M. P. Sean Fraser, I posted a message to your wall a few days ago.
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Dennis Tate
Mar 16, 2020, 9:09:24 AM3/16/20
to Sean Fraser, Sean Fraser
Dennis Tate
Central- Nova, N. S., B0J3C0, Canada
March 16, 2020
Member of Parliament for Central - Nova Mr. Sean Fraser:
Honorable Minister Mr. Fraser:
I posted a message to your Facebook page wall a few days ago that I think you may be
able to use if I send you a copy by e-mail.
Thank you for considering this theory on one way in which Canada could respond to the present
COVID 19 crisis.
Dennis Tate
p.s. I will be BCCing this message to others who I am hoping may well seriously consider and perhaps
even promote this option.
If my advice is unwise.... my apologies but I am going to share this to my wall to get some feedback but I am of the belief that this virus could set in motion a Bear Market, another 1929, and in my forty or so years of researching some theories on economics I am of the belief that one of the best responses to the possible economic fall out may be:
"Five hundred dollars per Canadian per month, can this work?
I am advocating the usage of the Bank of Canada that is owned by all Canadians to finance giving five hundred dollars per month to all thirty seven million Canadians.
It will of course mean much more to poorer Canadians than to millionaires........
but it could be surprising how many stay at home wives with cheap and stingy millionaire husbands who control the purse strings of the home may find this extra five hundred very helpful indeed.
I suspect that well over eighty percent of of Canadians will spend this money reasonably well and:
1. enrol their kids in more after school programs.....
2. begin to purchase a higher percentage of organic produce vs the cheap GMO stuff
3. purchase a newer car, SUV or half ton truck
4. do renovations to their homes
5. hire landscapers to do certain projects on their properties
6. pay down their debt loads, especially the higher interest ones
7. buy a new home rather than renting
8. buy a cottage outside the city so that they can get away for weekends
9. many will choose to move to rural Canada in order to escape relatively hectic city life
10. eat at nice restaurants more often
11. I also believe that a significant percentage of Canadian women who would have chosen to have an abortion under the present economic situation will CHOOSE to keep their babies as opposed to having an abortion!
I suspect that less than ten percent of Canadians will attempt to live off this five hundred dollars / month and simply use it to drink or smoke more.
To whatever degree this happens the worst cases where these Canadians put themselves and others in danger this can be dealt with by issuing food stamps vs a monthly check."
I posted this to the wall of my local Member of Parliament to give him and his boss P. M. Justin Trudeau something to think about.
"Five hundred dollars per Canadian per month, can this work?
I am advocating the usage of the Bank of Canada that is owned by all Canadians to finance giving five hundred dollars per month to all thirty seven million Canadians.
It will of course mean much more to poorer Canadians than to millionaires........
but it could be surprising how many stay at home wives with cheap and stingy millionaire husbands who control the purse strings of the home may find this extra five hundred very helpful indeed.
I suspect that well over eighty percent of of Canadians will spend this money reasonably well and:
1. enrol their kids in more after school programs.....
2. begin to purchase a higher percentage of organic produce vs the cheap GMO stuff
3. purchase a newer car, SUV or half ton truck
4. do renovations to their homes
5. hire landscapers to do certain projects on their properties
6. pay down their debt loads, especially the higher interest ones
7. buy a new home rather than renting
8. buy a cottage outside the city so that they can get away for weekends
9. many will choose to move to rural Canada in order to escape relatively hectic city life
10. eat at nice restaurants more often
11. I also believe that a significant percentage of Canadian women who would have chosen to have an abortion under the present economic situation will CHOOSE to keep their babies as opposed to having an abortion!
I suspect that less than ten percent of Canadians will attempt to live off this five hundred dollars / month and simply use it to drink or smoke more.
To whatever degree this happens the worst cases where these Canadians put themselves and others in danger this can be dealt with by issuing food stamps vs a monthly check."
I posted this to the wall of my local Member of Parliament to give him and his boss P. M. Justin Trudeau something to think about.
Here is my understanding of what happens if my nation Canada begins to use the Bank of Canada again as
we used it from 1938 to 1974 to create an extra eighteen billion dollars per month to pay out an unconditional income
supplement of this nature.
This extra eighteen billion dollars would be taxed back into the treasury after it would turn over roughly three times so
it would soon balance the deficit and begin to pay down the national debt of Canada by about eighteen billion dollars
Canadian per month.
The key though is that it has to be created in the same manner as we used from 1938 to 1974 when then Prime Minister
Pierre E. Trudeau made what could be argued was one of the biggest errors by a sitting Canadian P. M. in this last century.
we used it from 1938 to 1974 to create an extra eighteen billion dollars per month to pay out an unconditional income
supplement of this nature.
This extra eighteen billion dollars would be taxed back into the treasury after it would turn over roughly three times so
it would soon balance the deficit and begin to pay down the national debt of Canada by about eighteen billion dollars
Canadian per month.
The key though is that it has to be created in the same manner as we used from 1938 to 1974 when then Prime Minister
Pierre E. Trudeau made what could be argued was one of the biggest errors by a sitting Canadian P. M. in this last century.
Betty Krawczyk:
But somehow this worked backward for Trudeau. Many Canadians still think highly of Pierre Trudeau, but in 1974 he did one terrible thing that changed the lives, for present and future, of all Canadians, for the worse. Trudeau gave the leading operations of the Bank of Canada over to the private banks operating in Canada.
The Bank of Canada was first established by Prime Minister Richard Bennet in 1935 as a private central bank, but was then nationalized by William Lyon Mackenzie King in 1938. By nationalizing the bank, Mackenzie King meant for it to belong to the people so the Canadian government could borrow funds with little or no interest for capital expenditures. The mandate of the newly nationalized Bank of Canada was to act as the banker to the government and to manage the public debt. As Mackenzie King famously said: “Once a nation parts with the control of their currency and credit, it matters not who makes that nation’s laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile.”
So the Bank of Canada was nationalized in 1938 and the government could now borrow money with little or no interest. And it worked. The Canadian government built freeways, public transportation systems, subway line, airports, the St. Lawrence Seaway and funded a national health care system and the Canada Pension Plan. But then Trudeau, under the influence of the international financial group called Basel’s
Committee’s Recommendations (The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision) made the decision to halt the borrowing of money from the Bank of Canada, and instead, chose to borrow from the private banks who instead of lending to the government at no interest, or low interest, introduced higher interest rates along with compound interest.
All banks know very well the magic of compound interest. And Pierre Trudeau must have known that the mounting compounded national debt would lead to Canadians eventually owing a dollar fifty for every dollar of their disposable incomes. After all, he studied economics at the London School of Economics. Surely the professors there knew about compound interest.
So Pierre Trudeau, instead of feeling blessed that Canada, unlike the US, had a nationalized central bank, signed our bank away to the private banks. Couldn’t Trudeau, such an educated man, surmise that citizens in a few years would be struggling to make car payments and meet rent and mortgages and student loans and to buy healthy food while last year’s profits for the big five (that’s Royal Bank, TD Bank, Scotiabank, Bank of Montreal and CIBC amounted to $31.7 billion?) If he did, he didn’t care. But it doesn’t have to be this way. It really doesn’t. Our Bank of
Canada is still there. Next time." (Betty Krawczyk)
But somehow this worked backward for Trudeau. Many Canadians still think highly of Pierre Trudeau, but in 1974 he did one terrible thing that changed the lives, for present and future, of all Canadians, for the worse. Trudeau gave the leading operations of the Bank of Canada over to the private banks operating in Canada.
The Bank of Canada was first established by Prime Minister Richard Bennet in 1935 as a private central bank, but was then nationalized by William Lyon Mackenzie King in 1938. By nationalizing the bank, Mackenzie King meant for it to belong to the people so the Canadian government could borrow funds with little or no interest for capital expenditures. The mandate of the newly nationalized Bank of Canada was to act as the banker to the government and to manage the public debt. As Mackenzie King famously said: “Once a nation parts with the control of their currency and credit, it matters not who makes that nation’s laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile.”
So the Bank of Canada was nationalized in 1938 and the government could now borrow money with little or no interest. And it worked. The Canadian government built freeways, public transportation systems, subway line, airports, the St. Lawrence Seaway and funded a national health care system and the Canada Pension Plan. But then Trudeau, under the influence of the international financial group called Basel’s
Committee’s Recommendations (The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision) made the decision to halt the borrowing of money from the Bank of Canada, and instead, chose to borrow from the private banks who instead of lending to the government at no interest, or low interest, introduced higher interest rates along with compound interest.
All banks know very well the magic of compound interest. And Pierre Trudeau must have known that the mounting compounded national debt would lead to Canadians eventually owing a dollar fifty for every dollar of their disposable incomes. After all, he studied economics at the London School of Economics. Surely the professors there knew about compound interest.
So Pierre Trudeau, instead of feeling blessed that Canada, unlike the US, had a nationalized central bank, signed our bank away to the private banks. Couldn’t Trudeau, such an educated man, surmise that citizens in a few years would be struggling to make car payments and meet rent and mortgages and student loans and to buy healthy food while last year’s profits for the big five (that’s Royal Bank, TD Bank, Scotiabank, Bank of Montreal and CIBC amounted to $31.7 billion?) If he did, he didn’t care. But it doesn’t have to be this way. It really doesn’t. Our Bank of
Canada is still there. Next time." (Betty Krawczyk)
|
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages