Is it the end of the present financial system?

[active_indolent]

http://www.michaeljournal.org/isittheend.htm

After the recent bank failures and unprecedented losses on the stock markets in New York and elsewhere, people are getting nervous: is it the end of the present financial system as we know it? Is the whole economic system on the verge of total collapse? The answer is definitely: yes... unless the present-debt money system is replaced with a debt-free money system, accompanied by dividends given to every citizen.

Throwing trillions of dollars at the banks won't save the system

The news media reported that banks made bad loans that could not be repaid and so they could no longer lend any money, and therefore needed to be "rescued" by governments. Financial authorities threatened governments by saying that if these bailouts were not approved, total chaos and the collapse of the entire economic system would ensue. So the U.S.A. voted in an unprecedented $700 billion rescue program, followed the week after by an even bigger rescue plan by Europe: $2,300 billion. Will this be enough?

No, throwing trillions of dollars at banks will never save the system, it will only delay its collapse for a few weeks. And if one studies how the present debt-system operates, these huge bailouts aggravate the situation even further.

Which boat do you prefer?

The regular readers of the "Michael" Journal, and those who have studied the 10 lessons on Social Credit know that in the present financial system, all money is created as a debt in the form of loans. Commercial banks create the money they lend, but not the interest they ask in return. If one borrower succeeeds in paying back his loan, both the principal and interest, someone else must go bankrupt because, all together, we are not able to repay more money than has been made. If no money was borrowed from the banks, there would be no money at all in circulation. They only way to keep the present system going is to create more money... and therefore more debt. The time comes when this system reaches its mathematical limit, when even paying the interest on the debt is impossible: we have reached that point.

When one understands that to come into existence, all money has to be lent by the banks as a debt, these so-called government rescue plans are complete nonsense: governments have to borrow money from the banks to come to the banks' rescue! Governments just get deeper into debt to the private corporations that have usurped the power to create money for the nation.

Those in charge of the present banking system know perfectly that there is no way these debts can ever be paid, and that we are heading for a deadend, but this is precisely what they want: they create the problem to be able to then impose their own drastic solution.

As Clifford Hugh Douglas, the founder of the Social Credit school, said: "The Money Power does not, and never did, want to improve the money system — its consequences in war, sabotage and social friction are exactly what is desired." Why? It is because the Financiers believe that they are the only ones capable of governing mankind properly. They want to bring every nation in the world to such a state of crisis that these countries will think they have no alternative but to accept the solution of the Financiers to save them from disaster: complete centralization, a single world currency, and a one-world government, in which all nations will be abolished, or forced to give up their sovereignty.

The real solution would be for each nation to be truly sovereign and issue its own debt-free currency, which would not stop commerce between nations, but even make it easier. But this is not what the Financiers want: they claim that for a global problem, there can only be a global solution (a single world currency).

David Walker, U.S. Comptroller General and chief of the Government Accountability Office (until March 2008) has said that the United States could no longer service its debt beyond 2009. As reported on the halturnernshow.com website, the plan is to intentionally bankrupt the United States to force integration with Canada and Mexico. Once merged, the U.S., Canada and Mexico would be a new entity called the North American Union. The U.S. Treasury will declare that the U.S.A. has to default its debt, the present U.S. Dollar will be demonetized (declared to be "not money" by the U.S. Treasury), and a new common currency imposed for the three merged countries: the Amero (just as there is the Euro for Europe). "Old dollars" will be devalued by ninety percent (90%): in other words, you will get only 2 cents on the dollar...

Since the Chinese presently hold about $2.3 TRILLION U.S. Dollars in cash from U.S. trade imbalance, the Chinese demanded and got billions of the new AMERO currency in advance of everyone else. The 20 AMERO coin shown on the picture was minted at the Denver Mint in 2007, which proves this collapse of the U.S. Dollar had been planned for over a year! Here is the choice offered by the Financiers: people will be left instantly, totally, destitute, unless they accept the merging of the U.S. with Canada and Mexico into something called the North American Union (NAU) and take the new AMERO currency for pennies on the dollar.

The "psychological moment"

Is this choice acceptable (to have your present money devaluated by 90%)? Is there no other alternative? Yes, to apply the Social Credit principles, and guarantee enough purchasing power to every citizen.

Douglas predicted that the present debt-money system of the Bankers would become unworkable and fall by itself, because of all of the unpayable debts that it creates. He added that "a psychological moment" will come, a critical moment when the population, given the gravity of the situation, and despite all the power of the Financiers, will have suffered their debt-money system long enough, and will be disposed to study and accept Social Credit. Douglas wrote the following in 1924, in his book Social Credit:

"The position will be tremendous in its importance. A comparatively short period will probably serve to decide whether we are to master the mighty economic and social machine that we have created, or whether it is to master us; and during that period a small impetus from a body of men who know what to do and how to do it, may make the difference between yet one more retreat into the Dark Ages, or the emergence into the full light of a day of such splendour as we can at present only envisage dimly. It is this necessity for the recognition of the psychological moment, and the fitting to that moment of appropriate action, which should be present in the minds of that small minority which is seized of the gravity of the present times." This moment is now!

Alain Pilote

[sullivan]

An interesting article, but littered with errors. For instance, if the old dollar will be devalued by ninety percent, then you would get 10 cents on the dollar, not 2.  There is also no proof that the new Amero currency exists in tangible form, let alone that the Chinese demanded and got billions of the new AMERO currency in advance of everyone else. The authenticity of coin shown in the article has been discredited several times over the past year, and anyway, what would be the point of the Chinese holding billions of a currency that is not yet legal tender anywhere?

[active_indolent]

I agree with you. I can't see any point why the Chinese should be interested getting Ameros. But I do agree that they are planning for a world currency.
Even though I agree with you concerning the error made by the writer, I don't think they are intentional or make the key assertion less valid. There's a logical explanation to why the financial system is in it's final steps.  Michael Hudson has also pointed out this fact. The writer should have tried to outline this logic instead of making assumptions that are based on false information. His intension's seems to be good though and the strive to replace this monetary system as well.

I'll try to outline the logic behind the central theme of the article, despite may English – feel free to correct or ask question if you  find anything hard to understand- it's probably due to my English.

When a bank create a loan, let say  1 million dollar, it simultaneously create a debt and an asset (in dollar) on the same amount.  So the debt always equals the created dollar asset. Together they cancel each other , hence: if the newly created debt was amortized (morte= kill in latin) the debt as well as the money would disappear, cease to exist.

This is probably basic for all on this forum. But let continue with the consequences. Let's say the bank issue a new loan, lets say 1 million dollar again, and thus create the equal amount in dollar as an asset. The person who already holds an asset in dollar would not be likely to borrow that money because he would pay of the loan and the money would be destroyed (and the FRB tail that follows from the asset being put as an depsoit and re-lent) and hence destroy a part of the money supply. So in order to make as much new  money as possible the bank has to find someone that don't have a money asset but an asset in real goods or future labor. Hence: the only way the credit expansion can continue is by sucking up people that don't have any  dollar assets. This has an finite limit since sooner or later there will be  nor more suckers to suck into this pyramide scheme. I USA the poor and unemployed where the last resource for this parasitic scheme that pumps up money to those at at the top with money assets, collecting more an more with the help of interest.  In USA 1% of population owns  70% of the wealth (and we know who they are) according to economy professor Michael Hudson.

So the primary point the article raise: that the financial system has reached it's mathematical limits is still valid. There's no more debts slaves to call in.

[sullivan]

I agree with you. I can't see any point why the Chinese should be interested getting Ameros.

They might be if and when the currency becomes legal tender somewhere.

Even though I agree with you concerning the error made by the writer, I don't think they are intentional or make the key assertion less valid.

No, but it does weaken it, at least perception-wise.

There's a logical explanation to why the financial system is in it's final steps.  Michael Hudson has also pointed out this fact. The writer should have tried to outline this logic instead of making assumptions that are based on false information. His intension's seems to be good though and the strive to replace this monetary system as well.

Without at doubt, this phase of the financial system is imploding and will cease to exist. What replaces it will either be usury-on-steroids - making the current fiat-currency / fractional reserve banking scam seem tame in comparison, or it will be something along the lines suggested in this article. If the latter is ever to come about, the cancer will have to be removed - meaning the bankers and their fellow criminal cohorts will have to be totally and irrevocably factored out of the financial system - indeed out of any system of consequence. That is not an easy task, but also not impossible.

[active_indolent]

This was not what I was alluding  to. There ought to be less violent methods but evidently they actually seems to understand where the Achilles heel is located.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... yZwrq-7mtw

Sorry! Put it into the wrong thread, don´t know how to delete it.