mined..is traded..in gold-certificates[promises for..'future'..delivery,BUT..actual delivery is getting systematiccly complicated as more want the real stuff

[ditto for shares[the real-shares are held by an imf fund..[25 trillion worth]..BUT the fund owes 23 and a half trillion to rothchild...lol..so the wrath-child family is reaping it in..simply via intrest/ursury..[while holding the real-shaRES AS SECURITY..[LOL]

THATS WHY WE HAVE SECURITIES FRAUDS..[people want them to invest your cash/super..into some form of securities]..but its all a ponzie-sceme[the shares stay where they are,..you/me/we can only own a..'promise'..[along with the hundreds of thousands..also holding promises..lol

should BANKS/feds..<<give this power to Govt..,or should we just have proper regulation on the banks/..evolve a fairer system?>>both..why should banks be allowed to issue too much credit..[and collect intrest

[when its us signing the loan/mortgauge documents..[our signature thats the real security,...bundled together and made into bundled securities..[then underwritten by insurance companies..[we the people underwrite]

Come now Ludwig.You are not that stupid.I am talking about inflationary money.In 1970 you could buy a beer in a pub for 25c.Now it is more like $5.00.Where did all that new inflationary money come from?Individuals are not allowed to make their own money.It comes from the banking system and our own RBA.Some of it is borrowed but most is just simply created via debt.

View the movie Money As Debt and then you will fully understand what I'm talking about.All of our assets have become over inflated and our Govts and the financial systems are in denial.They are trying to stop a market correction by creating more money thus more debt.

Let the bad assets be liquidated and then the real productive economy will get us back on track.We are making the same mistakes as we did in the 1930's depression.It was prolonged for years because of the exact same policies.

UOG I agree,banks create very little.You like others seem to have an incorrect notion of money.Our fiat currency has no intrinsic value.It just represents human potential or worth.It only has value because of the faith that people put in it.

Too much inflationary money is bad for any economy since it let's the finance system feed off itself and become detached from the real economy.What I'm trying to espouse,is the regulation of inflationary money via taxes.Tax only the money that banks create from nothing since this inflationary money really takes from the wealth of the nation.

Presently they use increase in interest rates to control money supply.When you buy a car the salesman does not increase the price at a later date.The same should be said when you buy money.We can tackle the problem at it's source and then force the banks to borrow from existing sources of money without punishing the borrower.We then have more stability for borrowers so they can plan for the future and not have these cataclysmic collapses.

By the way log onto youtube see Prof Neils Harrit,Nano Thermite.You will find this very interesting.

For all the bank bashing that goes on (and I'm not accusing anyone in here of bank bashing - I'm pointing the finger more at A Current Affair, Today Tonight and their equivalents on other channels), I think we can be happy at least that our banking sector is one of the most tightly regulated in the world. That's why Australian banks aren't going under left, right and centre like many of their overseas counterparts.

That said, I think we have seen space for even tighter regulation both in the banking sector and in the non-bank lending sector. Here in Townsville, the Storm Financial fiasco hit quite hard, and the figures show that money was lent that never should have been lent. This resulted in the creation or purchase of assets which could not be financed - pensioners on $25,000 a year buying million-dollar houses and actually borrowing the bulk of the money to do this. What was even worse in the USA was people borrowing $550,000 to build a $500,000 house (3 years no deposit no repayments), living in it for three years then mailing the keys back to the bank. The bank (who must should much of the blame here for being stupid enough to give finance) ends up with an asset worth much less than the loan, unsaleable at its original value because the housing market has crashed.

Sorry for the lengthy blabbing here - curious, though, arjay - is this sort of thing what you are talking about?

its worth noting that two bob beer[we bought pre 66] was a coin minted from silver[real silver;ok sterling silver]but that silver two bob piece is worth the price of a beer STILL today

trouble is that silver coin was stolen when we went into the decimal coin-age[see we took our silver two bob coin and got a nice new cupra-NICLE coin,..the only silver coin AFTER decimilisation is the round 50 cent piece..that contains around 7 buck's worth of silver

see the worlds feds took the only constituted legal tender[silver coin]and gave us nickle[currently nickle coins even are worth very near the face value

it gets worse with the theft of our pound notes[if you read one of them they read this note can be paid in silver coin[real silver [remewmber]..now im not sure what a pound of silver is worth today[but i bought two pounds of silver[predecimal shillings]for 300 bucks

so when your parents bought thier house for 50 pounds[that then was 50 pounds of silver]..funny how your house today is still worth THE SAME WHEN FACTORED BACK INTO THE PRICE OF SILVER

thats inflation..[its real..parity price in silver hasnt gone up..[only its value in ever more worthless fiat fed paper]..inflation means the price you need to pay ever goes up,inflation is a stealth tax..[stealing our silver also led to higher inflation]..but no one told you then[and they certainly are/not telling you now]

we been sukkered,the fed began the theft when gold coin was legal tender[franking roosavelt took back the gold coin and gave it straight to the fed[who gave it to wrathchild]..the gold that is supposed to be in fort knox is rusting..[as reported by maintance staff]..so the fort knox gold has been looted long ago

its a clever scam,..find some info here
http://www.morpix.biz/x15/
more here
http://www.worldfreemansociety.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=1062
http://www.worldfreemansociety.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=1327
ignorance is no excuse
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8796&page=0

Sorry, Arjay, but you are missing the obvious.

Money, as anyone who knows anything about it understands completely, only has value when it moves, not when it is created.

You can mint, forge, manufacture, invent, conjure into existence or whatever phrase you like to employ, as much money as you like. But it won't affect anybody or anything unless and until it gets into circulation.

And how does it achieve this? Through either being earned, or being borrowed.

The problems we are facing right now are a result, to some extent, of a whole stack of money being created to buy property that had a lower asset value than the amount of the loan. Once the loan defaulted, the money was effectively destroyed.

But the transaction that brought the money into circulation was when the loan - together with it's repayment schedule and the lien on the asset - was agreed.

You can argue, as most people do, that it was the accumulation of such transactions that got us into this hole. But the transaction itself was perfectly normal, and nothing at all to do with the creation of "cyber money", in that it could equally well have taken place using dollar bills.

To add to the problem, money was advanced against paper assets - such as shares - that, once the economy started to go south, could not sustain their value. Once again, the value that had been created was destroyed.

One of the ways to achieve a balance again is indeed to refuse to borrow even more - which is the present fad of many governments - but to let these holes in the economy destroy businesses, jobs and pensions.

That would be unpopular.

It really is very simple, as long as you remember one thing.

Money has no value until it moves, and it only moves when it is used as an exchange medium for something.

Give it a go - try to identify one example where this does not hold true.

Pericles ,you are trying to distract from my central argument.Money it itself has no intrinsic value.The financial system has turned money into a commodity that feeds off expectation rather than real productivity.It was originally just a medium of exchange and store of wealth.How do you think that the cost of a beer has gone from 25C to $5.00 in 39 yrs? This represents a 2000% increase in the money supply above productivity or population increase.

The Banks have created inflationary money through their fractional reserve system.This is a reality you choose to ignore.If you were to create your own money,this is counterfeiting,but banks call it monetary policy.In reality it is theft since inflation devalues assets and savings of all in our society.How is it just for a bank to create the value of a housing loan in a computer as debt,then not only take the interest but also the principal,which wasn't theirs in the first place?

If the principal doesn't belong to the bank, then who does it belong to? Banks borrow money. They then pay the money that they borrow to builders, who build houses. The person who owns that house then slowly buys it off the bank, paying interest. The person repaying the bank pays more interest than the bank, so the bank creates a profit. If the person cannot repay the bank, the bank reclaims the property (as agreed by the borrower when they take out a mortgage) in order to reclaim lost money and (theoretically) repay its own debt. Banks don't just conjure up money every time someone takes out a mortgage. They borrow it.

otonoko<<If the principal doesn't belong to the bank,then who does it belong to?>>think of banks as getting a franchise from the fed..[the franchise holder,[banker]..is acting as an agent for the fed,..who in exchange for holding the mortgauge document..creates the credit..[by a simple book acounting..upon the reciept of the asset]

<<Banks borrow money.>>and the return money back to the fed..[to begin a bank you need to lodge a credit with the fed..[arround 50,000 cash that gives you a line of credit with the fed of say 500,000,to lend,for ursury in fiat dollars..the fed holds exclusive rights to issue for

see its their fiat..[to lend and get repaid by

[think of it as hair..[i borrow your hair..[but can only repay with YOUR hair]..its the same thing with the fed fiat-money..[we need to repay in the same fiat-money we borrowed]..the fed alone controls who gets it..and for how much intrest/ursury

<<Banks don't just conjure up money every time someone takes out a mortgage. They borrow it.>>FROM THE FEDERAL RESERVE..[or occasionally borrow it from an other fed]..all feds are owned by 12 banks..[but via crossholdings the banks are mainly controled by rothchild and a few others

the british bank was..'bought/in part created'..with a stick..[that is the longest legal-tender we ever had..[one stick..[with notches indicating tax paid to the king,..bought a one third share of the bank of england..

the fed bankers,..who lend to banks and govt's do as they chose..to whoever they chose..[they change the exchange rate as suits them..[they set intrest/ rates..give to..or take credit from..who-soever they chose..

[they control the franchise reaping their total control over govt or business according to whatever whim they chose]

they control the issue of money..[all money]..its their franchise..[we must repay in their money or default our debt]..meaning they keep our securities..[our collateral]..our homes business, investments,shares

think of it as their hair..in exchange for our labor/sweat equity

[we must work to get their hair..to pay them back in their legal tender..[their hair]..their species,..their fiat tender..

we must get it from them..[and them alone..[no one elses hair/legal tender..will do]..its a great exclusive franchise

Otokonoto, "Banks just don't conjure money into existence every time they loan out money,they borrow it." True,for the small retail banks this is correct.For the Global Reserve Banks they can virtually please themselves.The IMF has just created $1.4 trillion[ $1.4 million X million] which they had the audacity to call cyber money.They only had one fourteenth of this in gold reserves.This repesented over $200.00 for every person on the planet.It was created in a computer,not borrowed and now loaned out to various banks.To people in poor countries,$200.00 is a lot of money.The average worker on China can live on this for almost a month.

The fractional reserve system allows banks to create 9 times the money they have in reserves,this is why we need a tax on it to reduce inflation and stop the theft of your money.Paedaphilia has been happening for centuries,but that does not make it right.The Banksters have been doing this fo 300 yrs,it still does not make it right.How is it that the least productive institutions on the planet make the most profit even in hard times such as these?

Pericles refuses to acknowledge this reality because there are many in the banking and finance industry who profit from this legalised slight of hand which amounts to theft.Why do you think we now have a rapidly shrinking middle class and more poverty even in developed nations?

Arjay, having a mission to bash the banking system is all very laudable. But you mustn't mistake enthusiasm for accuracy.

>>Money itself has no intrinsic value... it was originally just a medium of exchange and store of wealth<<

It still is. We have over the years become more inventive how we conduct purely monetary exercises, but the fundamentals haven't changed.

>the cost of a beer has gone from 25C to $5.00 in 39 yrs... This represents a 2000% increase in the money supply above productivity or population increase<<

What you don't explain is why this, in and of itself, is a problem. After all, wages have also risen over the same period. And if you were to use a different commodity as your yardstick - say, sugar - you would find that the purchasing power of that dollar is actually far higher today than it was 39 years ago.

A proportion of the improved standard of living that we have experienced in those 39 years has undoubtedly been through our willingness to place ourselves in debt. Not only as individuals, but through our acceptance that debt is an instrument that companies use to expand their businesses.

This has not in any way subverted or changed the use of money in any way. The problem, as I mentioned before, is when the debt cannot be repaid, and the value in the transaction is destroyed.

You seem to be proposing a world without debt. From a purely ideological viewpoint this may seem virtuous - even biblical - but largely impractical.

Certainly, as a solution to our present concerns, it is a complete non-starter.

>>Pericles refuses to acknowledge this reality...<<

If you mean, I disagree with you, you are quite correct.

>>...because there are many in the banking and finance industry who profit from this legalised slight of hand which amounts to theft.Why do you think we now have a rapidly shrinking middle class and more poverty even in developed nations?<<

Conspiracy theories, you should be aware, generally turn out to be no more than the manifestation of a form of mild paranoia.

Alex Jones clearly explains who is to blame for the world’s financial problems...Media analysts try to place blame on free market capitalism or the greedy middle class.

However,the blame lies solely on the fraudulent Federal Reserve system.This quasi government corporation prints money out of thin air (at interest to us taxpayers),manipulating interest rates,devaluing currencies,and creating artificial boom and bust cycles.

The people need to understand how this system operates and stop complying with our own slavery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ku5u6X6LmM

Congressman Ron Paul is attracting a lot of attention for his proposal to audit the Federal Reserve bank,..the independent financial powerhouse that creates and regulates our money.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/rep-pauls-bill-to-audit-federal-reserve-nets-165-co-sponsors.html
the problem
http://www.prisonplanet.com/bilderberg-fears-losing-control-in-chaos-plagued-world.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/bilderberg-wants-global-department-of-health-global-treasury.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/vips-at-secret-summit.html
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/badgovernment.php
their cure[natzi youth]
http://www.prisonplanet.com/government-readies-youth-corps-to-take-on-vets.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/town-halls-hire-citizen-snoopers-as-young-as-seven-to-spy-on-neighbours-and-report-wrongs.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/childrens-database-launched.html
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Paying-To-Subjugate-Yourse-by-Jon-Faulkner-090516-91.html
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/south-asia/us-journo-claims-bhutto-was-killed-on-cheneys-orders_100194038.html
http://whitewraithe.wordpress.com/2008/11/06/benjamin-freedman-the-hidden-tyranny/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/5332884/ID-cards-taxman-allowed-access-to-personal-data.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=COO20090517&articleId=13646

It is generally considered poor online etiquette, oug, to fill your post with URLs without any clarification as to what, exactly, we are digging into.

However, I did notice on this occasion that the preponderance of your references pointed to a single web site, prisonplanet.com, so I took a quick peek.

Wow.

If you spend any length of time dredging through that site, oug, it is pretty certain that you will suffer some form of mental disconnect with the world at some point. So be very, very careful.

Any site that emphasises a link like this...

"CANCER CONSPIRACY? Are "they" suppressing the cure? Will YOU be the next victim? Learn the Secret Truth! - READ FULL STORY"

...can rot your brain. And that's no secret.

Or this cracker...

"Daniel Estulin, whose information from inside Bilderberg has routinely proven accurate, states that the global elite’s plan to completely destroy the economy and ultimately lower global population by two thirds..."

Conspiracy theories are two-a-penny on the web, of course, so there's no particular surprises here. Except that this site seems to be some sort of gathering place for them. A watering-hole, perhaps, where weird notions come together of an evening to graze. Where the global elite mix easily with the Illuminati, and Obama's New World Order is on first-name terms with seven-year-old "citizen snoopers".

It's brilliant.

I've added it to my favourites. Right next to xkcd.

thankyou for your in depth research perecules,..lol...i will remember your comments next time i hear..whiter than white with new enzime omo on your ever so reliable..lol...frree to air news program

its funny you do such indepth research..yet fail to refut or rebut the actual link ..as is usual in topic such as this..[rebut the messenger or the source]..because you cant refute the info

dosnt it become clear that your making no rebuttal..[means you couldnt rebut the info on the link...[yet needed to make some response,..thus chose ridicule of the messenger..,not the message

but responding to your OFF TOPIC TROLL..if the advert dosnt cure cancer i suggest you sue them..and clean up big time for suing them for dis-info..

[as this hasnt occured maybe there is a cure for cancer..[that dosnt need docters killing us with their drugs..[and radioactivity]..docters are doing quite nicely..getting the estates of those they murder,..its very proffitable not finding a cure,,,lol

i hear a guy in wa is using radio-waves to kill cancer..[another electrolisis he gives for free...just because you havnt done the research dont mean its not true..

[only last night i heard of a common weed..[called radium weed]..that cures skin cancer..[with only two applications]...so i call you even on your ridicule..[as reflecting your ignorance..[revealing your mind to be closed]

...but im responding to your off topic troll
because you cant rebut the actual info at the link..

please feel free to refute the facts,...correct the message at the link..,not ridicule the messenger...[because you cant refute the fact]

oug, with the greatest respect, I am most certainly not going to spend one single minute of my time "rebutting" a claim that there is a group of "elites" out there somewhere, which is conspiring to exterminate 80% of the world's population and then to use "advanced technology" to enable themselves to live forever.

The very concept itself is flawed.

If the world is left with a load of "elites", how would they spend their money? Who would be left to accept their money? Even assuming they had the means, and the motive, and the opportunity - why bother? If you already have that sort of money, it all seems horribly pointless.

There, and I said I wasn't even going to spend a single minute, and I've already spent two.

It may float your boat to get all excited about this stuff, but to me it is simply laughable.

Just my opinion, of course.

Have a great day.

Unless of course this is the day they finally come for you and lock you away because you know too much.

"Dr Ron Paul,the Congressman for Texas is achieving some remarkable results.Just a month ago less than 10% of Congress supported a bill to audit the US Federal Reserve Banking system."

I grabbed this from the other thread.

Did that Congressman get his support?

Pericles.Just answer a simple question.If the Reserve Banks can create money not based on value and productivity,then why can't individuals or Govts do the same thing? Give us no gobble de gook about about money only having value when it is motion.

Money represents human potential,just like potential energy,it can be stored.

Just as an exercise in how the Reserve Banks work,try this exercise.Try playing Federal Reserve Monopoly.You can use an ordinary monopoly board.The game is played with this difference.The bank is also a player who can buy properties.Distribute most of the cash amongst 4 players.Leave the bank with only 10% of the money.The bank however can exercise it's power of fractional reserve and generate 9 times the amount of real money it has on hand.Let the bank charge interest on money loaned out.You will need to photocopy lots of extra inflationary cash to play this game.Watch the value of the properties escallate as more inflated money is added to the system.In the end,the bank will always win.

It the ordinary game of monopoly there is a limited amount of cash and prices remain constant.In a growing economy there is a need for extra cash but the banks need to be stopped in creating inflationary money that destroys ordinary people's assets.

Is this a fair way to play the game of economics?

I sense that you genuinely don't understand, Arjay.

>>Pericles.Just answer a simple question.If the Reserve Banks can create money not based on value and productivity,then why can't individuals or Govts do the same thing?...Money represents human potential,just like potential energy,it can be stored. <<

Creating money is not the issue. You and I could forge money to our heart's content - so long as we don't try to put it into circulation. If the Bank simply "creates" money, then sits on it, and doesn't do anything with it, why bother to create it in the first place?

And the bit about human potential, potential energy and storage doesn't work either.

Money does not in any way "represent human potential". It is simply an expression of value, given or received, past, present or future, foregone or anticipated.

The analogy with potential energy is a total mis-characterization. In physics, you can normally calculate potential energy, and rely upon it to remain stable. There are some exceptions - a battery, being chemical, will decay - but in general you are looking at some level of stability.

Money has absolutely no value at all in storage. Banks do not - have never, in fact - simply take your deposits and put them in a vault for safe keeping. They become investments, and earn a turn in doing so.

Your Monopoly analogy is fine as far as it goes - in an economy where the only good is property, inflation will tend to increase along with the supply of credit - but only so long as the other prices in the closed system, rent in this case, are able to rise too.

But it falls down – obvious when you think about it – because in Monopoly there is only one winner. And if – as you suggest – the Bank ends up with all the cash, who is left to actually take part in the economy?

No-one is left who can buy stuff.

The money sitting in the Bank has no value at all if it cannot move, and create value elsewhere.

I haven't yet heard any reason why, in this 21st century, we need money AT ALL? Surely if we moved on to a new system then a lot of the worlds ills would fall by the wayside?
Can anyone justify it's continued use, other than to say that it's always been done this way? Lets face it, if we scrapped it, the only losers would be the wealthy, no bad thing!

max[re your millions you must see that your million is in hard cash[the plan is to do away with hard cash..[create cyber credit..[where your COMPLETE credit is on a computer

you currently 'trust' banks,..but how much you trust computers?..[able to do those clever things computers are programed to do]

the plan is to micro chip you[and then the micro chip pays the bills[if the computer says you got credit]..if it says you dont,..you wont even get a meal..nor a drink..nor paid sex..[or a bed, or transport,..or be allowed to travel]..nadda/nothing

yes we can have faith..[but who controls the computer?

[what say a hacker greenie kills your credit?..what proof you got millions of credit..[not billions of debt?]

computers are infallable right...lol..[the computer says your broke[sorry sir your credit/says your poor..[by the way the computer says you should be in jail,..we have called security,,,how much faith you have in your friends?..[they have computer credit as well..[or if they join you the cop/computer..creativity creates..[virtual debt]

maybe its time we learned computer hacking..[a key here/a key click there and the earth is yours..[simply adjust the cyber-credit]

its funny i can under stand how poor ignorants dont care..[but mate you trust your millions to thieves and ursurors]..cyber autocrat's envisioning total live time control/nightmares are trying to take over the world,..defending the indefensable..was fine when we thought we had free speech..[thought we had cash to buy net acces]

max your not dumb..[how much faith you got in computers?..[what you never had one die on you?,..never had one make a simple human serror..[never had a virus delete your info], never had that error message when posting..

[what you think your special..[proto-gore thinks he is]..lol..he really believes money..[credit]..sitting in a bank is valueless..lol..but..lets see how value-less it is when it gets disappeared...he may be more correct than he thinks..yet not for the reason he thinks..lol

This is starting to get decidedly odd.

>>I haven't yet heard any reason why, in this 21st century, we need money AT ALL? Surely if we moved on to a new system then a lot of the worlds ills would fall by the wayside?<<

Basically, Maximillion, we use money because it is the most sophisticated means of exchange so far invented. In other words, if you want to get rid of it, you have to devise a workable replacement. Otherwise, millions will starve. Quickly.

But, let's go back to basics for a moment.

Arjay asked, right at the outset:

"Why not have a high tax on what is becoming kown as cyber money so that banks will then be encouraged to borrow from existing sources thus keeping inflation under control?"

The definition of cyber money he provides is:

"cyber money has been recently invented by the IMF.They created $1.4 trillion to be disbursed around the planet and... is created from nothing and not borrowed from existing institutions."

The first problem, then, is "how do we tax the IMF?"

The IMF is financed by a bunch of around 150 countries. It lends to countries that need assistance in a crisis.

Question: if you were to tax this process, a) from which point in the transaction would you extract your money, b) who would pay the tax and - possibly most importantly - c) who would receive the tax?

Your problems don't end there, of course.

If the money is "cyber money", would the tax also be in the same form?

Have you thought through the Monopoly example yet? It might help if you set up a board, decided on some rules - Bank lending limits, interest rates etc. and played it through.

If you assume that the money you start with is all in the form of capital, you'd find that your first problem is keeping your balance sheet in order. After all, if you create a new asset by lending to a player, what will be the corresponding liability?

Let me know how you get on.

glad for serious consideration pericules quote<<The first problem, then,is "how do we tax the IMF?">>we dont we tax every transaction[a one percent transaction-tax]dispersed to the member countries as a dividend[on all between country payments/transactions

<<The IMF..lends to countries that need assistance in a crisis.>>yes but also has this nasty habit of making 's[ecial conditions[that send them broke[and force them to sell off their peoples infastructure]that has directly stolen public wealth[into multinationals monopoly]

<<from which point in the transaction would you extract your money,>>at the settlement's securities exchange

<<who would pay>>any buisness recieving overseas payment or income[all foreign currency exchangers,..takling their proceeds off shore

<<who would receive the tax?>>all the members of the un..[or rather their auiditable treasuries

<<"cyber money",..would the tax also be in the same form?>>..the real money..underpinning the cyber remains in the money origonator counties coin as debt/credit..in the same species[of coin]the only constitutionally legal tender

<<the money you start with is all in the form of capital,>>incorrect the money we start with is the countries declared cash circulation/plus its nett real value is real assets[insured asset value in case of disaster]..to allow for surity and continuance of all infastructure and asset capitalisations,

as well as a providing a clear real valuation of each nation states juristicional worth..to under pin its national unitary exchange/currency vallue and true value of its fixed asset capital as well as its citisenry skills capital,into realisable asset..[more educated citizenry means more credit]for egsample...

<<if you create a new asset by lending to a player,..what will be the corresponding liability?>>the asset gets added top the countries credit availability[and the credit for it is made available]intrest free[but with transaction tax on any international repayments

of course the un gets hugely expanded[via proportional representation by state or council district]..no countries, more local councils[say 144,000 local council districts, overseeing 144,000 treasuries[over seeing 1444,000 local curencies..[and their exchange rates

Pericles of those 150 countries who contribute to the IMF,you will find many like the USA who have foreign banks owning their currencies.It is an incestuous relationship that enslaves our entire planet.

It is not only the IMF who produce cyber money,it is the Bank of England[owned by the Rothschilds],Bank of Japan etc.The Euro is owned by a private cosortium of banks.Luckily our currency is owned by the RBA which in turn is owned by the tax payer.However we are beholding to the USA for military security thus we borrow form their perverted banking system.Do you acknowlege the existence of the fractional reserve banking system ,whereby banks are allowed to create 9 times the amount of money that they have that represent the real productivity of society?

If all I have espoused is so obiviously flawed Pericles,why do persist in such a dogged attack that to you,is obivious conspiracy theory? You have not addressed my most basic analogy of cyber money being theft by stealth.If banks can create money form nothing,then why can't individuals?

I don't think you're listening, Arjay.

>>You have not addressed my most basic analogy of cyber money being theft by stealth.If banks can create money form nothing,then why can't individuals?<<

But you can, Arjay. You can. You can create as much money as you like.

What you cannot do, is to put that money into circulation.

Because in order to do so, you have to do something with it.

Just printing the stuff won't get you very far, will it? You have to use it.

Buy something.

Lend it to somebody.

Build a hospital.

If you try this with your home-made currency, it is called forgery.

You are using a medium that is not generally recognized (your own dollar bills) in order to defraud someone else.

When a government makes currency, it does so, then...

Buys something.

Lends it to somebody.

Builds a hospital.

They are allowed to do this. It is not theft. Every dollar they create is used for a particular purpose. It is a medium of exchange. Once they put it into circulation, it is used to buy stuff, build stuff.

It puzzles me that you cannot see the absolutely obvious, Arjay.

Sure, the more money you put into circulation, the more likely you are to cause inflation. More money than goods equals higher prices. But when you are filling a hole created by the destruction of asset value, it is far better than the alternative, which would be to create mass unemployment and severe deflation.

Which bit don't you understand?

>>Do you acknowlege the existence of the fractional reserve banking system ,whereby banks are allowed to create 9 times the amount of money that they have that represent the real productivity of society?<<

I do understand capital adequacy, if that is what you are referring to.

But that has nothing to do with the "real productivity of society"

If you believe it does, please explain it to me.

So Pericles by your definition of 'capital adaquacy'[theft by stealth] or banks creating non productive money,why can't the individual create inflationary money like the banks ? You have evaded my question yet again.

Individuals creating non productive money is known as counterfeiting,by your definition it is 'capital adaquacy' if banks do it.Theft is theft no matter who does it and no amount of moral equivocation or corporate authority will change that reality.Is your moral compass buried deep in your bank shares?

*Unless of course this is the day they finally come for you and lock you away because you know too much.*

I'm following this thread with interest, frankly because I believe
that there is much misunderstanding about how the banking system
actually works.

Pericles would be able to explain it better then I can.

Mind you Pericles, that top line I quoted from you is one of those classic
OLO gems that make OLO worth reading and will long be remembered :)

Pericles, you've basically re-iterated "it's always been this way", and a better system would quickly send food where it was needed, instead of claiming it was too expensive, or no-one would pay for it, yet we dump millions of tons of food every year world-wide!
O.U.G., you've missed my point, stuff credit, I'm talking about dumping money TOTALLY! the whole "capitalist system", it seems to have out-lived it's usefulness, and is creating more misery than good.
As for computers, yes, I've had one die, and lost heaps of stuff, and I've been "hacked" also, but, unlike many, I keep absolutely NADA on 'puter, not even my own name, all e-addies are for nicknames, no details, so there's nothing they can steal from me. That should make it clear how trusting I am, lol!

max its not the theft im concerned about[its trusting the credit i hold to a computer, to have a chip that says i can buy[or sell]..to stand in a shop and find govt edited my worth into a status of non person

with physical cash we at least hold a fiat that others see as value[i can chose to gift it to who i want for an out cast to buy a cup of coffee to[or use it to by drugs..that govt decides arnt legal[or govt has decided arnt allowed[it can get so big brother..

govt is meant to serve the people not police them[with cyber credit it becomes moral policing,it may say this hooker cant get credit,or this person is a virtual prisoner..[no credit for transport,or for comunication[or info]

of course thats fine with the wowsers..[till booze cant be bought,or your favourite indulgence gets censored at the click of a button[or they find sweets cause cancer, omnipotant power will find ways to msupport their mates[and disadvantage their chosen enemy]

they can say your too young[or too old, to decide, they can say woman cant have credit[or men]..with computers its as simple as a click of the mouse,..you can even set differential preferances[make each credit worth double[or half]

we have seen how a certain type person gets attracted to a certain calling..[pedophiles seek to be with kids for egsample..[or frightend people become public servants,bullies become cops..[what sort will love being a virtual god?

This is becoming a little repetitive.

The present monetary system, by any definition, is not perfect.

But much like democracy, it is the closest we have come so far to a halfway workable solution to a very complex issue. For democracy, the challenge is to encourage people to value and preserve their freedoms, while shouldering a reasonable share of responsibility ourselves. As a system, it has been bent, buckled, tortured and squeezed into many different sets of clothes. French democracy differs from German, which differs from Swedish and so on. But they all do their best, even when those concepts are rorted by piddling politicians at the drop of a hat.

Money is much the same. It attempts to address the problem of how, in a world of six billion people, to facilitate as much as possible the exchange of goods and services across as wide a selection of its population as possible.

The present status of money is that it has evolved from being a simple lump of metal with some geezer's head stamped on it, to a highly flexible unit of information, that can be used in a myriad of highly sophisticated ways.

It has always been at heart an instrument that carries information. When I was a lad, the pound note carried a simple statement, "I promise to pay the bearere on demand the sum of one pound."

Nothing has changed, except that the piece of paper has morphed into a series of electrical impulses.

But our present financial situation has nothing to do with money, or the concept of money. It has to do with debt, and the creation of debt.

And you can't blame the concept of debt for the problems - that's just shooting the messenger.

>>So Pericles by your definition of 'capital adaquacy'[theft by stealth] or banks creating non productive money,why can't the individual create inflationary money like the banks?<<

Arjay, I cannot say it any more clearly.

You.

Can.

You can.

You are able to.

It is entirely possible, for you so to do.

Vous pouvez.

Sie können

Možete

Maaari kang etc.

pericles quote<<..the pound note carried a simple statement,"I promise to pay the bearere on demand the sum of one pound.">>such poetic licence[in fact it was a promise to pay in sterling sliver[by going to commonwealth bank]

recall the brits have pounds STERLING[that was a guarentee for the grade of silver [you could get a pound of silver for[in exchange for the pomisary note

well the promise is no more[we lost our pounds[in weight] for dollar in weight[that is only a fraction of the weight of a pound[to be redeemed IN STERLING SILVER]

now one pound promise is two bucks in cupra-NICKLE coin[no where near the weight of one pound of sterling grade silver

money USED to be worth its weight in GOLD[but we lost the gold satandard after the fed took over[and the fed kept the gold
we lost the silver at decimilisation[AND the fed kept the silver

we lost our copper [AND THE FED KEPT THE COPPER]

now the nickle is at parity..we are to lose our nickle..[AND THE FED KEEPS THE NICKLE

YES a lot has changed to say <<Nothing has changed,>>is a great absurdity, we have lost all that gold/silver copper and soon too our nickle[what value you put on that

a note cost's 7 cents to print
a coin costs near its face value to coin[mint]
a virtual dollar costs nothiong

<<the piece of paper has morphed into a series of electrical impulses.>>but where is the stolen gold silver copper and soon too we will ask where is our cupra nickle?

“But our present financial situation has nothing to do with money, or the concept of money. It has to do with debt, and the creation of debt.”

Huh? How can debt not having anything to do with the concept of money, within a financial system?

Pericles, what about the consumption of capital, rather than the consumption of interest generated from that capital? Doesn’t this have at least as much to do with our financial system and its healthy survival as debt does?

I’m referring to the continual depletion of our non-renewable resource base (capital) as opposed to resources derived from, and wealth generated from, the non-depletion of a predominantly renewable sustainable resource base (interest).

Doesn’t the core of a better monetary system lie with the means of generating wealth in the first place, and our ability to keep generating wealth to an extent that is in line with the demand?

How are we going to return to a healthy financial system when the demand is forever rapidly increasing while our capital is rapidly decreasing?

Unfortunately I see all this hoopla about our current financial predicament, across the developed world, as being little more than a HUGE distraction from this core issue.

The absolute basics completely don’t add up – rapidly increasing populations and rapidly decreasing means of supporting them.

THIS is surely the essential issue here.

Ludwig<<How are we going to return to a healthy financial system when the demand is forever rapidly increasing..while our capital is rapidly decreasing?>>there is the rub,it boils[i think]to debt to consume or build...

see that consuming destroys value if its only investing in a depriciating asset,..thus this con-sumption needs to be offset by value adding..that builds up real assets,..[utilities that serve as a means of asset building or of future value]

<<The absolute basics completely don’t add up..rapidly increasing populations and rapidly decreasing means of supporting them.>>..absolutly,..we need to make valuable the skills and talents of our people

realising the value in having people with skills/education/problem/solving..not just consumers consuming[but creators creating]investing in creating assets not ever faster devaluing consumables

we have the means to value people according vto their skills[to see that the best get more, say to get into a course there is a basic credit for the course

[then more credit to set up the best from the course..into buisness pilot,..with the best..owing a share in that buisness their skills create

You are confusing the issues even further than Arjay already has, Ludwig.

I suggested that “our present financial situation has nothing to do with money, or the concept of money. It has to do with debt, and the creation of debt.”

To which you responded:

>>Huh? How can debt not having anything to do with the concept of money, within a financial system?<<

At a simplistic level, of course it does. But let's see if I can explain my point with a sporting analogy.

Australia are playing India at cricket.

Brett Lee (assuming he's fit) bowls a bouncer at Virender Sehwag, hits him on the helmet, and causing him to be led off the field.

Now, in this situation, the bouncer is debt, and money is cricket.

Bouncers happen in cricket. They are part of the game. All fast bowlers employ them.

Without cricket, there are no bouncers. It requires a bowler, and a batsman, both of whom are necessary for the game to be conducted.

You ask "how can bouncers not have anything to do with cricket, or the concept of the game?"

My suggestion is that Sehwag's hospitalization "has nothing to do with cricket, or the concept of cricket; it has to do with bouncers, and with a bouncer making contact with the batsman's head"

While it is true that without the concept of money, debt would not exist, and that without the concept of cricket, bouncers would not exist, there is no direct connection between the game of cricket itself and the hospitalization of Virender Sehwag.

There are many steps between the two concepts.

Cricket leads to confrontation between bowler and batsman, which sometimes leads to bouncers, which occasionally leads to a crack on the head.

Money leads to various financial instruments, including the ten-dollar bill, the CD, the overdraft, the mortgage, the loan book etc. which sometimes lead to debt, and which occasionally leads people - and companies, and countries - into debt problems.

Is that a little clearer?