Posted by: graemebird | December 11, 2011

What Will Be The Banking Cartel’s Next Trick?

When this rolling thunder of stealing is fully tapped out, where will the banking cartel point us? This actually can be predicted quite easily.

MORE LATER.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. I blame tbhe Jews.

  2. All of them or just those that are big shots in banking and government? All of them and them alone? You see we cannot have that sort of racism around here. I’m open-minded to the idea that we do have an ongoing problem with super-rich Jews, just as we seem to have a problem with a tiny minority of super-violent muslims. Those characteristics which lead Jews to so effectively create wealth for the community, when they are in their small business phase, could well, at least in theory, be something of a problem, when the same community gets near the levers of government and large corporate power.

    I’m open-minded either way. Nothing I’ve sorted out about this issue amounts to any sort of science. But what we cannot be doing is laying blame on the entirety of the community (women and children included) and taken as an whole.

  3. I think we need a sort of fanciful scenario to explain the situation, for those who lack the ability to take an historical perspective. Supposing you are coming out of a dark ages. A dark ages of the sort that we have been through before and will go through again. And suppose you alone come out of that dark age, as a benevolent immortal. You figure the only way to help your mortal humans, is to get the money right, as good as you can get it so, then most things will take care of themselves. Your goal is to wind up with as many commodity monies as is possible. Some for coins, some for transfer of ownership while they are in storage. You cannot expect total purity of the elements used. But you are after a standardised and practical level of purity.

    Everyone is starving of course. And people have to use what they can at first. Alcohol. Warlords (i.e. “Kings”) tax vouchers. Unchipped glass bottles. All excellent monies under the circumstances. But if metallurgy ever gets off the ground again (and thats a big if) you would want metals, that are resistant to oxidation. Big copper coins and small silver coins are the natural coin money. Gold, Platinum, Palladium, Chromium (Chromium oxidises, but the oxidised layer prevents further oxidation) Tungsten, Titanium …… these are all good storage monies. Platinum and Gold are good for settling large international purchases.

    Now for the surviving human race to be prosperous and living in a fair and decent society, what they need is homogenised money in all cases. At first they will have coins, and other monies, of all different purities and weights. Such a primitive state of affairs means there has to be an element of barter ON THE MONEY SIDE of every level of transaction. It is not conceivable that we could maintain technology and wealth beyond 19th century levels is this state of affairs continues. We could not beat Malthusian considerations. The Malthus reality will be harder to beat the next time around since the resources available are so much more remote.

    So you get to where you have general agreement in the rules of money. You’ve got a lot of monies on the fly, whereas the bankers would prefer just gold, so they can dominate it. But you’ve got your unclipped, unworn coins, of copper and silver, and your ingots of various sizes of the other metals. But with banking when you had varying degrees of impurities, and coins-and-ingots of unreliable weight, the bankers and the customers knew ….. They knew and all agreed …. All parties were in agreement ….. that to lend out your ON-CALL worn-and-clipped stash, was a betrayal and a fraud.

    Track back and forwards over that point at which you standardise the money. Yes if society is not vigilante, the banks will have already started to cheat a little where they can. But everyone will agree that to lend out YOUR stash is fraud. No-one will deny it. The bankers, who will be at this stage, metallurgists, will offer standardisation remelting at cost, so they can get your other business. You will probably be quite grateful to them for such cheap re-coining. Not grateful enough for you not to be cut in on the next opportunity that comes their way. Naturally they will have started becoming lending banks, and not mere depositaries, once they have the capacity to standardise your coins at cost for you. But pretty soon the money-lending …. the term loans side of their business, will be a cover for the practice of fractional reserve. They would never at this stage openly lend out your on-call stash. Because this would be a giveaway as to what they were up to.

    We know if we track backwards and forwards over that point of time, when the coins and bars, finally become standardised as to purity and weight … we know that before that fractional reserve is fraud, and that the practice will be introduced by stealth. Then normalcy bias will set in. Why can we not consider it fraud, when it is the ruination of the free society? When it is the ruination of us ever having the best money we can have? Its a simple choice society can make, to consider it fraud, as it clearly is at that point, and be vigilante about this fraud.

    Recall that we had to get a variety of monies, and not just gold and silver. There is economic dead loss to simply having gold and silver. Thats two elements that have to be taken out of the periodic table for industrial uses just for starters. Their price winds up as an uneconomic, and therefore unstable price. But to quickly get back to a high-tech non-Malthusian society, we need to standardise weights and purities. We can surely still use the Warlords tax vouchers as a medium of exchange. Nothing wrong with that. But we cannot trust the warlord, except to inflate, so most of the money has to be natural.

    So we have standardised purity, at a practical and economic level, correct weight, and standard shape and so forth. And what I’m telling you is that we can-and-must continue to consider that lending out your stash, on-call, is fraud but not fraud-alone. Its conspiracy to pervert the mediums of exchange. Its a conspiracy to engage in theft and unjust enrichment. Its the destruction of any chance the species has to reach for the stars. The perversion of one side of every transaction. A ponzi-conspiracy to bugger up any possibility of efficient capital markets. People have problems with thinking of this act as a crime, because it starts so small and innocent with no cut-off point. And because its many crimes rolled into one.

    The first thing that happens in this story is only gold and silver can then be money. Because if the banks are engaging in these multitudinous crimes you will still bank with them. My oath you will. But you aren’t going to go for any other money, because Platinum, Palladium, Chromium, Titanium …. these are all indistinct. The banks will see to the purity of the gold and silver. At the first available opportunity they will enter into a conspiracy to destroy silver as a medium of exchange. Then they will have all the gold and you will be carrying around paper.

    So I”m saying we go with the natural law. John is saying that we can never aspire to efficient capital markets and excellent and cost-effective money. He is always going to make this case, because he is in the tribe of economists which looks after the financial looters, whereas the Keynesians are in the tribe that look after the public servant looters.

  4. Sad and angry to hear that Christopher Hitchens didn’t make it. Angry because cancer treatment is a ridiculous, unstrategic, and anti-science fraud. I’m not talking about any single type of treatment so much. I’m more talking about the entirety of the medical norms involved. It simply did not need to happen. A strategic approach, with all the tools the medical profession had on the table, would have easily beaten the cancer for Christopher.

    (((((((I tried to email suggestions through to Hitchens when I found out he had cancer. But then I realised that if I researched matters more thoroughly I may be able to save my own Mother. But it turned out that I was too late to save Mum. Too slow off the mark.))))))))

    Sad because he is a voice that will be missed. Now that statement may be controversial. In some areas radical atheism has cut loose from its humble, put-upon, and reasoned approach to matters. And it has become itself, an oppressive and mindless orthodoxy. Chris was by no means perfect. He did have the left-wing mental handicap. But we must never go to one writer for our received opinions in any case. Christopher was always worth reading, right, wrong, or in-between.

    I have read all of CL’s counter-attacks on Christopher. I think he makes many good points. Although I think Christopher was quite right in his malign presentation of Mother Theresa. He may have gone TOO far, I don’t know. But I figure he had basically the right idea about her. I don’t know enough to either get behind Christopher on his extraordinary criticism of the current Pope, or to rather get behind the current Pope. Had Christopher launched such an attack on the prior Pope, a true hero of the Western world, I would have assumed that Hitchens had gone insane. So all in all I think that Christopher was a brilliant journalist, and he had his own prism, and that to look through that prism was, and would tend to be, an ongoing valuable thing, at least until the militant atheists got too oppressive. Which may have happened shortly before Christopher died.

    • HIS OPINION OBVIOUSLY CANNOT AFFECT THE SCIENCE OF THE MATTER.

  5. If you seriously believed what you were saying John, you would have told me I’d better not get anywhere near ……. such-and-such area or it would trigger a legal (or other) response. This is bizarre self-promotion on your part. Death-threats are not okay. Death-threats could never be okay in a free country.

    Comment by graemebird | December 18, 2011 | Reply

    You ought not be defending death threats. Every man is tasked with looking after his girls and his children. This becomes impossible if we allow the death threat horse to bolt.

    Comment by graemebird | December 18, 2011 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: