social credit versus the moral hazard of usury

[Richard]

The Biggest Conflict of Interest (the one that is killing us)



by Dick Eastman



The biggest conflict of interest and moral hazard in the US -- the
root of all corruption, the source and empowering of conspiracy is the
fact that the intermediaries who supposedly take peoples savings and
then lend them out to entrepreneurs are also the bond holders, the
creditors to whom all debt is owed. Intermediaries are supposed to
make money on the spread between depositors savings accounts and the
rate at which business loans are made. Bond holders simply own IOUs
and can only gain in wealth if they can engineer deflation. When the
bond holders and the intermediaries are the same persons, investment
will simply not be made -- because creditors have much more to gain
from engineering deflation than intermediaries have from lending
savers' savings to entrepreneurs.



That is why American bankers have quit providing money for domestic
economy entrepreneurs. They much rather profit by deflation, with
occasional refilling of the pot to drain by extending easy home-equity
credit which they know will be soon eaten up again in deflation by
virtue of the fact that no matter how much new money they create in
the form of home equity loans will be taken back again with a vengence
when both principal and compound interest must be repaid. The
deflation continues apace, but with each short period of boom, more
assets are created that will be captured by the creditor class in
foreclosure.



Bank intermediaries simply should not be allowed to own bonds. It is
a conflict of interest and a crime.



Look at the debt that the people are in - all owed to bankers, i.e.,
to the intermediaries who are supposed to bundle savings and lend it
out to producers but never do.



If I could be Führer for a day the first thing I would do after a)
repudiating all debt to the international bankers, 2) initiating
social credit dividends for the creation of all new money in the
household sector exclusively, 3) making money US treasury "thin air"
debt-free fiat and 4) ending fractional reserve banking would be to 5)
impose a law separating bonds from banking so that Businesses
selling bonds and Government selling bonds - will be kept a
quadrillion light years from the banks which I would limit exclusively
to lending savers' time savings deposits to businessman borrowers
and home buyers.



Once the human race separates bonds and banking every day will be the
first day of spring.



Dick Eastman

Yakima, Washington




Here is a basic social credit speech given in New Zealand, but
adaptable to every country. Listen to this message and then repeat it
to others in an American context.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbAUw-KFITY


Who kills our presidents?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H1aXjqMkns

Note from Dick Eastman -- I am a man of limited and very dated
thinking -- the men who shaped my thinking were all intellectually
active before the 1970s -- yet I believe in their solutions, in the
combination of their ideas that I have come up with when faced with
national and worldwide evil -- but as I see that I am about to cash
in my chips -- I have made a late discovery -- that there are two
minds living now that I think hold the promise of a better future.

Below you will find links to the ideas of Albert Migchels and
Professor Bernard Lietaer. With this posting I hope I can help spread
their influence. Too often men like these appear but can never fully
be realized by their contemporaries. Let that not be the case this
time. Migchels is a young man. Lietaer is not old and his ideas are
already forming around them a world movement.

If you do nothing else with the material below -- please listen to
the videos you will find here -- begin with number 8, but then watch
all the others. Here is the URL: http://wn.com/Was_ist_Geld,_Prof_Bernard_Lietaer?_Der_Schein_trügt#




From: Reinhold Sommerstedt
To: Dick Eastman
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 4:03 PM
Subject: WHAT POINT? Re: If you kill the Fed and let the securites it
owns go to the banks that own it (which are owned by the Rothschild
gang -- Rothschild will control monetary policy in secret and
responsible to no one.


Mr. Eastman,


Just what is your point ? Here is mine:


END THE FED. Place all assets into Receivership and return all
property to the rightful owner.
Thereafter abolish all money substitutes, arrest, proscute and execute
all culprits


Reinhold

--
Dear Reinhold,

The point is that the Fed won't go be bankrupt. It owns all of those
securities it has just pruchased. What happens to those? I will tell
you. When the Fed is disolved the big banks -- Chase etc. -- that
own it will get all of those securites distributed to them.
Furthermore the national banks that own the Fed, but only the biggest
ones, will get the power to create money, as in the old days before
the Fed. There will be no central authority, public or private,
overlooking how the monetary economy is working -- except for one!
The dollar will be again pegged to the gold standard and the amount of
credit in the system will be determined by the Rothschilds. They
will secretly control national monteary policy and world monetary
policy. Rothschild's will be the world central bank - and gold rather
than federal reserve notes will be the money base for all credit.

You are making a very big mistake in supporting Ron Paul. Ron Paul
was put in charge of the banking committee for a purpose. The
Rothschild's want his program.

Cqan you swallow your pride and check your assuptions.

Read the following from others and see if you have room for second
thoughts. I tell you -- the well being of 6 billion people depends on
the difference between libertarian-Austrian economics (which is an
intellectual front for Rothschild interests) -- and populist social
credit (which is your interests out in the open for all to see) .
Don't turn your back on humanity to worship the golden calf.

Richard Eastmann M.S., M.A.
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.
---




From: Anthony Migchels anthony....@gelre-handelsnetwerken.nl
To: oldick...@q.com
CC: lewro...@mac.com; pipefi...@wowway.com;
chdo...@yahoogroups.com


It seems to me that everything becomes clear when the cost of interest
to the ordinary citizen becomes clear. Empirical data show that 45% of
retail prices can be tracked back to cost for capital. So we lose 45%
of our disposable income to interest, even if we don't have any
outstanding debts.

Another clear example is a mortgage. We borrow 200k for a house, after
30 years we have payed back the principal, plus a hefty 3 or 400000 in
interest.

Crucial here is the understanding that the money is created at the
moment the loan is granted. So we pay all this interest for pressing a
few buttons.

Also very important is the fact that only the richest 10% of the
population receive more interest than they pay (in prices and/or
mortgages). And this is logical: the rich have money (or own the
banks), so they receive interest. The 'poor' (the remaining 90%) pay,
because they lack cash.

In the west this amounts to a wealth transfer from the poorest 90% to
the richest 10%. And what kind of wealth transfer? In Germany alone we
are talking about 1 billion euro's PER DAY. So that's a total of 365
billion per year. For the west in total we must consider that the
multitude are paying a few TRILLION PER YEAR to the richest ten
percent.

All the data can be found with Margrit Kennedy:
http://www.margritkennedy.de/pdf/PRE_moneypres.pdf

Money cannot be understood without interest. And interest cannot be
addressed without explaining why the many are losing so much in an
interst bearing money environment.

Anthony

--------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mark Anderson (American Free Press editor)
To: Dick Eastman
Cc:
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: If you kill the Fed and let the securites it owns go to
the banks that own it (which are owned by the Rothschild gang --
Rothschild will control monetary policy in secret and responsible to
no one.


I am torn on this angle, though I have long suspected that abolishing
the Fed haphazardly might mean there is a trap set to get us into a
world currency, perhaps the Bretton Woods bancor or IMF Special
Drawing Rights.

I just don't know about nationalizing the Fed. Zarlenga's American
Monetary Act basically calls for such an incorporation of a trimmed-
down Fed "remnant" into the Treasury Department.

I am wary of letting any part of the Fed remain. But I do know we
could be tricked into adopting something worse.

Social credit seems to push all the right buttons toward a solution.

M. Anderson




-------------------------------------------------------------


From: Tom Mysiewicz
To: Dick Eastman
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 2:06 PM
Subject: RE: If you kill the Fed and let the securites it owns go to
the banks that own it (which are owned by the Rothschild gang --
Rothschild will control monetary policy in secret and responsible to
no one.


Dick:

My old computer has died and I'm out working in the woods much of the
time, hence my recent silence. You certainly have a point. Spain and
Europe's nobility were hopelessly indebted to the banking interests.
While the discovery of gold and silver in the New World led to a
quintupling of consumer prices in 100 years--it did make it possible
to pay off those pesky debts. One could make the case that the
ability to issue credit and paper money allows for the liquidation of
usurious debts. Taking away this ability and replacing it with "the
discipline of gold" makes that impossible.

Tom




From: Dan Breeden
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Dick, I know that you don't like Ron Paul. I know why and, to a
certain extent, I agree with you. You MUST give him credit though. He
is at least speaking up. This vid enunciates just about every problem
with the republic. It does not go into details but, it is VERY clear.
Whether he is trying to split the vote or whatever else his ploy may
be, he is speaking clearly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-olNr4UuVqY

Dan



first step to grab 401Ks

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-18/senate-bill-would-limit-savers-using-401-k-s-as-rainy-day-funds.html


Richard, this is an excellent article on the real nuts-and-bolts of
economic reality and policy. BTW, it is not pro gold:

http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/2011/05/may-25-2011-future-of-physical-gold.html

Dan





=============================

Peter writes:

Dick, you spin your wheels arguing with the Austrians because you are
calling for social credit plus something, and that something else is
government charge of money. The two major parties would love to have
that power that is now in the hands of the Federal Reserve, so
politics would stay dirty or get dirtier.

In attacking the gold hoarders, you claimed that the gold hoarders
will try to trade their gold back for dollars when compelled to do so
by hunger and other shortages that their hoarding actually helped
bring about. Yeah, and who will buy gold from them and starve, giving
away their dollars to buy food? And yes, even in hyperinflations the
dollars although worth only a speck never stopped being exchanged -
even when wheelbarrows of inflated currency were necessary to make a
small purchase at the corner store.

Every time someone denounces fiat money or says creating money out of
thin air is a scam, the more the unwitting public will think 'gold' is
the answer. They need to see, and you aren't getting it across, that
legal tender fiat money printed out of thin air isnt a scam.
Every system has to express itself in practice by 'thin air' created
representations of people claim on goods and services. The use of
'thin air' naturally causes people to think 'inflationary finance', so
one may as well shoot oneself in the foot or should it be the mouth?

And here is a point -- a paradox -- that you always miss: Consider
this: when prices run ahead of disposable incomes then there is a
shoratge of money (disposable) caused by inflation, not deflation.
Interest drain getting ahead of loan injection can happen even during
inflation as long as the interest rate is higher than the rate of
inflation. In other words you will get the same "A + B" problem even
when prices and wages are rising as long as interest rate is higher.

There are many 'chicken or the egg' puzzles within the orthodox
mindset finance/economic theory, which keeps everone divided just like
the cults and divisions in the Christian churches. People find
something they can 'understand' or simply see clearly but not with a
balanced comprehensive overview and so they die in a ditch to hold
that bit they see as their flag.

Douglas flew right over the top of this darkened room where evryone
was running around bumping into one another trying to find the exit
door, because he wasnt in bondage to higher learning indoctrination
from the universities. He studied the beast and the accounting system
closely not the textbooks the universities use nor the junk economics
the journalists dump on the public.

It's in this area that you think Douglas was blind or soft when if one
reads him widely he covers many things and gives many explanation
along the way but focuses on the real issues that will count against
the international bankers -money power who control their field in the
universities, journalism and politics. He also based his recipe upon a
philosophy that gave power as it aught to to the people which no one
else does, everyone just looks for a tinkered technical way to over
come debt, which is short-sighted and will not replce the philosophy
of the money power who have their own philosophy as represented by
their finance/econoic/politics systems. People dont know what they
are fighting, Douglas did. The rest of you are flying blind on good
intensions, which the road to hell is paved by.

Time and time again you lack Douglas' wisdom because you have the
orthodox mindset and think you know better than him.
One can lead a horse to water but one cant make them drink. P

--------------------------

From: Wendell Solomons
To: Dick Eastman
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: Kill the Ron Paul Federal Reserve Abolition Bill --
because here is what they want to leave in its place


Hello Dick!


Blessings come in disguise.


Notice how they paint themselves into a corner.


Elitist F D R had planned that Independence for the colonies would
create the raucous
world that Frankin and Jefferson had prophesied as unstopable after
the US Revolution..



If they want to abolish the USFed that would serve as the threshold
and precedent for
Xpropriating gold bulliion misused in the hands of the cartel.


If you prefer, we might call our prerogative a slicing the salami.


It was Trotsky who negated any gradualism


Best wishes,
--wendell

=======================

On 28 May 2011 00:27, Dick Eastman <oldick...@q.com> wrote:


The Ron Paul Bill to Abolish the Fed is a Trick -- Here is what you
get if it passes.


If you kill the Fed and let the securites it owns go to the banks that
own it (which are owned by the Rothschild gang -- Rothschild will
control monetary policy in secret and responsible to no one.

I am drawing the line in the sand with this post. Either you are for
Rothschild power through control of gold used as a monetary base for
credit -- or you are for national money with social credit
distribution of new purchasing power going exclusively to the
household sector.

The Fed should be nationalized with the power to inflation from thin
air put in the hands of the people to counter the loss of purchasing
power -- our wealth which has been disappeared into thin air by the
deflationist policies of the Fed. And a gold system is always
deflationary -- and a system where banks can issue notes only if they
have gold reserves -- such a system will result in alternating credit
expansions and credit contractions to profit the controllers of the
gold supply who happen to be the same people to whom all the worlds
owes trillions upon trillions of dollars.

ABOLITION OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE CHANGES
NOTHING IF WE GO BACK TO THE SYSTEM WHERE THE TREASURY PEGS THE DOLLAR
TO GOLD AT A TIME WHEN GOLD PRICES ARE CONTROLLED BY THE SAME PEOPLE
WHO OWN THE BANKS WHICH OWN THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM. RON PAUL,
ALEX JONES, PETER SCHIFF LEW ROCKWELL, GARY NORTH, GERALD CELENTE AND
EVERYBODY ELSE HAWKING ROTHSCHILD GOLD. (Notce that right now
Rothschild is selling gold to blind the followers of Celente and
Rockewell and Alex Jones at a moment with the price of gold is at the
top. These people will be selling their gold to buy back dollars
later on in order to stave off the famine in the depression which lack
of dollars in the system caused.

THE ONLY WAY OUT OF DEFLATIONARY DEPRESSION HELL IS THROUGH INFLATION
WITH MONEY THAT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE PAID BACK AT INTEREST. GOLD IS
EXACTLY MONEY THAT HAS TO BE PAID BACK AT INTEREST. NO DEPRESSION
ENDS WITHOUT INFLATION. RON PAUL WANTS TO MAKE INFLATION IMPOSSIBLE
-- BUT HE IS PERFECTING SILENT ABOUT THE FACT THAT HIS BILL WILL
IMPOSE EVEN MORE DEFLATION/DEPRESSION ON THE DOMESTIC ECONOMY. GOLD
STANDARD IS GOOD FOR CAPITALISTS (CREDITORS, USURERS) -- BUT IT IS
HELL ON FAMILIES, ENTREPRENEURS, WORKERS, GOVERNMENTS AND SOCIETY IN
GENERAL. WARNING TO ALL WHO DON'T SEE THIS -- YOU CARRY THE LETHAL
GOLD SICKNESS -- YOU SPREAD THE DEFLATIONARY PLAGUE LIKE TYPHOID
MARY -- WAKE THE HECK UP BEFORE SOMEONE IS FORCED TO SHOOT YOU.


Beware of these Hucksters -- pay attention to they
system they are trying to sell you to replace the Fed.
No matter how bad the lemon you drive, there is always
someone willing to sell you a worse lemon.
These men when they call for a gold standard and the abolition of the
Fed are actually proposing that all of the assets held by the Fed be
turned over to the National Banks, that is turning over all of the US
debt they hold -- the securities the Fed has been buying in its
"Quantative Easing" program (the name was invented to keep the open
market operations mechanism hidden from the public) giving the
securities to the Rothschild controlled banks that own they system.
These Rothschild owned regional banks and big New York banks will
simply get all of those securites for their own portfolios -- that is
why the investment banks changed the rules allowing them to merge with
the Fed owning national banks. And under this plane the the
"nationally chartered" banks -- probably just the biggest ones, will
get to issue the money if they have the gold reserves. Thus they are
putting Rothschild's gold holdings in total control of money and
credit in the US. Its the most stupid thing the American people can
do -- but all of you folks love to dance to Paul and Celente and
Schiff because they have learned what songs make you laugh or cry or
stand up and salute or scare you into doing stupid things without even
starting to think about the consequences.

===============

Dick,

I think that, in its prime, the Birch Society was the biggest
controlled opposition organization that ever existed in the "patriot
community." Years ago I accused it of being the first outfit to
spread the lie that monopoly capitalism (which is the ONLY kind of
capitalism) and free enterprise are the same thing when, in fact, they
are 180 degrees opposed. No one ever responded. Also I constantly
described its policy as "forever learning and never coming to the
truth." I know for a fact that two chapters in So. Cal. were shut
down by headquarters because they were studying the Jewish involvement
in just about everything that the society was supposedly trying to
correct.

Tony B.


---------------------------



From: Don Barness
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 8:01 PM
Subject: Fwd: [frameup] If you kill the Fed and let the securites it
owns go to the banks that own it (which are owned by the Rothschild
gang -- Rothschild will control monetary policy in secret and
responsible to no one.


We ALL need to see Eastman's point!
Failure to do so will simply continue the same rotten systems that now
control us.
Have any of us learned ANTHING about the values and benefits of Social
Credit?
Dick isn't the only person worldwide promoting Social Credit, but he's
one of the best at presenting it.
Just like Germany did when Adolph Hitler came to power, we will either
escape the prison hell of the Rothschilds, which the Germans did for a
few years, or we will go down continuing to slave for them and lose
everything.....because 'everything' is what they want from
us.....including our lives, our progeny lives.
Make no mistake, the Protocols and the Guidestones are as true as if
they are the words of the gods.
Political change is impossible without change in 'control monetary
policy'.
Dad/Don

==========================



From: Ed Kendrick
To: Dick Eastman
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: If you kill the Fed and let the securites it owns go to
the banks that own it (which are owned by the Rothschild gang --
Rothschild will control monetary policy in secret and responsible to
no one.


Loud and clear, Dick.



The intentional destruction of the dollar--while looting the last
value out of the dollar will be followed with a "solution" which is
even more control and looting.


Ed Kendrick

=========================

From: Exposé Subject: The Social Credit approach to national
accountancy is designed to rectify the expropriation model of the
current Banksters' system


The value of money and the 'generation of wealth' comes from the
people.
Without which/whom there is nothing.
NO: NATIONS, ARMIES, GOVERNMENTS, CORPORATIONS ETC.
The exploitation of the 'MONEY'/wealth has been hijacked by so-called,
self-styled, 'elites' with only two agendas - GREED AND PLUNDER.


American Moslem Leader Louis Farrakhan on the Fed
http://www.4shared.com/audio/bt5KmaS6/Louis_Farrakhan_-_Federal_Rese.html

"I would like to speak to a representative of Minister Farrakhan about
what Social Credit could do for black people and Moslems in this
country and how a gold standard will hurt them and everybody else."
oldick...@q.com
-------------------


From Wallace Klinck:
When banks create money in making loans and claim ownership of the
money used to monetize the real assets of the borrower. The Social
Credit approach to national accountancy is designed to rectify this
inequity. The Three Demands of Douglas: 1) a National Credit Office
2) a National Dividend and 3) Compensated (retail) Price. The intent
is to place in the hands of each citizen by inalienable right of
inheritance his or her rightful beneficial (not direct) share in the
communal capital in the form of unfettered access to consumer goods as
they emerge from the production line.

-- Wallace Klinck

---



-=- Dutch Monetary Reformer Anthony Migchels (right)

Anthony Migchels

Daniel Krynicki writes:

Social credit would exist only to maintain a money supply and should
fluctuate to match growth or decline in population, innovation and
productivity. The dividend will never be a free ride. It may only be
enough to acquire food and shelter, or at times even less. I suppose
the winos would squander it and still live in abandoned cars. At
least those who do not have the ability to work will be able to eat
and find shelter. But the main point is that most people work for
their keep. But they would thus have the opportunity to prosper
without paying usury to the parasites. As Anthony Migchels pointed
out below in his reply to Mr. Doolittle, with usury removed from the
equations for capital expenditures, food producers and manufacturers
would be able to lower prices by about 45%.

I was a pipifitter for 33 1/2 years. I didn't dream all this stuff
up. But earlier on, it became apparent that our monetary system is
nothing more than a giant scam operation. How can the scam part be
removed from a monetary system? Either we discern the differences
between bad and good, or the usurers win.

Read them carefully because they do contain information never
discussed by mainstream media and academia. Possible solutions are
discussed that 97%+ of the population is unaware of - and show that
economic distress is completely avoidable.



Take a look at the first four words of the first email shown by Mr.
Migchels. Again, this 97%+ of the world does not realize that money
itself is an invention that is brought into circulation through
creation by banks. By what authority are banks allowed to lend money
they never did actually have and thereby inject this new currency into
the money stream thus inflating the (M1) money supply. Think about
this. If they deliberately want a downturn in the economy all they
need to do is decrease the money supply by refusing to issue loans.
Behold, lay offs and foreclosures will follow.


So what about those first four words by Mr. Migchels? We already pay
taxes. We already pay enough to support a monetary administrative
infrastructure to issue the currency as interest free loans as Mr.
Migchels suggests. This money disappears from circulation as it is
paid back.


See Richard Eastman's commentaries for introduction and maintenance of
the money supply through social credit, the only fair way to create
new money that remains in circulation.


Fire Bernanke, Geithner and all their crony capitalist executives.
Nationalize the remaining employees of the Fed and banks into the new
Monetary Administrative Division (MAD, haha) of the Treasury
Department. Voila, we have a usury free, non-deflationary economy.


So Moses was correct three thousand and six hundred years ago.
Domestic usury should be abolished.

From: Anthony Migchels <anthony....@gelre-handelsnetwerken.nl>


It seems to me that everything becomes clear when the cost of interest
to the ordinary citizen becomes clear. Empirical data show that 45% of
retail prices can be tracked back to cost for capital. So we lose 45%
of our disposable income to interest, even if we don't have any
outstanding debts.

Another clear example is a mortgage. We borrow 200k for a house, after
30 years we have payed back the principal, plus a hefty 3 or 400000 in
interest.

Crucial here is the understanding that the money is created at the
moment the loan is granted. So we pay all this interest for pressing a
few buttons.

Also very important is the fact that only the richest 10% of the
population receive more interest than they pay (in prices and/or
mortgages). And this is logical: the rich have money (or own the
banks), so they receive interest. The 'poor' (the remaining 90%) pay,
because they lack cash.

In the west this amounts to a wealth transfer from the poorest 90% to
the richest 10%. And what kind of wealth transfer? In Germany alone we
are talking about 1 billion euro's PER DAY. So that's a total of 365
billion per year. For the west in total we must consider that the
multitude are paying a few TRILLION PER YEAR to the richest ten
percent.

All the data can be found with Margrit Kennedy:
http://www.margritkennedy.de/pdf/PRE_moneypres.pdf

Money cannot be understood without interest. And interest cannot be
addressed without explaining why the many are losing so much in an
interst bearing money environment.

Anthony


Also from Anthony Migchels:

An anonymous defender of the Austrian School against Social Credit
asks:

> If we eliminated interest, why would people save?
> If people don't save, how can they build a retirement?
> Why would people with talent, intelligence and money
> want to work in your society versus another society?
>

> What you will end up with is simply communism,
> plain and simple.

Anthony replied:

If we eliminate interest, prices would drop by a few dozen percent,
because producers would not make any costs for capital.

If we eliminate interest, we can print money for nothing and lend it
out for free (ok, not entirely for free, but for costprice, not
hundreds of thousands pure profit for banks as the mortgage case
shows).

If we eliminate interest, people don't need to save money. When they
need cash they can get interest free credit. Preserving wealth for the
future can and must be done in more efficient ways than hoarding cash,
which is just taking it out of circulation, forcing others to borrow.
See http://www.activistpost.com/2010/11/on-inflation-saving-and-nature-of-money.html
for more on this fundamental issue.

If people don't save, they can still invest. see aforementioned link.

If we kill interest, people will no longer be working for banks. they
will be able to keep the products of their efforts, instead of paying
interest for nothing. This will enable most people to work less. It
would greatly enhance the incentive to work, because people are no
longer robbed by interest.

Where the communism gets in here sure beats me..........

We are not against profit, as in making money by adding value.

We are against the shearing of the flock by pressing computerbuttons
and claiming interest for it.


As you can see, the answers are there. You need to get more in touch
with the problem before you will appreciate the relevance of all this.
And for that, you need to get back to the cost of money. Interest.

Anthony

---------------------------

Henry Makow . com
http://www.henrymakow.com/taking_the_glitter_out_of_gold.html

Taking the Glitter Out of Gold-Based Currency
by Anthony Migchels
in...@gelre-handelsnetwerken.nl



"You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns,
you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold" - William Jenning
Bryan






Although debunking Gold completely would take too long, there are
three points I would like to make. I believe some contemplation of
these are quite sufficient for all who want to be armed suitably for
the monetary struggles ahead.




In the first place, it doesn't matter at all what means of exchange
you use. Paper, bits and bytes, shells, tally sticks, salt. They have
all been used successfully in the past.





The question is, who is in control of the supply? And what is he doing
with it?




Let's just one more time repeat a worn out quote: "Give me control of
a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes the laws."




We all know who said this and we all know he knew his trade.This was
said when Britain was on the Gold Standard.




What is gained by control of the supply of money?




In the first place the ability to inflate and deflate creating the so
called 'business cycle', not a force of nature, but an effect of
tampering with money.




Inflation leads to higher prices, growth, optimism. Deflation then
comes, forcing many to sell below normal prices and in this time of
scarce liquidity, a few insiders with lots of cash buy up the whole
lot for practically nothing.




All this doesn't change at all with Gold. The 19th century is riddled
with asset bubbles followed by depressions. It is quite clear that
there is an inverse relationship between monetary stability and Gold
as money. Even though Gold's record is probably not as bad as paper,
it is at best the lesser evil.




GOLD-BASED CURRENCY = DEFLATION & DEPRESSION





Most often, however, periods with Gold as money are characterized by
deflation. The controllers of the system keep Gold scarce. Also,
global gold output is insufficient to keep up with economic growth,
implying structural relative decline of amount of money in
circulation, compared to total output of production.




Even more important when controlling money is Interest. Now, this
really exasperates me.




The Gold people say that interest is a normal free market pricing
mechanism for money. It allows for 'optimal allocation of capital'.




Yeah, right in to the bankers pockets..........

Don't the Gold people care about the enormous price that Labor pays
for this?




Isn't it totally atrocious to allow a few capitalists to control such
an important factor of production and reap such massive profits from
it just for their own sake?




Let's get over this.





So it is not about what means of exchange you use, it is about whether
we, as a people, are in control of it, so that its supply is steady
and dirt cheap.




ILLUMINATI LIKE GOLD CURRENCY





The second item of interest with the Gold narrative is, that it was
financed by Rockefeller. He imported Ludwig von Mises to the US in
1940 and gave him a grant...............




The self styled 'Illuminati' would invest in people supporting gold
and hiding this message in other, less relevant (dis)information. It
would simply be a typical tactic for them, to have some people make
some noise about the bankers and perhaps 9/11, at the same time
selling gold as a solution and in this way leading the opposition in
to a blind alley.




Third, interest free money is not an idea, it is an established fact.
It is all around us in the various barter schemes around the world.




Hitler financed his war machine with his own capital and bartered
internationally without one dime of gold or 'hard' currency. Declaring
stuff like 'breaking the thralldom of Interest is the kernel of
National Socialism' time and again..................




Hell, the greatness of the US itself is built on non interest bearing
government notes! Franklin's Colonial Scrip, Washington's Continental
(even though this was inflated into oblivion, if we take the money
supply out of the hands of the bankers, please don't give it to some
career politicians.........) and of course Abe Lincoln. He won the war
by throwing 30% interest gold out of the window, spitting in
Rothschild's face and buying everything he needed to hammer the South
by printing a few hundred million Greenbacks, some of which are in
circulation even today!




Of course, he got shot for that, but that just emphasizes the point.




NO CASE FOR GOLD




So is there really a case for Gold? I think not. It is just one more
of their memes, and a particularly nasty one.




Gold classically had its uses as a store of value in times of crises
and the last couple of years it is making a comeback as a hedge
against inflation and total systemic breakdown. But even for that it
is a second rate tool. Terrible manipulation of the gold market, and
now Tungsten bars all over the place........ Gold is not very
credible, really.




And at the end of the day, all this focus on 'wealth preservation' is
rather tiring and a big problem in itself. An old friend famously said
you cannot serve two masters and it is simple truths like these that
need more focus and we need money more in line with it.




For real money, serving the needs of the community, instead of its
producers, we need at least a few percent of the people to know about
these things. We need people who have a basic literacy on monetary
matters and who can see through the basic schemes.




The import of the matter is such, that the Truth community both has a
major opportunity and responsibility to facilitate the necessary
education and debate.




Because the production of the means of exchange is simply a trade and
science like all the rest and is in urgent need of demystification.




And when it comes to making money in the real sense of the word, there
is no reason at all to wait until the governments clean up their act
and start doing their job. Its suicide to do so. Commercial barters
around show that we can NOW start creating all the liquidity we need.




Waiting for the nanny state to solve our problems IS our problem.




TAKING CONTROL OF MONEY.




Because "money is anything that is generally accepted by agreement as
a medium of exchange", and although most of the current barter units
do not qualify as high quality money (because they are either not
convertible to other currencies, or can't supply interest free credit
as I worked out here), it is clear that private, not for profit
organization can start issuing interest free money right NOW. The
bigger the networks in which these units circulate, the more effective
they become, and the more they alleviate the plight of slavery through
usury and of course function as a hedge against the continuing
financial turmoil.




Let's not forget that WIR is turning over the equivalent of 2 billion
CHF per year in Switserland and is universally seen as an important
factor in that nation's stability and prosperity.




However, privately created high powered working capital is quite
something different from simply printing some interest free government
notes, since there is no coercion available to make people accept it.
Nor are taxes payable in private money.




These challenges have not been sufficiently met. Yet.

But that is an other story.


----



The story on Gold really occupies me and this morning I have done
something I promised myself a long time ago: to analyze the protocols
for their content on money.

It has been some time since I last studied them, but they remain a
treasure.

Look what I found: http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/the-protocols-on-money/

So clear and outspoken about circulation of currency, the Gold
Standard, Interest. Amazing stuff really, I'm sure it will be of
interest to you.



--



Gold is the closest thing to a univerally accepted standard, which is
beneficial for international trade (normal trade, that is; forget
"free" trade).

One discussant says that currency "must have some rarity and
desirabilty, so it has value. it must be something that does not
degrade in storage. it must be something that can easily be
manufactured to a standard weight and shape. it must be something that
can not be easily counterfeited".

A gold standard does not -have- to be a bad thing (it all depends on
who controls it). When one is making a large transaction (like buying/
selling a house), it is more convenient to exchange notes or even
cheques (which represents notes which ultimately is redeemable in
gold) than to keep lugging all that gold around.

Government-issue notes should ultimately be -redeemable- in gold;
thus, the amount of gold kept in reserve should be enough to redeem
the notes in circulation at a fixed value.

It is government which should have the power to issue gold-redeemable
currency, of which the banks are only custodians. If all the citizens
of a nation accept a government and its laws, then they should also
accept and use a common means of exchange between themselves and their
government. The process by which government issues a nation's currency
should be open and accountable; and perhaps supervised by a separately
elected body which is not involved in politics or any of the banks.
Both the government and this theoretical body should be governed by a
rule of law regulating the issuance of currency, perhaps ratified by a
national referendum so that almost everyone can agree on it.

Today we have private banks, like the "Federal" Reserve in the United
States, lending money to the government with -interest- so that the
debt is created out of thin air and can -never- be paid off, even if
the country is taxed to death. But if the government issues currency
which all of the citizenry can use, without interest, then the
government can finance its own existence without too many taxes.

There should be no usury (lending at high rates of interest). Lending
with interest is not lending. If banks operate as -businesses-,
instead of custodians, then they will want to make loans with
interest, in order to make a profit. This tends to stymie business
growth, since business will have pay back not only the initial loan,
but also the interest, which is adverse to their own profitability and
of the workers who are employed.

The monetary system need not be too complex.

However, the world is so enmeshed in the current unstable system that
nothing less than an Apocalyptic shake-down will change it.



-----------




Anthony Migchel's whole article: "Gold Revisited".

The Hidden Slavery of Interest

Anthony Migchels

Most advanced political and economic debate is dominated by the
Americans.
Through films like Zeitgeist Addendum, The Money Masters and Money as
Debt,
and books like those of Thomas Greco and Ellen Brown. They have been
enormously important contributions to the awakening of the many
(including
myself!) towards the most pressing problem of our time, our monetary
"system."

Interest is being payed by people borrowing money and received by
people
having loads of it. So it is per definition a wealth transfer from
poor to
rich.

The one notable exception is interest. Of course all the
aforementioned
sources have dealt with interest, but to my mind there has been no
really
comprehensive and satisfactory analysis of interest in the Anglo
Saxon
world. In fact, most analysts concentrate on the fact that money is
debt.
There seems to be some kind of consensus that debt is the heart of
the
issue. But it is not. Without interest, debt would not be a problem,
as I
worked out here.

Interest is one of the few things that is more profoundly understood
in
Europe, more specifically, Germany. Throughout the 20th century
interest has
been analyzed by some unknown, but brilliant thinkers. Silvio Gesell
comes
to mind, Gottfried Feder and later Helmut Creutz and their current
standard
bearer Margrit Kennedy.

Feder wrote a book Breaking the Shackles of Interest, and later
advised
Hitler, who was to say time and again, that "the kernel of National
Socialism is breaking the thralldom of interest." Maybe that did
some
damage by association to the theme.
It is curious to realize, when studying Hitler, how close he came to
the
truth in his analysis (which was, no doubt, inspired by exactly the
enemies
he was purported to attack). It is mind boggling to realize how much
the
bankers were willing to give away and how they entrenched their
supremacy by
totally destroying him and his credibility.

Be that as it may, it is time to make fully clear what the scale of
the
interest problem is. We need to get rid of any misunderstanding, let
alone
underestimation of this most heinous tool in the hands of our
Satanist
masters.
Dealing with Interest

We'll go through this point for point. Some points will in some way
overlap
others, but they are still worth mentioning because they widen our
perspective. I'll be quoting Margrit Kennedy a lot and I would
strongly
suggest going through her classic 'Why we need monetary innovation'.

1. To begin with, I'll put forward my standard example: a mortgage.
Let's
say you want to buy a house and go the bank and get a loan. Say 200k.
The
simple truth is, after thirty years you will have payed back 600k.
200k for
the principal and 400k (!!) in interest. Now this might be OK, or at
least
somewhat understandable, if you were borrowing this money from
somebody
else, who has been saving it. But as we know, this is not the case.
The
money is produced the moment the loan is granted by the bank. In a
computer
program. By pressing a few buttons.

So basically you pay 400k interest for pressing a button. Granted, the
bank
needs to manage the loan during the time it is being repaid. But the
cost
for this is still only a fraction of the income they get through the
interest.
Now, we could stop here, because it is clear that the bank is ripping
us
off, also in legal terms, although they make the laws themselves,
because
there is no realistic service being delivered for the money.

But there is so much more, we must continue.

2. When the bank creates some money by giving you a loan, it takes the
money
out of circulation when you repay. Repaying debts means a diminishing
money
supply. The banks only provide the principal, in our previous example
200k.
But after thirty years, 600k has been repaid and only 200k was
created. So
how can this be? How can 600k be repaid by 200k?

It can't. Somebody else needs to get into debt to create sufficient
liquidity to pay the 400k interest. And the borrower of the original
loan
must start competing for this liquidity with everybody else to obtain
that,
intrinsically scarce, cash.

This means that because of the combination of debt and interest, the
money
supply must grow forever. But we know that a growing money supply is
the
definition of inflation and that inflation is closely linked to
rising
prices. So inflation is inherent in the system. This sounds strange,
because
Central Banks raise interest rates to lower inflation, reasoning less
credit
will be issued because of rising prices for it. But the higher the
interest
rates go, the more money must be created to pay for this interest.

Just one of the perverse side effects of interest in the current
wealth
transfer system we call "finance."

3. Due to interest, money circulates slower. This is a big problem,
because
the slower the money circulates, the more we need of it in circulation
to
meet our needs. And when you have interest bearing money as debt, that
is
quite a problem indeed. The reason for slower circulation is that it
enhances the store of value function of money, with all its
detrimental
implications.

This phenomenon can be best seen when thinking about paying bills. If
you
know you can increase your money by postponing paying your bills, you
will
help the money circulate slower. People will be encouraged to hoard
the
money instead of spending it.
It is also more likely because of this reason rather than the growing
cost
of money which lessens inflation (or better, price rises) in the short
term
when raising interest rates. Because less money is circulating
slower,
demand falls.

4. Now, because of the fact that the principal is created but not the
money
to pay the interest, money is intrinsically scarce. Because of scarce
money,
capital is the scarce factor of production, whereas reason has it that
labor
should be the scarcer than capital. How else can we say we live in
abundance?

I think it was Lietaer who pointed out the natural consequence of this
state
of affairs: competition. Economic actors in the current system compete
with
each other primarily for scarce working capital. Scarce money is a
major
driving force in the ever more competitive marketplace. Of course,
the
winners of this system have their lackeys ("economists") explain that
competition leads to efficiency. But common sense dictates that humans
are
more effective when they can cooperate. Surely there is a place for
competition in the market, but it has gotten totally out of hand and
it is
getting worse.

Scarce money because of interest is one of the more profound reasons
for
this trend.

5. So what of it you think. I was raised to be conservative in these
matters
and one should simply not get into debt, so you won't pay interest.

Wrong. Not only because if nobody went into debt, there would be no
money,
but because companies go into debt to finance their production. They
pay
interest (capital costs) over these loans. And like any cost this must
be
calculated into the prices they ask for their goods and services.

And what percentage of prices can be related to interest? It depends
on the
kind of business, particularly how capital intensive it is. Going from
12%
for garbage collection to 77% for renting a house. All in all about
40% of
prices can be traced back to costs for capital. These figures are by
Kennedy
and they have been corroborated by an independent study done by
Erasmus
University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands under the supervision of STRO,
a
leading monetary think tank in the Netherlands.

So, you lose 40% (!!!!) of your disposable income to interest through
prices.

6. Interest is being payed by people borrowing money and received by
people
having loads of it. So it is per definition a wealth transfer from
poor to
rich.

It transpires, that about 80% of the poorest people pay more interest
than
they receive to the richest 10%. The next richest 10% pay as much as
they
receive. This means the vast majority is losing a substantial part of
their
money to interest. The richest own the banks or have a lot of money
there.

We must keep in mind that this is totally for nothing, since most of
the
money is printed at the time it is loaned out.

How much money are we talking about? I have only figures for Germany,
but
reason suggests it is basically the same everywhere.
In Germany the poorest 80% pay 1 billion Euros in interest to the
richest
10% PER DAY. Yes, that's right, one billion euros per day. That is a
grand
total of 365 billion euro's per year. That is one seventh of German
GDP and
extrapolating this to America, the poorest 80% must be paying at least
a
trillion a year.

It conclusively explains the old adage that the rich get richer and
the poor
get poorer.

This is the hidden tax that nobody is talking about.

This is the yoke that we carry.

This is the worst kind of slavery, because it is slavery without even
realizing it.

This is interest and let it never be forgotten.

This is our mortal enemy and let us never take our eyes of it again,
until
it is thrown into the fire of hell, together with the usurers
enslaving us
with it.

Anthony Migchels is an Interest-Free Currency activist and founder of
the
Gelre, the first Regional Currency in the Netherlands.


========================



Social Credit is only the beginning -- it buys us the ticket to the
world described below:

Here is the answer you have been looking for.

I recommend as the best view of the big picture. The videos are in
English.

This is the common understanding that we all need.

Friday, 27 May 2011



Was Ist Geld, Prof Bernard Lietaer
Open this Window and view item #9: Zeitgeist Addendum (full movie)

http://wn.com/Was_ist_Geld,_Prof_Bernard_Lietaer?_Der_Schein_tr%C3%BCgt#

-----------------------


From: Wallace Klinck social crediter
To: Dick Eastman
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: (1) Gary North or Dick Eastman Deflationist versus
Inflationist


Frankly, Dick, I think that North's position vis-a-vis Social Credit
can be summarized by saying that his thinking is dominated by an
overlying fear of physical scarcity and that psychologically or
"morally" he is outraged by the idea that anyone should get anything
"for nothing."

Comment:
Mr. North, a onetime aide to Representative Ron Paul of Texas -=- Mr.
North, who is the late post-milleniumist reformed theology publicist
R. J. Rushdoony’s son-in-law but was not on speaking terms with him
from 1981 until Mr. Rushdoony’s death -- (so much for the tell-tale
love of one another by which Christ said his discples would know one
another) With a deficit of $125 billion a month, Ron Paul has
advocated that the Treasury sell whatever gold it holds, to restore
gold to the private sector, and Gary North has defended him. You know
the "private sector" is, of course, that's you and me and and the guy
on the corner holding the carboard sign that says "no home no food
will work for anything" -- every penny the US government earns
selling its gold at the top goes to Rothschild as interest on the
national debt -- Rothschild (the City) too has been selling gold to
us following the Ron-Paul-following know everythings. And of course
the government sale of gold -- provided the government really has gold
bars that aren't tungsten (the new fools gold) -- may be the event
that brings gold off the top.




The Puritan mind would no doubt consider such a state of affairs as
being conducive to sloth and consequent further scarcity. Jesus, as
demonstrated by word and deed, apparently disagreed with North. Who,
one might ask, is the superior exponent of Christian thought and
practice?

Comment: Calvinism -- all predestination and no love -- the least zeal
for spreading the gospel -- by their wealth shall thee know them.


North appears to be entirely convinced of the efficacy and moral
validity of the unChristian Doctrine of Salvation through Works.

Comment: Calvinism is salvation through God picking you -- once saved
always saved, but there is always the question of were you saved in
the first place -- only god knows, but if you persist in acting right
people will more or less assume that your prospects are good.


Yet he would criticize Ellen Brown (quite rightly with regard to her
advocacies regarding State issue of credit) as being sympathetic to
the the "command economy" of the Nazis who were most unyielding
advocates and enforcers of "full-employment." as a means to establish
and perpetuate the tyrannical "Work State."

Comment: Ellen is for government spending the new money, but also for
households getting some. I have that from her directly.

Would North dare to argue that in the production of that mythical
"widget", involving a lengthy multi-stage program over say five years,
the incomes of the people involved in that production are all saved by
them for five years so that they at that time can pay for and obtain
the widget?

Comment: You mean the so-called round-about-means of production and
the lengthened time-structure of production which, with inflation/
malinvestment is used by Austrians to explain depressions.

North appears to hold that the organism has no right in natural law
to draw sustenance from its environment--or if not he apparently
separates humanity from the natural world to be governed by a very
different moral imperative. The emotional and pejorative style of
North's writing seems, in my opinion, to reveal a negative
psychological factor that impairs objectivity.


You have expressed a considerable number of valid ideas in your
commentary. But I must point out--or reiterate--that "B" payments are
not merely interest payments but ALL payments that one firm make to
another rather than to individuals. Douglas was entirely explicit
about this matter in his presentation of the A + B Theorem and
explanatory discussion. Interest is not the fundamental cause of the
economic dilemma. It is more a result rather than a cause. The
fundamental cause is an accounting convention that leads to the
increasingly premature cancellation of consumer purchasing-power
through the inclusion of allocated charges in respect of capital in
retail prices. If interest were removed from the scene altogether
this would not solve the problem. We are talking about two things:
the sufficiency of consumer income and the distribution of income.
Because of the centralized issue of accumulating financial debt under
the present system of industrial cost-accountancy, which is not
corrected by a realistic system of national cost-accountancy, the
distribution of income is certainly skewed and inequitable with regard
to the servicing of debt being held by the powerful rather than by
society at large. But Social Credit would end this inequity because
at the final economic stage, i.e., consumption, consumers would always
have sufficient unencumbered buying power to acquire the totality of
completed goods flowing from the production line. No consumer debt,
no interest.


Also, reference to the velocity theory of money is quite irrelevant in
discussing Social Credit inasmuch as Douglas stated that that theory
is a complete myth and demonstrated quite clearly why it is unsound.
A unit of money is a unit of money and cannot perform the work of ten
or twenty or whatever other fantastic value may be imagined. A unit
of currency can cancel only one equivalent of financial cost. Its re-
issue through new production creates a new unit of financial cost.
Douglas's approach was from the standpoint of accountancy--the
creation of financial costs and the means of their liquidation.


Bankers are both deflationists and inflationists insofar as this
serves their alternate policies of stimulating the production of real
wealth through the creation of unsustainable debt and subsequently of
seizing created real wealth by foreclosure brought about by credit
stricture. I agree that as holders of the sole right to create credit
Banks wish to enhance through scarcity the value of what they regard
wrongly as a "commodity." Banking policy is confiscatory. Social
Credit is not inflationary by the definition which it ascribes to
inflation. Douglas accepted that inflation is an escalation of prices
accompanying an expansion of the supply of money. But he also made
quite clear that the supply of money can be expanded in a manner to
reduce the price level and provided the appropriate accountancy
technique for accomplishing this end. This is an accountancy issue
and not one of "supply and demand."Thus, an expansion of credit in the
Social Credit sense would not be inflationary according with the
orthodox definition. Social Credit does not advocate for stable
prices because to do so would be an act of economic sabotage denying
the consuming public the real advantage in financial terms of genuine
increases in actual production efficiency. The conventional economy
cannot deliver in this regard because it can only charge the consumer
with capital depreciation and has no mechanism whereby to credit the
consumer with capital appreciation which latter greatly exceeds the
former.


The core of Douglas's technical analysis, as indicated by him
specifically in "The New and Old Economics", and elsewhere, reveals
that financial price does not reflect real cost which is the ratio,
computed in financial terms as accounted, of the mean rate of national
consumption divided by the mean rate of national production--which
latter is increasing much more rapidly than is the former. Thus, the
"Just Price" of consumer goods is not properly represented by
financial price as conventionally computed but is increasingly less
than the latter--and retail prices and earned consumer incomes must,
therefore, be compensated on a macro-economic level so as to reflect
the actual physical cost of production. The primary goal of Social
Credit is to confer upon the individual citizen a beneficial share in
the communal capital--realizable through increasing automatic access
to consumer wealth independently of earned incomes. Social Credit
does not contemplate usurping the private administration of productive
resources.


Sincerely
Wally Klinck


Trojan Triangles -- here come the Chinese technicians to fill in
where we are said not to have any skills

From: Vicky Davis <eyeswi...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Homescam Security.... seeks foreign Homescammers
Date: Thursday, May 12, 2011, 4:30 PM



And you can bet that a lot of them - maybe about 100,000 or so .. will
be COMMUNIST Chinese "students" - arriving massively through the
Trojan Triangles. Probably with the officers coming through the
State Department using the extra merchant marine visas.

Also, I almost forgot to mention.. who might be the sponsors? You of
course. Indirectly, through the technology grants to the universities
and the small business incubators - that are actively seeking Foreign
Direct Investment from the COMMUNIST Chinese

Put it all together - it's strategic.


--- On Thu, 5/12/11, Barbara wrote:


Subject: Addressing imaginary shortages
Date: Thursday, May 12, 2011, 4:12 PM


http://content.govdelivery.com/bulletins/gd/USDHSICE-7434c


ICE announces expanded list of science, technology, engineering, and
math degree programs
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sent this bulletin on
05/12/2011 04:35 PM EDT

Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page.

ICE announces expanded list of science, technology, engineering, and
math degree programs

Qualifies eligible graduates to extend their post-graduate training

WASHINGTON - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) today
published an expanded list of science, technology, engineering, and
math (STEM) degree programs that qualify eligible graduates on student
visas for an Optional Practical Training (OPT) extension-an important
step forward in the Obama administration's continued commitment to
fixing our broken immigration system and expanding access to the
nation's pool of talented high skilled graduates in the science and
technology fields.

The announcement follows President Obama's recent remarks in El Paso,
Texas, where he reiterated his strong support for new policies that
embrace talented students from other countries, who enrich the nation
by working in science and technology jobs and fueling innovation in
their chosen fields here in the United States, as a part of
comprehensive reform.

By expanding the list of STEM degrees to include such fields as
Neuroscience, Medical Informatics, Pharmaceutics and Drug Design,
Mathematics and Computer Science, the Obama administration is helping
to address shortages in certain high tech sectors of talented
scientists and technology experts-permitting highly skilled foreign
graduates who wish to work in their field of study upon graduation and
extend their post-graduate training in the United States.

Under the OPT program, foreign students who graduate from U.S.
colleges and universities are able to remain in the U.S. and receive
training through work experience for up to 12 months. Students who
graduate with one of the newly-expanded STEM degrees can remain for an
additional 17 months on an OPT STEM extension.
_________________



From a couple of days ago - constituent letter from Senator Lugar:

The EB visas are designed to bring talented and qualified individuals
here to help grow our economy. As such, I have asked my staff to look
into the matter of its alleged abuse through the Midwest Center for
Foreign Investment.


It may also interest you to know that I co-authored the StartUp Visa
Act of 2011, which is aimed at increasing America's global
competiveness by attracting job-creating entrepreneurs to the United
States. More than 160 venture capitalists from across the country
have endorsed the proposal.


The StartUp Visa Act of 2011will allow an immigrant entrepreneur,
holders of H-1B visas, and entrepreneurs living outside the United
States with a market presence in the country to receive a two year
visa if he or she can show that a qualified U.S. investor is willing
to invest in the immigrant's startup venture and create jobs. To
accommodate this new type of visa, adjustments would be made to the
existing EB-5 visa. Under a new EB-6 category, a visa would be
granted to the innovative entrepreneur with intellectual capital,
instead of a wealthy foreign investor who is in a position to buy a
visa. The legislation transfers an allotment of the yearly 9,940 EB-5
visas, of which only 4,191 visas were used in FY 2009, to be granted
under the new EB-6 category. The creation of new visas is not
authorized in this bill.


In a global economy, we face competition for ideas, talent, and jobs.
It would be a shame for us not to welcome an entrepreneur if he or she
is willing to create jobs here in the United States rather than in
other countries. Our nation should strive to attract to the United
States the most talented and highly skilled entrepreneurs. We should
channel the power of innovative thinkers from around the world and
American investors towards creating jobs and encouraging economic
growth and future prosperity.



=========================



The Biggest Conflict of Interest (the one that is killing us)



by Dick Eastman



The biggest conflict of interest and moral hazard in the US -- the
root of all corruption, the source and empowering of conspiracy is the
fact that the intermediaries who supposedly take peoples savings and
then lend them out to entrepreneurs are also the bond holders, the
creditors to whom all debt is owed. Intermediaries are supposed to
make money on the spread between depositors savings accounts and the
rate at which business loans are made. Bond holders simply own IOUs
and can only gain in wealth if they can engineer deflation. When the
bond holders and the intermediaries are the same persons, investment
will simply not be made -- because creditors have much more to gain
from engineering deflation than intermediaries have from lending
savers' savings to entrepreneurs.



That is why American bankers have quit providing money for domestic
economy entrepreneurs. They much rather profit by deflation, with
occasional refilling of the pot to drain by extending easy home-equity
credit which they know will be soon eaten up again in deflation by
virtue of the fact that no matter how much new money they create in
the form of home equity loans will be taken back again with a vengence
when both principal and compound interest must be repaid. The
deflation continues apace, but with each short period of boom, more
assets are created that will be captured by the creditor class in
foreclosure.



Bank intermediaries simply should not be allowed to own bonds. It is
a conflict of interest and a crime.



Look at the debt that the people are in - all owed to bankers, i.e.,
to the intermediaries who are supposed to bundle savings and lend it
out to producers but never do.



If I could be Führer for a day the first thing I would do after a)
repudiating all debt to the international bankers, 2) initiating
social credit dividends for the creation of all new money in the
household sector exclusively, 3) making money US treasury "thin air"
debt-free fiat and 4) ending fractional reserve banking would be to 5)
impose a law separating bonds from banking so that Businesses
selling bonds and Government selling bonds - will be kept a
quadrillion light years from the banks which I would limit exclusively
to lending savers' time savings deposits to businessman borrowers
and home buyers.



Once the human race separates bonds and banking every day will be the
first day of spring.



Dick Eastman

Yakima, Washington


================================

The gold panic is suicidal. Americans are being stampeeded of a cliff
by the gold monopoly. Stop the panic to gold. You are bleeding this
country to death when you buy gold -- and there isn't any monetary
inflation. You are being had and it will cost us all everything.



Our dollars are our only economic salvation.

There is no monetary inflation, only the worst monetary deflation in
our history.

Only inflation ends depressions. American's must know that under the
present system all bank loans are inflation. All investment is
inflation. This economy needs inflation just as much you need to
inhale your next breath.

We are not inflating. We need to inflate.

You object, do you? You say that any fool can see by the rising
prices of gasoline and food that we are in an inflation.

Yes, I agree. All fools can see that. But it is false nontheless.
Fuel prices rise because they are administered prices of an oil cartel
and the deliberate restriction of supply at the well and at the
refinery by monopolist producers. Food prices rise in part because of
fuel prices, but mostly because of a global effort of the Rothschild
Power to make food scare all around the world in 2011. This is
monopoly pricing and it is also Rockefellerian Population Control at
work. The prices are also due to the destruction of small competitors
against which the big corporations, including Wal Mart, had been
attempting to drive from the market with their Chinese-labor
competitive edge. But now that they have the markets to themselves,
they can now raise prices as an ordinary retail monopolist without
fear of new entry. No new entry is possible in this deflation
depression.

---

The Rothschild mouthpieces say that the US must pay down the debt by
cutting government services and transfers, but cutting wages, by
privatizing and selling off public assets, by cutting the American
standard of living -- ostensibly because we were "too pigish" in
borrowing rather than working for a living - because we are liberal
hippies who avoid hard work like the rich people do " etc.

That is not true. The economy is failing because of excessive debt
that was inevitable simply from the fact that all of our money is bank-
loan money that always must be paid back 100 percent and with compound
interest. The more we stimulate with debt-financied stimulus, and the
more we pay off our debt by undertaking new debt in the form of a
newer home equity loan -- the more we will pay later on -- p[rincipal
plus interest -- putting us into an even worse spot. And it has to
end, because the system is not geared up for banks to offer less than
zero interest rates -- and only lower interest rates induces
homeowners drowning in debt to take out yet one more equity loan to
keep their noses above water. The interest gets lower but the
principal gets bigger. There is only one way it all can end without
tossing out the rules -- and that is in Rothschild owning everyone's
house, everyone's gold hoard and everyone's bonded servitude as debt
slaves for all generations forever.

To Hell with Rothschild International Usury by Dick Eastman here

Criminal Rothschilds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USGSOViaulc


Migchels, Eastman etc
http://desiebenthal.blogspot.com/2010/10/democratic-money-versus-absolute-power.html


From: Ellen Brown
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 5:24 PM


Hi, here is my latest article, "Japan Shows How to Defuse Debt Time-
bomb"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-brown/inviting-chaos-the-perils_b_867491.html

Best wishes,
Ellen Brown


====================


From: anegy...@cherifo.com
To: ;
Subject: DSK a déclaré à Tribune Juive en2003 qu'il se lève chaque
matin"en se demandant comment il pourra être utile à Israel"
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:01:45 +0300


En 2003, Strauss-Kahn déclare à Tribune Juive qu’il se lève chaque
matin « en se demandant comment il pourra être utile à Israël. » En
1991, il avait déclaré : “Je considère que tout Juif de la diaspora,
et donc de France, doit, partout où il peut, apporter son aide à
Israël. C’est d’ailleurs la raison pour laquelle il est important que
les Juifs prennent des responsabilités politiques. En somme, dans mes
fonctions et dans ma vie de tous les jours, à travers l’ensemble de
mes actions, j’essaie d’apporter ma modeste pierre à la construction
d’Israël.” (Passage)
The Article.


For those who don't read French.
In a nut shell: this guy Strauss-Khan, in the year 2003 said that
every morning when he wakes up he ask himself how can he help
Israel ???

Cherif
anegyptian

---- Forwarded Message ----

Sent: Wed, May 18, 2011 8:58:21 PM
Subject: DSK

http://canard68.20minutes-blogs.fr/archive/2011/02/24/du-gouvernement-jospin-au-fmi-qui-est-dsk.html

C’est Strauss-Kahn qui, en 1999, a proposé Pascal Lamy pour que celui-
ci devienne le Commissaire européen au commerce international (avant
de devenir, ensuite, directeur général de l’OMC).
En 2003, Strauss-Kahn déclare à Tribune Juive qu’il se lève chaque
matin « en se demandant comment il pourra être utile à Israël. » En
1991, il avait déclaré : “Je considère que tout Juif de la diaspora,
et donc de France, doit, partout où il peut, apporter son aide à
Israël. C’est d’ailleurs la raison pour laquelle il est important que
les Juifs prennent des responsabilités politiques. En somme, dans mes
fonctions et dans ma vie de tous les jours, à travers l’ensemble de
mes actions, j’essaie d’apporter ma modeste pierre à la construction
d’Israël.” (Passage)



Social Credit: Not Socialism
Not a political party





Not Socialism
Because of the word social in the term “Social Credit”, some people
erroneously assume it to be a form of Socialism, and automatically
reject it. On the contrary, Social Credit is the best way to fight
Socialism and Communism, and to protect private property and
individual freedom. A Dominican Father, who had studied the Social
Credit proposals, even wrote: “And if you want neither Socialism nor
Communism, bring Social Credit in array against them. It will be in
your hands a powerful weapon with which to fight these enemies.”

And in 1939, a Commission of nine theologians appointed by the Bishops
of Quebec found that Social Credit was not tainted with Socialism nor
Communism, and was worthy of close attention. In fact, Social Credit
wants to make every member of society a real capitalist, a shareholder
in the wealth of the country. If the expression “social” credit
scares some people, Douglas's financial proposals can also be referred
to under other names: public credit, economic democracy, or New
Economics.

Not a political party
Concerning the issue of political parties, it is true that parties
called “Social Credit” existed in the past, and that is why some
people may be confused: a “Social Credit” party existed on the federal
scene in Canada for a while, and was even in power in the Province of
Alberta, Canada, from 1935 to 1971, and in the Province of British
Columbia, from 1952 to 1991 (except for three years, from 1972 to
1975). None of these provincial parties applied Social Credit. (The
very day he took office as premier in 1952, Bennett, B.C. “Social
Credit” leader, even said that his party would do absolutely nothing
to apply Social Credit principles. Actually, there was nothing even
closely related to real Social Credit in this party or its platform;
it should have been more accurately called “conservative”.)

The fact is that there is no need for a so-called “Social Credit”
party to have C. H. Douglas's Social Credit principles implemented.
These principles can be applied by any political party presently in
office, whatever its name — Liberal, Conservative, etc. Some people
may have thought that promoting “Social Credit” parties was the better
way to promote Social Credit, but C. H. Douglas and Louis Even thought
exactly the opposite.

As Douglas and Louis Even pointed out, the creation of “Social Credit”
parties was even a nuisance, and did nothing but to prevent the
implementation of real Social Credit. For example, as soon as you use
the words “Social Credit” to name a political party, you just close
the minds of people of other parties to even study Social Credit,
since they will consider it only as another party to be fought.

Real democracy means that elected representatives are sent to
Parliament precisely to represent their constituents, and to express
the will of their constituents. So the point is not to create new
parties, and divide the people even more, but to unite the people
around common objectives, and then to put pressure on the Government
to implement these objectives. This method of pressure politics is the
one advocated by the Michael Journal.

In a speech given to Social Crediters on March 7, 1936, Douglas said:
“If you agree that the object of sending a set of men to Parliament is
to get what you want, then why elect a special set of men, a special
party at all? The men who are there should get you what you want —
that is their business. It is not their business to say how it is to
be got... How things are done is the responsibility of the expert.”

On the same occasion, Douglas said that the idea that a Social Credit
party should exist (in any country) was a “profound misconception”. He
even added: “If you elect a Social Credit party, supposing you could,
I may say that I regard the election of a Social Credit party in this
country as one of the greatest catastrophes that could happen... (It)
would be to elect a set of amateurs to direct a set of very competent
professionals. The professionals, I may tell you, would see that the
amateurs got the blame for everything that was done.” This is
precisely what happened in Alberta in the 1930s. (Douglas wrote a very
interesting book on that subject, entitled “The Alberta Experiment”,
from which the following information is taken.)

The Alberta experiment

Aberhart

William Aberhart was a principal of Calgary High School, who commanded
a province-wide audience every Sunday with his religious broadcasts.
He came across a book on Social Credit and, being so carried away by
this new light, he began to use his radio program to preach the
“gospel” of Social Credit, and to mobilize support for it. Hundreds of
study groups soon appeared across the province, and a majority of
Albertans became in favour of Social Credit. The ruling party in
Alberta at the time, the United Farmers, was also open to Social
Credit, but said that it could only be applied nation-wide, and not
provincially. Aberhart disagreed, and decided to present Social Credit
candidates in the 1935 provincial election, and he captured 56 of the
63 seats in the provincial legislature. They were all new to politics,
being a “set of amateurs”, and were no match for the Financiers.

For example, when Aberhart took office, instead of listening to
Douglas's advice, he went to Ottawa to seek financial assistance, and
an economic adviser, Mr. Robert Magor, was given to him. This Mr.
Magor had obviously only one objective in mind: to discredit Social
Credit. Measures were adopted that were just the opposite of Social
Credit, and that is what Douglas called “a policy of capitulation to
orthodox finance... Almost every mistake of strategy which could be
made in Alberta had been made.”

It must also be mentioned that Aberhart, although sincere enough, had
also little knowledge of Social Credit, and did not understand its
technical basis, which led him, in an effort to simplify Douglas's
ideas, to often distort them. In the following years, fifteen Social
Credit bills were voted on by the Alberta Government, but vetoed by
higher authorities (either disallowed by the Federal Government, or
ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court).

One point of contention was obviously that money and banking was under
federal jurisdiction, according to the Canadian Constitution. Douglas
explained to Aberhart that Alberta could bypass this difficulty by
making use of its own credit by establishing a provincial credit
system, since the Constitution grants to the provinces the right to
“raise loans upon the sole credit of the Province.” As Douglas wrote
in The Social Crediter of September 11, 1948: “When Mr. Aberhart won
his first electoral victory (in 1935), all he did was to recruit an
army for a war (against the monopoly of credit). That war has never
been fought.”

Aberhart had learned from his mistakes during his first years in
office, and was ready, after World War II, to take up the fight again,
but he unfortunately died in May, 1943.



So those who say that “Social Credit is that funny money scheme tried
in Alberta, where it failed”, are dead wrong. Social Credit did not
fail in Alberta, for the simple reason that it was never tried: all
the attempts to implement Social Credit policies were opposed and
defeated by a centralized power. As Douglas said, if Social Credit was
absurd and worthless as an effective answer to the Great Depression of
the period, the best way to have this demonstrated would have been to
permit the Government of Alberta to go ahead with a Social Credit
policy. The credit monopolists feared that even a partial application
of Social Credit would prove so successful that every effort had to be
made to prevent this from taking place.

* * *

The only effective way to have the Social Credit proposals implemented
by governments is therefore not to promote so-called “social credit”
parties, but to make Social Credit principles known to the population
— by distributing our Michael leaflets, and, above all, to solicit
subscriptions to our Michael Journal — in order to create a public
pressure that will be strong enough to get the government — of any
party — of our country to issue its own money, debt free, and to
implement Douglas's Social Credit principles.

We firmly believe that the Social Credit principles, once implemented,
would be a very efficacious way to eliminate poverty (in the countries
in which they are implemented). For the first time in history,
absolute economic security, without restrictive conditions, would be
guaranteed to each and every individual. So, dear reader, go ahead and
study the following pages. You will find them most enlightening. Our
hope is that this study will get you to take action to make this
Social Credit solution known to your fellow countrymen, in order to
create a public pressure that will be strong enough to get the
government of your country to issue its own money, debt free, and to
implement Douglas’s Social Credit principles.

====================================================================
i agree with you sir,but i am afraid it will take a massive bloody
worldwide revolution to pull it off..where do we go from here? mike in
korea..(bty--they are completely lost HERE..-just little brain dead
capitalist pigs running around with cell phones attached to their
body..


=============================

From: David Pidcock
To: Dick Eastman
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 10:12 PM
Subject: RE: If you kill the Fed and let the securites it owns go to
the banks that own it (which are owned by the Rothschild gang --
Rothschild will control monetary policy in secret and responsible to
no one.


WE SEE AND FULLY AGREE WITH YOUR POINT - NO MATTER WHAT OR WHO YOU
VOTE FOR - A ROTHSCHILD MAN, WOMEN OR POLICY GETS IN
DAVID
INSTITUTE FOR RATIONAL ECONOMICS

---------------------------------

Sweet Sue writes:

I put your entire commentary up on vatic project that outlines your
case and even included the JBirch letter and your words on that too.
Good points.


Populist Nationalist Social Credit Brotherhood of American Citizen
Peacemakers of All Races and Creeds -- This is our Common Ground!!!

http://www.thespiritualun.org/socialcredit.htm

[Richard]