It is reported today that Big Business is pushing for company tax to be halved and GST increased by an "unspecified" amount!

This sort of reasoning in these very economically "delicate" times is to say the least very inflammatory. There must be many many people who are poised on the brink financially, and with all the projected Budgetary impost about to be levied against each and every one of us in the immediate future, one could be forgiven for wondering if this is a deliberate greed inspired conspiracy to create civil unrest throughout the community.

The people who lobby government to achieve financial benefit at the expense of the poorer groups across the community should be aware that to continue pushing the underprivelaged closer to the edge can and possibly will push this country towards the inevitable breakdown of our society!

We are currently going through some very dangerous times both financially and politically and the utmost caution should be exercised by all groups in an effort to minimise the effects of the financial downturn!.....This is the wrong time to be advocating changes to a very delicately balanced economy!

the real issues are complicated..[what investment..will these new investors invest in..if there are any proffits to be made then that means they are sucking cash/proffits out in the end..or else end up owning yet more aussie assets

[its more like a subsidy/tax break for the all-ways-ready rich...because the poor dont earn enough to bank..a circular reasoning process..for them furinours to come loot and plunder the assets of the poor even more]

how im seeing it..is corperations have subverted the rights of the people..[its time we all had.. FAIR EQUALITY..lets just dump the corperate tax rate..all together..and treat all income at the same tax scale..be they homegrown rich..[or overseas bornm rich..[it its earned here you pay tax here]no egsemptions

and while were at it..either give the people limited liability..like the corperatess have..[or remove the limited liabilities off the dead corperations]...lets face it..there are living faces..[greedy faces behind every limeted incorperation..]let them near the same liability as us living

[time to tax all of us..at the same scale,..be they living people or dead incorperation's..[multinational/zombies sucking the life out of the living]...if investment is needed..issue shares..[and let our compulsory/supper..''contributions''..or aussie investors..pay for it]

and while were at it lets make it so NO ONE gets gst egsemption...[if you buy it you pay it..[no egsemptions..[and no increase of the rate]...yes those who claim it back in tax..or simply get egsemptions..love it..

.but the poor who dont earn enough..to put in a tax refund form..get stuck with this compulsory tax..[just like its the poor fool low-income;..mugs who will wear the carbon taX..[while not getting any of its credit]..

its all about taxing the poor into early graves..[us subsidising them]..and them..getting first class/health/super/travel services..while we mugs.. pay ever more..pay for their over generouse benifits

Crackup.I was thinking the very same this morning.They want to transfer their tax liability to the consumer.Isn't that nice of them?The big corporates created this debacle in and now want us to pay again.How much poverty do they want?

Large Corps can esaily pass on the GST but small business with small margins absorbs some of it.Their argument is that to attract capital they need to pay less tax.Well if we have a National Monetary Fund as I've suggested,we don't need to borrow from foreign banks who just create money from nothing anyway.

We would not then have a private debt of $650 billion nor Kevin's debt soon to be $300 billion.We can finance our own future without their inflation or debt slavery.It can be done but the banking lobby has a strangle hold on our Govts.It is time to become aware and demand change.Kevin jumps up and down feigning outrage at the CBA's increase in interest rates but Kevin is just their puppet.

You really have to wonder about the moral health of some of these business people to think that it is okay to plump up the wealth of CEOs and major shareholders at the expense of ordinary people.

I bet they used the mythical job creation argument while they continue to offshore jobs overseas - and they will keep doing it regardless of any cuts to company taxes. You can bet there won't be any increase in wages to facilitiate these higher taxes for consumers.

Pathetic but predictable.

"It is time to become aware and demand change.Kevin jumps up and down feigning outrage at the CBA's increase in interest rates but Kevin is just their puppet." very true indeed.

We should stop the practice of allowing big corporations fund political parties. Should even go further, make serious white-collar crime a capital offence. Commercial crooks like B. Madoff should be executed like in China.

It is only an idea cuphandle/crackup.
Not one the PM is likely to run with but an understanding of it and its intentions may be worthwhile, so too could it be.
Just as some want the GST raised, an idea Rudd has no intention of following.
We do need to revamp our taxation system.
We like the world have bills to pay.
And much like events like the recent bush fires and northern floods it is more often than not the battlers pay most.
Any reform that stops rich tax avoidance is worth a try.
We however are building ants nests into mountains here, no plan to put the idea to work exists, and all ideas need airing ,should be considered.

Belly I don't think you understand.The corporates want to halve their company taxes on profit and put that liability on the consumer.The GST does not tax corporate profit nor does it tax shareholder profit.It is a consumption tax and the poor proportionately spend more on consumption.

Well Guys! Maybe the 10% Flat Tax Rate right across the board is not such a bad idea after all!

Y'know Arjay, it occurs to me that forums like this are the only places where you can say the stuff you do without everybody around you choking in their beer and falling about laughing.

>>Well if we have a National Monetary Fund as I've suggested,we don't need to borrow from foreign banks who just create money from nothing anyway. We would not then have a private debt of $650 billion nor Kevin's debt soon to be $300 billion.We can finance our own future without their inflation or debt slavery<<

Mind you, it doesn't stop the people who read it from falling about laughing, but fortunately you can't see them, so you can pretend they aren't there.

But as we have discussed many times on other threads, i) you don't understand what you are talking about and ii) until you do, you will be unable to see how impractically fanciful your (borrowed) ideas are.

Enjoy your day.

Before Pericles falls to the floor laughing, he may want to check these out

Banks create money out of thin air
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIo7IYVCIXM

The Federal Reserve Fraud in 5 parts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEZfMruLMSI&NR=1

One US senator was murdered by the bankers before he could impeach them.

I owe you a debt of gratitude, Philip Tang.

I had been wondering for some time how this mantra "Banks create money out of thin air" came from. That YouTube video explains everything.

But...

The very nicely-spoken lady missed one vital step in the sequence.

She perfectly correctly shows how Banks are allowed to make $250,000 (and more) in loans, against assets of $100,000.

But she omitted to mention where the money contained in those loans actually comes from.

A simple exercise in double-entry bookkeeping will explain the mechanics.

The $100,000 CD is issued. It is a liability, balanced against the asset (Cash). During the year, $5,000 in interest will be added to the liability.

The Bank makes a loan of $90,000. The $90,000 appears as an asset, but $90,000 walks out of the door at the same time. The Asset side of the balance sheet now shows $10,000 in cash, and an asset (loan) of $90,000.

The total is still $100,000.

So until and unless the Bank earns interest on its loan - which hopefully is at a higher rate than the 5% it is borrowing at - it has nothing left in the till to lend.

However, it does have security on the loan, and a reliable income stream from that loan, so it is in a good position to raise more money on the money market, or issue more shares in return for an increase in its capital base and so on.

But the fallacy in the video is that the money is actually available to lend, from that original deposit.

On the one hand, it is true that they can lend a multiple of their asset base.

On the other, it is not true that this money magically appears in their vaults to enable them to do so.

They borrow it.

Ultimately, the Treasury (or Fed, or whoever) has to make that money available to the economy as a whole.

Or alternatively, withhold it. Which is known as a "credit crunch".

Hope this helps.

Pericles retreates to accountancy gobble-de-gook to confuse the issue.On the balance sheet the rule is debit assets/expenses and credit liabilities/income.These notions of positive and negatives in accountancy are opposites.Assets and expenses are opposites thus also liabilities and income are opposites,yet they appear on the same side of the balance sheet.Mathematically it works out because they have swapped a positive for a negative but logically it makes no sense.

I asked why this is so of an accountant of more than 35 yrs and he could not explain it.It is just accepted as tradition.Accountants like lawyers like to confuse the issue so they can expand their empires.

The money created by banks through the fractional reserve system is an asset not a liability,since the bank is not liable to repay it to anyone.There is nothing more simple than business or household budgets when looking at the bottom line.There are positives and negatives but those who want easy profit,muddy the waters with semantics to gain advantage,which is exactly what Pericles is doing now.Pericles is implying that we are all stupid since he relying on the semantics of accountancy to confuse the issue.

This system of creating money from nothing must be taken from the irresponsible banking community.Since 1970 they have inflated our currency by 15 times or 1500% and thus we have over inflated house prices and produced a monetary system in a state of collapse.It is time for ordinary folk to take control and bring some sanity to this system which has failed us dismally.

pericules loves making his/her destractions[he/she minimises the onselling of the surity..[mortgauge documents,that get bundled and onsold[giving the banks back the cash[and the risk],

the bank now is only an agency that passes along a percentage of the money/ursury it recieves][but the cash it lent..it has fully gotten back..[by onselling the surity..[securitised mortgauge documents]..

we wont get into the fact that default at any stage means they seize the surity by faulse pretences..[usually by putting before the corupt court system a photocopy of the origonal documents..they allready onsold..[securitised]years before]

we wont get into bankfees..[where before we actually got intrest on every penny..[nor the overnight banking cash/scam where the same cash on hand;assets are doubled up..[by being in the bank in daytime..[but not in the bank at night...because someone on the other side of the planet is using it..as their day trading surity...

there are very clever money manipulators..playing games even bankers are unaware of..here is my mortgauge document with out standing debt[i sell my house and you need to buy your credit by signing a mortgauge document..[you get credit[it goes to my bank to pay off mine[but i dont get my document back..[its still a surity they securitised]

but the point is banks only ever keep a certain ammount of actual cash[the extra goes to the fed..[the fed holds all the banks extra funds[when your bank pays off my mortgauge it is simply a book entry, credit/debt moves from one bank's books to the other..[no real money ever changed hands,..and the securitised paper stays in the hands of those fools who think its a real security...

the fact still remains its a private for proffit franchise..underwritten by our taxes..that go straight to the fed[under the terms of the bankruptsy...via war debt our govts owed to the bankers ..that allowed the bankers to take over the worlds feds[when govts should be running the scam,..not multinational ursurists,

pericles has added the light of reason and truth to the thread.
his/her first post here said it all for me.
We each of us, should try to post threads that search for reasons and answers, not bury truth in this way.

The beautiful thing about the truth, Arjay, is that it won't go away just because you want it to.

You can hide from it, run away from it, put your hands over your eyes and pretend it isn't there, stick your fingers in your ears and go la-la-la-la-la, but when you look up, it is still there.

>>Pericles retreates to accountancy gobble-de-gook to confuse the issue.<<

It is plain English, Arjay. You understand all the words I used, you just don't like what they tell you.

>>On the balance sheet the rule is debit assets/expenses and credit liabilities/income.<<

Income and expenses appear on the Profit & Loss account, Arjay, not on the balance sheet.

>>Assets and expenses are opposites thus also liabilities and income are opposites,yet they appear on the same side of the balance sheet<<

Take a look at any balance sheet - there are plenty to find with only a couple of clicks - and search for expenses and income.

They're not there, are they?

>>I asked why this is so of an accountant of more than 35 yrs and he could not explain it.It is just accepted as tradition.<<

My advice is not to use this person to do your tax returns.

>>The money created by banks through the fractional reserve system is an asset not a liability,since the bank is not liable to repay it to anyone.<<

The strange thing about this statement is that you can look at the balance sheet of any Bank, and you will immediately see one thing: it balances.

That means that for every asset, there is a corresponding liability. Any loan they make has to be offset by a liability - either a deposit, or their own borrowings.

The other important thing to understand is that two half-truths do not make one truth.

So while the money that they "create" does not have to be "repaid" to anyone, in your parlance, the money they borrow in order to deliver the cash to you - the other side of the balance sheet - does.

Hope this helps

Actually P', it does. I was married to an accountant, but could never really understand her more esoteric pronunciations, you've explained it far more simply, I thank you. I won't claim to understand it ALL, but you've given me at least a glimmer.

from
http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=2431

in reply to the question[big buisness or conspiricy]
Who Controls the Federal Reserve System?

Board of Governors:
Ben S. Bernanke(Jew) – Chairman
Donald L. Kohn(Jew) – Vice Chairman
Kevin M. Warsh(Jew)
Elizabeth A. Duke(White European)
Daniel K. Tarullo(White European)

Federal Reserve District Banks:
Eric S. Rosengren(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
William C. Dudley(White European) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Charles I. Plosser(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia
Sandra Pianalto(White European) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
Jeffrey M. Lacker(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond
Dennis P. Lockhart(White European) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
Charles L. Evans(White European) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
James B. Bullard(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Gary H. Stern(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis
Thomas M. Hoenig(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City
Richard W. Fisher(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
Janet L. Yellen(Jew) – President, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

Of the five(5) members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, three(3) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 60%. Of the twelve(12) Federal Reserve District Bank presidents, eight(8) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 67%. Jews are approximately 2% of the United States population. This means that Jews are over-represented on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors by a factor of 30 times, or 3,000 percent, and over-represented among the presidents of the Federal Reserve District Banks by a factor of 33.5 times, or 3,350 percent.

This extreme numerical over-representation of Jews among the members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Reserve District Bank presidents cannot be explained away as a coincidence or as the result of mere random chance

it has been well recorded that jews cant charge each other ursury[as even revealed by a search on this forum
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/search.asp?cx=partner-pub-0168091956504304%3Ayb7rk7-ta83&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=windows-1252&q=jews+ursury&sa=Search#1075

thus whosoever charges a fellow jew ursury dooms themselves into hell..[thus clearly those jews running the banking system cannot be charging each other ursury]...no matter how cleverly we may talk about balance sheets...the one surity in the balance..is not to charge ursury to a brother jew

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=gd&q=jews+ursury&hl=en-GB&rls=MEDA,MEDA:2008-36,MEDA:en-GB

clearly if they are charging each other ursury they are revealed as godless athiests..[capable of doing the most vile]..is this not excuse enough to audit the fed..[to find out if these ursurors controling the issueing of credit and currency ursury free to their fellow jews..are god abiding or godless]...if godless the system they suss-taint is revealed as godless

I shall ignore your anti-semitism oug, and address some of your other misapprehensions.

>>pericules loves making his/her destractions[he/she minimises the onselling of the surity.<<

If I understand you correctly you are suggesting that I "minimize" the impact that securitization has had on the economic pain we are suffering.

That simply isn't so. I have written here on a number of occasions that the careless packaging of toxic debt, and the manner in which the true nature of the borrower has been obscured - often with the active assistance of Rating Agencies - has been a major "first cause".

I have in fact stressed that it was this process, where the quality of the security was hidden, that caused so much pain when it became necessary to unravel the deals involved.

For the US borrower, all they needed to do was send back the house keys and move out. They had no further obligation.

But for the Bank, they lost the income stream, and also had to write off (revalue downwards) some portion of the underlying asset against which they had lent. If that liability - i.e. the reduced value of the property - was also reflected in multiple "packages" that had been used as assets on someone else's balance sheet, the whole edifice comes a-tumbling down.

By the way, I'm not an accountant. I never have been an accountant. Unlike Maximillion, I have never been married to one. I have had no formal training in finance. I do not work in Finance, nor have I ever worked in Finance.

I am however interested in what goes on in the world, and in making sure that I understand it as much as possible.

>>the fact still remains its a private for proffit franchise..underwritten by our taxes..that go straight to the fed[under the terms of the bankruptsy...via war debt our govts owed to the bankers<<

It might help a little if you wrote more carefully, oug. I don't understand a word of this, and it seems to be at the heart of your concerns.

http://www.apfn.org/APFN/Fed_reserve.htm
gives a brief overvieuw
http://www.gibson2.com/econ135/fed.pdf

it is suggested you read the creature from jeckle island

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=the+creature+from+jekyll+island+download&aq=3&oq=the+creature&aqi=g10

or the audio version
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4457906/The_Creature_From_Jekyll_Island_-_G._Edward_Griffin

http://goldismoney.info/forums/radio.blog/
click on last link
[skip the intro]

there is plenty of info on the topic
http://www.pdf-search-engine.com/G.%20Edward%20Griffin%20The%20Creature%20from%20Jekyll%20Island-html-www.beearly.com/pdfFiles/Jekyll10112006.html

the book is haRD TO FIND..[SEEMS THERE IS A second book[most links link to some intervieuw]..but research reveals the truth, dispite the obvious attempts to muddy the water's
http://www.spielbauer.com/JekyllDownload.htm
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA,MEDA:2008-36,MEDA:en-GB&q=creature+from+jekyll+island+ebook&revid=1602833997&ei=7Is5SoDoCsWjkAWyluCsCw&sa=X&oi=revisions_inline&resnum=0&ct=broad-revision&cd=2&tbo=1

You are obviously hooked on conspiracy theory, oug.

And as with any conspiracy theory, there is little point in arguing facts with you, because you clearly won't accept them.

But just out of interest, and using your own mental faculties rather than parrotting the chatterings of others, could you please describe to me once again the point at which you believe that money is being "created out of thin air", which seems to be the mantra on which your misperceptions are based.

The reality, whether you like it or not, is that the creation of an asset automatically brings with it the creation, or recognition, of a liability. This is most often in the form of a promise to repay, at sometime in the future, the amount that was "created".

There is absolutely no exception to this rule.

None.

Today Obama has given more power to the US Fed Res.He has given them more power to Govern the operations of the smaller banks and control over the Corporations who have been bailed out.Talk about putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8104700.stm

Obama has not a clue and transfers responsibility to a GROUP OF PRIVATE BANKS WHO CREATED THIS WHOLE DEBACLE!

The Fed is not doing it's job since the business community is now suffering from a shortage of credit since the Fed is too busy bailing out it's mates and probably using tax payer's debt money to buy up cheap assets.This is why Ron Paul and now 231 congressmen want an audit.We are also seeing our rates rise because of this shortage of credit.This will only prolong and deepen the recession.

see; http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/new-hard-evidence-of-continuing-debt-collapse-3-3407

Hi Pericles. What do you think of the following documentary, "Monopoly men, (Federal Reserve Fraud)"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7065177340464808778

Perhaps you could enlighten us about the role of the Federal Reserve which is not a body of the US government.

Stop the presses, Arjay has spoken!

>>Obama has not a clue and transfers responsibility to a GROUP OF PRIVATE BANKS WHO CREATED THIS WHOLE DEBACLE!<<

Frankly, Arjay, if I had to choose whom to believe on the topic of US finances between you and President Obama, I have to admit that it would not be you.

I hope you are not offended, but I'm dead cetain he knows considerably more than you do about finance.

In fact, I suspect the First Dog, Bo, would be well in the running for that honour.

If you had the first inkling, even the tiniest glimmer, of finance knowledge, even merely of simple balance sheets, you would not embarrass yourself with these outbursts.

This is classic:

>>The Fed is not doing it's job since the business community is now suffering from a shortage of credit <<

One minute you rail at the Fed for creating money, now you accuse it of constraining credit.

Which, just so that you cannot possibly misunderstand how silly your statement is, is the exact opposite of "creating money"

And thanks for another edifying video, Philip Tang.

>>What do you think of the following documentary, "Monopoly men, (Federal Reserve Fraud)" <<

Well, for a start, it is not a documentary.

It is tabloid journalism, the sort with which Today Tonight would be embarrassed to be associated. I'm only surprised that they didn't point out that the Fed's Board of Governors are in fact aliens, whose spacecraft, even now, is being held in readiness for their departure in Area 51.

If you really want to understand the need for the Fed, do some research on what happened when the US Government actually tried to run the currency on their own. The nineteenth century was littered with credit crises, culminating in the Wall Street Panic of 1907, that "caused what was at that time the worst economic depression in the country's history"

http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/E/usbank/bankxx.htm

Rather than rely on YouTube dross, take a straightforward walk through the essay at the above link. It is not too long, very interesting, and deals only in reality.

Ahhh, but WHOSE reality?
Sorry, couldn't help throwing a little perspective in there.

perculior<<The/reality..the creation of an asset automatically..brings..the creation/liability.>>..pure insanity and typical of the dross you consistantly post

go to the gold fields..finding a nugget creates an asset..[show me where..<<''the..creation/finding..of the asset created a liability''>>]...and if/your going to say transport costs or some other debt is a liability,...i will remind you that your saying the creation AUTOMATICLLY brings a liability

[so i will say i walk in my garden..finding a four-leaf/clover,or a rare plant..or some hidden stash of coins,..or make a pot from clay found in my yard..[fired in leaves..picked up off the ground..[where is the liability the asset creation..''automaticlly'..created]lol

<<This is most often in the form of a promise to repay,at sometime in the future,..the amount that was"created".>>...your talking about BUYing an asset..[yet..again your excluding barter or simply exchange or even gift..or any one of the many other possabilities to aquire assets..

[you still persist in yout ignorance to overstate..your simplistic over-simplifications..quote<<..There is absolutely...lol..no exception..to this rule...None.>>...lol

you wanted it..in my own words..[yet refuse to listen to the proofs i provided]...ok i am the fed...i give you a fixed unit of exchange[legal tender]..in the form of a one dollar note..[it costs me..like the fed]..7 cents to print]

in exchange i get from you an iou..[at the generous ursury of 5 percent]...you have a devalueing asset..[1 buck]...i have a negotiatable instrument,..that inflates in value,..next year your dollar is still worth one dollar..[my negotiatable instrument is worth one dollar AND five cents]...where are you going to get the 5 cents..ursury from..to ever repay me

oh and by the way..i onsold your iou..[for a dollar 15cents]..in the form of a 5 year note...[they got a discount/but hey..im generouse to my real mates...but you can still make your payments to me...lol

[gotta love..this exclusive franchise/me and me mates have..via this banking cartel...i got my dollar back on the securities market..[and have printed..10 more dollar bills..=70 cents..[plus my costs of 35 cents for the bus fare]

and will give govt their share after i pay my other costs..[think i will pay myself 7 cents..in wages that should buy me an other dollar note]

Can you say this? can you talk about true concerns with the forum?
Well I am going to find out.
This thread is one of a few that concern me.
I am no angel, my entry into this forum was blighted by poor spelling and heated by genuine dislike and distrust of the then federal government.
I still feel unhappy on looking at some of those posts, mine.
And yes I fought battles I should have avoided with posters no longer active here.
But we seem to have lost some good ones , is it our fault?
Pericles takes the task on here, but we seem bogged down on
falsehoods in mud throwing at shadows ideas that some one must be to blame for this crisis.
I miss[ strange he looked for me in my absence] Forrest gump is he still here?
We all should try very hard to get threads started that are fresh and bring posters not turn them away.
I highlight again this thread started because business put an idea up no one intended it was to be law no one should be told your idea is not worth debating but some of the things being said here are stopping debate I am sure many do not return to such threads onceis enough

belly/here is my concern..[bankers control money..[and monetary supply,..its their exclusive franchise,..they create the money..[but dont create the ursury[intrest]..needed to repay the outstanding debt..[thus we have the boom/bust cycle..thus..we have this beast called inflation...all controled by issueing more or less credit..[by the banks]

quote from percules link<<..economists blame the state banking system for contributing to the volatility in the economy,..<<the banking system not be the cause..[they charge us/more of their exclusive franchise[money]..needed to pay the intrest..[than they issue..via lending]

<<..overly/optimistic banks..would issue too many banknotes..which would accelerate..the growth of the economy...However,this would eventually..lead to inflation and an over-extension of credit.>>>it still does..[quote/from] http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/E/usbank/bank08.htm

look at the graph,..revealing the boom/bust/value/cycle..because more or less money is issued/defaulted..[BUT because of ursury..it..never can..all be repaid...its created by borrowing it..from the banks..[via the issue body/the fed]

<<A random downturn..and banks..call in loans and contract the money supply.>>..egsactly..the contraction of money supply..results in people unable to finance everyday business..[resulting in banks taking back the pledged/securities..[resulting in people getting broke and asset stripped,..and the banks owning the assets that devalue..[till the whole scam begins again..[and banks lend..new..money

a previous link said..states copntrol monetary supply[wrong],,,the links percules gives is very simplisticly/wrong

<<Sometimes..this led to cases of depositor panic..and further reductions..in the money supply,..which brought the next contraction of economic activity>>>..yes the boom and bust due to ursury..[intrest]..needing others to default..because the ursury hasnt been borrowed into egsistance..to enable all the loans/to get full repayment

realise baNKS..GETTING THE MONEY BACK..is the best security for us[and the banks]..[they still print money at will..[but drop the lie that it is borrowing only/the money WE banked[...its lending..new money..it creates/as an exclusive franchise]...

fed orders the mint to print every cent..[the fed..should allways..insure we ALL..get our money back..but..stop making more of it..than was banked/or backed by real assets..stop/keeping our repayments..as well as seizing our assets

[full repayment of all debt..[and no bankruptsies]..and minimul ursury..[the extra money[for usrury]..being issued by govt not the banking cartel]...like the greenback's isued be the govt of usa

I understand your confusion, oug, this might help.

>>go to the gold fields..finding a nugget creates an asset..[show me where..<<''the..creation/finding..of the asset created a liability''>>]<<

You take your nugget to a Bank, and a couple of different things could occur.

Scenario 1: You put the nugget in the Bank vault, and they give you a ticket that identifies the safe deposit box.

No value has changed hands at this point. Your nugget could be pyrites, or - as far as the Bank is concerned - it could be your sandwiches. No asset has been recognized. If it is gold, it is potentially valuable, but that value has not yet come into existence.

The Bank's books are untouched. They have merely issued a ticket.

Scenario 2. We are in a gold standard economy, so the weight of the gold determines its value. The Bank weighs the gold, tells you it is worth $1,000, and you can then do a couple of things.

You can sell the Bank the gold. Or you can deposit it with them at the value stated.

If you sell it to them, you get $1,000. The Bank registers the value of your nugget as $1,000 asset, and decreases its store of cash - another asset - by exactly the same amount. Their balance sheet does not change, as value has been exchanged for value.

Are you with me? Good. Because this is the interesting bit.

You deposit the nugget, on the basis that the Bank can use its value, in exchange for interest. You can withdraw your $1,000 at any time, or - because we are on the gold standard - demand $1,000 in gold at any time.

Note that you can't get your exact nugget back, because you have allowed the Bank to use its value.

The Bank registers an asset of $1,000, and simultaneously a liability of $1,000, because they have to recognize their obligation to pay you back any time you like.

Once again, their balance sheet remains in balance, with $1,000 added to each side of the ledger.

I hope this helps.

again with the deceptions periculeiour...banks dont give cash for gold[plus we arnt on the gold standard..[plus in a cash box..my asset isnt registered on the banks assets...till they say its abandoned

till it seises it..[under the new laws that deem the cash box abandond[then it goes into internal revenue,..auctioned and the cash deposited into the fed reserve bank/treasury account..as its dollarised value..[dollar's the fed issues and owns..[you ignored the rest of my post as usual]

so will quote you on your limeted delusional reply..<<this is the interesting bit>>....lol

<<You deposit the nugget,on the basis that the Bank can use its value,>>>rubbish i cant deposit gold with a bank..[only cash]i can put it into a box..i rent from the bank

<<in exchange for interest.>>but cannot draw intrest..[on the deposited gold,..it retains its value as gold[no liability]..and an ever increasing value..in the rapidly devalueing fiat fed reserve dollars..

[look at who signs your fiat dollar]..its only a check..they can print as many as they need for 7 cents each[regardless of face value printed on em[thus hyperinflation,boom/bust]

<<You can withdraw your $1,000 at any time,>>if it were monetised[BUT im not monetising it..[and the bank cant either]

<<or,because we are on the gold standard - demand $1,000 in gold at any time.>>>mate that is how it WAS

[not how it is now,..we used to be able to claim silver/gold from the bankers..but not anymore..[go to a bank and try to get 1000 in nickle/coin..[they say make an appointment]..ask for silver/gold they say your nuts..[legal FIAT/tender only]

<<you have allowed the Bank to use its value.>>no i risk the bank stealing it from my cash box...its in the bank..[not in my possesion, they often refuse even to give us our own money back..[see argentina]limit our withdrawel to 1000 per day..besides they dont know whats in my box..[and dont insure it if it gets stolen]

reply the rest of my points..[like them selling..[securitising our iou's..,getting their cash back..[yet still claiming ursury and return of its principle]..

on second thought..im so over your deceptions and distortions..[to what end trying to explain to you..believe as you chose

I am trying to help here, oug. If you're determined not to listen, that's fine.

>>so will quote you on your limeted delusional reply<<

The question I was addressing was (remember?) the creation of a liability to go along with the asset.

But if the Bank doesn't take gold, fair enough.

You sell the gold to a gold dealer, and take the $1,000 to the Bank, they recognize the $1,000 asset (cash) and the $1,000 liability (accepting that you can withdraw that cash at any time).

As I have explained, there cannot be an asset on the books without a corresponding liability. It simply cannot happen.

>>reply the rest of my points..[like them selling..[securitising our iou's..,getting their cash back..[yet still claiming ursury and return of its principle]..<<

I can certainly do that oug, but you really need to grasp and accept the basic principles of double-entry bookkeeping, otherwise I'm not sure we'll make too much progress.

But here goes.

You borrow from the Bank. They give you money that you use to buy a house (car, golf course, whatever), and you agree to pay them interest, say, 10% for 10 years.

A lot of others do the same.

The Bank has a bunch of IOUs that generate a million dollars a year in interest.

They "securitize" these by pooling them together and selling them as securities (hence the name). They receive cash for these, but the underlying assets - the IOUs themselves - disappear from their balance sheet, along with the credit risk.

Wikipedia does a pretty good job of explaining all this, so you don't have to take my word for it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset-backed_security

The risk is effectively spread across all the loans that are packaged, and transferred to someone else.

You of course still have to pay interest. That was the deal you made. And of course you still owe the principal. That was also the deal you made

The fact that someone else is actually holding your IOU shouldn't worry you in the slightest. Your - and the Bank's - responsibilities haven't changed one bit.

Hope this helps.

Pericles with his smug aristocratic posts thinks that he is the font of all wisdom.The simple logic is this,Pericles cannot create currency from nothing since this is counterfeiting,yet this avaricious banking system which he supports,can and does counterfeit money legally.

If we as individuals counterfeit $22 million the equal of every person in Australia,then this dilutes the wealth of all Australians by $1.00 per person.Since 1970 banks have increased the amount of currency above productivity by at least 1500% and now we have over inflated houses/share prices which has led to this collapse.

The Global Reserve Banks inflate the currency as they did in the Great Depression,then they restrict money supply causing deflation.They then go about buying undervalued assets to increase their power base.

We are now seeing credit shrinking even though the US Federal Reserve is creating more and more cyber money.The Fed is bailing out it's mates and using tax payer debt money to buy up cheap assets.That is why the Banks here are putting up interest rates.We are locked into this global rort of a finance system and our own RBA is powerless as witnessed by the fact that as they decrease rates the private banks take the profits with little relief for borrowers.

We should be the richest country on the planet with all our resources and small population.We should be more wealthy than Dubai,yet we cannot even build basic infrastructure, have proper medical care and decent aged pensions.

The peasants will become more revolting very soon and people like Pericles had better wake up to that reality.

That's cute, Arjay. I think I'll frame it.

>>Pericles with his smug aristocratic posts thinks that he is the font of all wisdom.<<

Not at all dear boy (might as well play up to the image a little), as far as this thread goes, a little light bookkeeping knowledge is ample.

>>The simple logic is this,Pericles cannot create currency from nothing since this is counterfeiting,yet this avaricious banking system which he supports,can and does counterfeit money legally.<<

Sorry, but this is pure fantasy.

I have tried to explain in the simplest language why it is fantasy. Unfortunately I am unable to draw pictures for you, otherwise I would. It is such basic, easy stuff.

There is no doubt at all that there has been insufficient oversight of the system, and that its poisonous loans were too well hidden under the weight of "sophisticated" hedging instruments.

But as I have pointed out, it is "we the people" who have been enjoying the fruits of all this, spending like drunken sailors on McMansions, Made-in-China plasma screens for the family room, and collecting iPhones and Blackberries as fashion accessories.

You see the Banks as drug dealers, and the peasants as hopeless addicts with no willpower to resist, gorging on all this money as if there were no tomorrow.

And you are right about one thing - if the Banks hadn't been willing to lend us the stuff, we wouldn't be in nearly as much strife. But it's pretty insulting to your friends and neighbours to label them helpless idiots, mesmerised by the Big Bad Banks into stretching their credit past the limit.

>>We should be more wealthy than Dubai,yet we cannot even build basic infrastructure, have proper medical care and decent aged pensions.<<

Maybe so, Arjay, maybe so.

But I can guarantee you one thing. We'd never stand a ghost of a chance achieving those riches without the availability, from those horrid Banks, of that nasty, evil... credit

Obviously Pericles is caught in the circular argument of accounting, i.e. assets must always equal the sum of liabilities and shareholders' equity.

He seems to have missed the argument that banks have grown so large (unlinited power given to them to create worthless fiat money, derivatives, etc) through unethical and corrupt means that they have made the lives of the common people difficult. (We are not excusing those who have brought financial ruin upon themselves through excessive spending).

The concept and practice of fractional reserve banking has been abused by the big banks. This has brought about financial disasters in many countries.

The present economic woe is due to a large extent by present banking practices, the monetary system and other factors.

This theory is supported by eminent economists (from the Austrian School) like Ludwig von Mises, Nobel laureate for economics F A Hayek and Murray Rothbard. They were responsible for starting the Ludwig von Mises Institute which published several books and documentaries.

A good one to watch is “ Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553

Ah, so you do understand a little about bookkeeping, Philip Tang.

>>Obviously Pericles is caught in the circular argument of accounting, i.e. assets must always equal the sum of liabilities and shareholders' equity.<<

Hardly a "circular argument".

More a known fact.

>>He seems to have missed the argument that banks have grown so large (unlinited power given to them to create worthless fiat money, derivatives, etc) through unethical and corrupt means that they have made the lives of the common people difficult.<<

I have not "missed the argument", Philip Tang. You and Arjay and to some extent oug are all completely devoted to it.

Unfortunately, you don't actually have any evidence for it, other than you hate Banks and think they have too much power. Not an uncommon position, it has to be said, in fact to a great extent I agree with it.

But that doesn't automatically brand them as being unethical and corrupt, nor provide any illumination as to how they "have made the lives of the common people difficult"

The biggest misconception that you all seem to be under is that a Bank can simply create currency at will, and without any corrsponding liability.

Which is utter nonsense.

>>This theory is supported by eminent economists (from the Austrian School) like Ludwig von Mises<<

I am familiar with the Austrian School, and with the work of von Mises.

He's a theorist, and has developed some interesting "if only" theories about money and the economy.

There are two aspects of his work that are important in 2009.

One is that his theories cannot cure what ails us at present. They could only ever have worked as a starting-point for an entire economy. If you doubt that, simply explain to us how you would have advised Kevin Rudd to address the global economic downturn, using only Austrian School concepts.

Can't be done, can it?

The second is that any economy, that adheres to these theories, would experience exceptionally low growth.

The closest example of a real-life community that follows his dicta would be the Amish.

Thoroughly worthy. Limited economic horizons.