But the fact remains that Germany is no longer a nation,
From what I can work out Michael Germany created its own financial system and was as Churchill wrote in his private letters "A threat to the world financial system"
I see this key fact repeatedly attacked claiming "Hitler was a Rothschild" and all kinds of other fiction, one thing for sure - how they reinvented themselves and what they accomplished in the 30's is/was quite breathtaking. But of course, can never be applauded.
They did this, of course, knowing full well that Wall Streets Banks were exploding the Soviet Union's GDP by at least 8 times its size in preparation for destroying Germany, but of course, everyone knows it was those pesky Germans that started it. _________________ Vaut mieux prévenir que guérir.
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 Posts: 151 Location: Perth, Australia
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2018 2:14 am Post subject:
Some points Richard Werner stresses about Germany is their small firm (SME) performance is the secret of 200 years of strong economic performance.
No other country has so many SME market leaders.
Why, because of Community Banking.
Germany has the largest number of not for profit / public community banks in the world (1,500).
70% of deposits are with community banks, over 90% of SME lending.
German community banks were not affected by the 2008 crisis.
Community banks increased SME lending after 2008, so there was no recession and no increase in unemployment.
So basic rule of banking:
Large banks lend large amounts to large scale financial speculators.
Small banks lend to small & medium sized enterprises.
He says also that now the truth is coming out of big bank money creation, they are preparing cybercurrency, a cashless society so we don't insist on community banks.
The Bank of England has already prepared its implant with digital currency chip under the skin, this is why the elites are now pushing Universal Basic Income, it is the bribe to accept the microchip.
At a conference at the Monetary Institute in Zurich in Feb.
Based on the principles outlined in Steve Keen's presentation,
all we need is a way for the State to reinsert itself back into the
money game from which the NWO's neoliberalism had ejected it.
Such as this new initiative in Italy:
A parallel currency for Italy is possible
Rome can regain control of its monetary policy
without breaking the rules of the eurozone.
By BIAGIO BOSSONE, MARCO CATTANEO, MASSIMO COSTA AND STEFANO SYLOS LABINI 7/5/18, 10:10 AM CET Updated 7/5/18, 4:18 PM CET
In Joseph Stiglitz’s recent article for the POLITICO Global Policy Lab (“How to Exit the Eurozone,” June 29, 2018), the Nobel-prize wining economist proposes that Italy issue a parallel currency as a way to retake control of its monetary policy.
It’s an insightful idea, and one worth exploring. However, Stiglitz is wrong when he suggests that “introducing a parallel currency, even informally, would almost certainly violate the eurozone’s rules and certainly be against its spirit.”
Our organization — the Group of Fiscal Money — has been very active in developing and promoting such a dual-currency scheme. We call it “Fiscal Money” and believe it could be used to avoid the uncertainties of exiting the euro while allowing Italy to recover economically without breaking any EU rule.
Our proposal is for government to issue transferable and negotiable bonds, which bearers can use for tax rebates two years after issuance. Such bonds would carry immediate value, since they would incorporate sure claims to future fiscal savings. They could be immediately exchanged against euros in the financial market or used (in parallel to the euro) to purchase goods and services....
Congress appropriates, the executive branch enters into contracts, contractors send invoices, and the Treasury pays the bills by directing the Federal Reserve as the government's fiscal agent to settle the accounts.
The Fed credits bank accounts in the payments system with its own liabilities (reserve balances) and directs the banks to credit their customers accounts on their books.
This is how the government issues currency through spending.
Transfer accounts and interest payments are pre-appropriated, so the Fed just issues the necessary currency to cover the government's requirements. It's all "free money" for the currency issuer, which doesn't need to obtain its currency and logically can't obtain it since it is all issued by the government. John Maudlin is seriously confused about this process.
What about bank created money?
When a bank creates money (M1) by extending loans and crediting deposit accounts, it is not issuing currency. The bank must obtain vault cash from the Federal Reserve to meet demand at the window and it does this by exchanging funds from its reserve balances at the Fed in the payments system which are credits on the Fed's books, which can only be created by the Fed.
Similarly, if a bank customer writes a check to the US Treasury to cover a tax liability the bank has to settle that in the payments system using credits in its reserve account at the Fed that only the Fed can create.
This is what the government as monopoly issuer of the currency as its unit of account means operationally.
One could object that the Fed is a private institution politically independent and can therefore refuse to cover the government's checks. Ben Bernanke scotched that by saying that that the Fed is the government fiscal agent and does what the government authority tells it to do. Is the Fed going to bounce government checks to cover government appropriations and periodic obligations when the Fed is an institution created by Congress and delegated its powers by Congress?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum