Arjay, I don't think the term "credible" really applies to a site dedicated to supporting the ridiculous claim that Barnaby Joyce was right about Australia's debt.

You say the CEC tell the truth. Do you think they were telling the truth when they claimed that Obama's a British agent and so was Gorbachev?
http://cecaust.com.au/main.asp?sub=releases&id=2011_12_13_Hillary.html
ISTR they've also accused more than one of Australia's PMs of being British agents, though I can't be bothered to find the link to that at tthe moment.

http://usawatchdog.com/felons-in-charge-of-our-largest-financial-institutions-professor-william-black/

Aiden Prof William K Black used to be bank regulator and did put these criminals in gaol until Bill Clinton abolished the Glass Steagall Act. Now there are no rules.

Arjay, the answer is very simple. If you don't want to use a bank to look after your cash, then don't use a bank to look after your cash.

The concerns you have on this issue are just another complete misunderstanding of basic finance, as usual.

>>As a depositor you are defined by the bank as an unsecured lender<<

What did you imagine you were? Banks have not been simply a vault in which to stash your ready for a very long time. They invest it. That's how they get the extra bits to pay you interest. If it just sat there, you'd need to pay for renting the space in the vault, someone to guard it etc. etc. So why the sudden gasp of surprise, to discover that you are an unsecured lender?

>>If our banks are so secure, why do they need a Cyprus style confiscation of bank deposits?<<

Banks have been going bust, taking depositors money with them, for centuries. Look it up if you don't believe me. Here's a start:

http://www.davemanuel.com/history-of-bank-failures-in-the-united-states.php

The new rules on how banks measure their assets (that is, the security behind the deposits you make) are actually tougher than before, providing a greater sense of security to everyone except dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy nuts.

Ive known about bail-in measures being discussed at the G20 at least since mid last year though I'm certainly no expert on it.

>>If our banks are so secure, why do they need a Cyprus style confiscation of bank deposits ?<<

I think they're taking measures to provide protection for banks (at our expense) when the US dollar collapses.

Aiden.. I don't know anything about the credibility of CEC but on first glance their seem to be some interesting articles you wouldn't find in the mainstream media and they might actually be a political party worth voting for.
You suggest that Barnaby Joyce is wrong about Australia's debt.
You must belong to the group of deluded individuals who prefer to compare debt as a percentage of GDP and pretend everything's rosy.
Now that the mining boom is over (and even then the budget surplus was abysmal) just exactly how are we going to pay back 700 billion dollars + interest, taking into account manufacturing is dead and we sold off our assets.
If you say he's wrong tell me how we can pay that back? How?
- Obama being a British agent, I don't know the truth of it, but it truly wouldn't surprise me.
Here's why I think its possible.
http://youtu.be/9oYKMJkatzI
As for Gorbachev I don't know for sure either, but its also possible, Try these links
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/03/mikhail-gorbachev-surprise-visit_n_4535427.html
http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/15079
Notice one of the links mentioned Khrushchev, who gave Crimea back to the Ukraine, (without consulting the Duma if my memory is correct)
I also found this, but I have doubts whether or not it's true.
http://www.interpretermag.com/khrushchev-gave-away-not-only-crimea-to-ukraine-but-alaska-to-us-as-well-moscow-commentary-says/
I heard many of our PM's have had connections to British bankers, though I'm not sure about this and will have to look more into it.

You guys think Arjay's conspiracy theories make him a crackpot, (I agree with many things he says) but its you guys (sheeple) relying on a one-sided MSM that only gives half-truths.

Take this about rising C02 from the CSIRO for example.
http://www.csiro.au/Portals/Media/Deserts-greening-from-rising-CO2.aspx
And we all get told the increase in C02 is a bad thing.

Dear Critic,

<<Now that the mining boom is over (and even then the budget surplus was abysmal) just exactly how are we going to pay back 700 billion dollars + interest, taking into account manufacturing is dead and we sold off our assets.>>

By halving the salary of public-servants. Those who don't like it can leave and we all shall be relieved.

Also, by closing government departments and selling off the land and buildings they occupied.

---

Dear Arjay,

The links you supplied are still opinions, rather than raw information. I can form my own opinions, if only I had the raw information, which I don't in this case.

You say that "J P Morgan, Citibank and HSBC have 40% share holdings in all our banks." - so what? If share-holders collapse, then they have to sell their shares to others at a fraction cost. The only ones affected would be the other share-holders, not the company itself whose shares are traded (in this case Australian banks).

Armchair,

Nobody is proposing Cyprus style confiscation of bank deposits. And nor is the US dollar in danger of collapse. It may well devalue a bit, but it exports far too much to be in any danger of collapsing.

I first found out about the CEC before an election (as I always vote below the line, I usually check out all the parties running). You might read a couple of their articles and find them interesting, but any more than that and it's the same three themes over and over and over again: they think everything's a British conspiracy, they support protectionism, and they don't value the environment. They're certainly not worth voting for (though last election they didn't even run a candidate in my state anyway).

I don't just suggest that Barnaby Joyce is wrong about Australia's debt, I am 100% certain on it – and it's nothing to do with it being low. There is also zero chance of Japan running out of money and having to default.

Since the early 1990s, the Australian government has sonly borrowed in Australian dollars. Australia will always be able to borrow Australian dollars, as it owns the Reserve Bank which creates them. And much of the money it borrows from banks which borrow it from the RBA anyway. It would actually make more sense to borrow more of the money direct from the RBA; we don't do that mainly for historical reasons but also to support bank liquidity requirements.

Although our bonds must always be honoured, we will never need to pay off our debt.

It's quite amusing how you refer to "sheeple" while demonstrating a complete lack of critical thinking yourself. It's not just American presidents who are descended from that king, it's most of the population of Britain, Ireland, the USA, Canada and Australia! It doesn't make them any more likely to be British agents.

You have a lot of very low quality information that doesn't stand up to even basic scrutiny.