TFC 27 June 2010 first banking forum

[Helphand]

Apologies if this is in the wrong place and I appreciate this was a nominally TFC-only event so please (admins) relocate it if inappropriate, but I couldn't recall seeing any detailed record of this significant show so I wanted to record its main points as I understood them (or not...). My commentary probably also makes dull reading but "the end justifies the means" as some would have us believe. My few notes marked {}.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TFC / I AM The Witness broadcast:  27 June, 2010
Participants: Daryl Bradford Smith, Ellen Brown, Donald Arthur Martin, Mohammed Rafeeq (sp.?)

More discussions are apparently intended to follow and this TFC panel broadcast might be developed as a sensible opposition to the gold backed fallacies being pedalled by the likes of the Mises Institute (Lew Rockwell et al.) and by Jim Puplava on Financial News Hour who favours Mises/Austrian School over the rest.

[Time codes as per iPod Nano which may differ from PC mp3 players...]

[The assumed premise of the talk: debt money just means money brought into existence when a bank extends a loan or ADVANCES CREDIT, essentially by making credit and debit ledger entries that reflect such loan.  The lending bank doesn't necessarily receive 100 from customer A and lend 100 to customer B, the bank may in fact receive 100 from A and makes loans which in total are a *multiple* of the deposit it received from A up to the maximum allowed by its regulator, hence it creates money out of thin air. The borrower will draw the loan by making out a cheque or bank transfer to a third party to pay some obligation. This "money" or credit is in contrast to M0 money which is basically physical notes and coin. In UK terms the credit money is now about 97% of the total money supply and the paper and coins 3%.
The interesting question - which I believe is addressed in one of Murray Rothbard's books - is: in this situation the loan proceeds will usually end up in a second bank or banks so when they demand payment of the amount paid in by their own customer how does the first bank meet the claim if it lent more money than it actually "has"? The answer presumably is that the payments between banks are in both directions reflecting different transactions and in total sort of even out or net off, which is presumably what Ellen Brown was saying in the show in another context; and where a bank still faces a daily deficiency it will obtain the necessary money from its central bank (lender of last resort) by tendering something else of the necessary value in exchange i.e. securities. Comments?
This latter issue is important because it is commonly taken by the opposition as a means of negativing the issue that banks create money out of thin air on a leveraged basis...]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
D. Martin acted in political issues such as the UK Independence Party and Bromsgrove Group looking to redesign the financial system

What is the banking system, how gone wrong and what options to fix. North Dakota public bank set up 100 years ago to benefit citizens, still there. Conservative lending. No derivatives. Money brought forward through credit based systems. Ellen Brown has looked into it.

D. Martin has spoken with Icelandic officials who have refused to pay up all depositor demands made following the Icelandic bank failures.

Legal position of N Dakota Bank: 91 years old and kept a low profile! Like systems adopted in Guernsey and Jersey. {See Grubiak, Olive and Jan - The Guernsey Experiment (1960).} 1919 legislation passed post election won by Non Partisan League - mainly Swedish and Norwegian farmers who feared foreclosures. Not getting together for socialist reasons.  Granaries owned by Rockefeller cartel of railroads rejected grain delivered by them so they realised a plot existed against them. Won the election. conservatives opposed to it and won next election. Capital raisers for the bank just raised enough before the League lost office. In 1931 Non-partisan League got in again and established mission statement that the bank should serve the State. Its mission statement is enshrined in legislation so ignoring it could result in civil liability.

M. Rafeeq says e.g. trust deed limitations can stop fund managers and the like from investing outside the allowed remit and encourage conservative dealing.  

D. Martin: as regards the UK, still some number of small building societies exist but Nationwide have gone outside remit of mutuals. He doesn't know of any development to community based lending.

Ellen Brown: India, China, Malaysia, Brazil and Argentina (after 2001) have publicly owned banks {n.b. also the original Australian Commonwealth Bank} that are operating alongside privately owned banks. 4 development banks in China are offshoots of the original single State owned People's Bank of China. Different from credit union model where member money is taken in and re-lent to borrowers; in development bank model they leverage the money i.e. fractional reserve / multiplier basis but created as credit and loan paid back with proceeds of thing being built by the borrower. Interest free, N Dakota Bank paid the State a 26% dividend last year. North Dakota also partners with other banks and plays role of a central bank for the other banks.

DBS: after new Basle Capital Accord leverage of banks wasn't x10, it increased phenomenally. JP Morgan 2000:1 on derivatives book alone, per M. Rafeeq. Old terminology of fractional reserve preceded the Market Risk Amendment introduced in 1996 - in force in the UK in 2000: "Risk Based Capital" where old time was nominals:notionals now it is inherent risk VAR/Value AT Risk and institutions can offset one asset risk against another's. Enabled them to adopt formulae which upped their gearing. M. Rafeeq looked at the 2009 North Dakota accounts and finds almost no gearing so savings and loans style institutions {n.b. the US savings and loans banks had their own financial difficulties...}

Iceland: news blackout after Icelandic population said no to full repayment of depositors. D. Martin replies in a referendum 60% voted, 90% voted no to full deposit repayment at cost of Icelandic population. Multiplier factor is referred to in UK rather than fractional reserve. UK PM Gordon Brown went on TV saying Iceland was bankrupt and said all money to be paid and also a huge fee. Bad effect on Iceland internationally. Anti terrorist laws were used to freeze funds of Icelandic companies. D. Martin was told of this. Spoke to current and past members of Icelandic Parliament and other groups there. Need grass roots working on members of parliament. Contributed to TV broadcast and 2 radio programs in Iceland and large article in main daily paper in Reykjavik. Moving into second stage following Icelandic Parliamentary recess in Autumn.

@21 DBS: says austerity is in fact poverty. We want to promote the idea that the public can say NO, public / private partnerships are going bad so State on hook to banks as guarantor in effect; will cost public money.

D. Martin: Iceland had some money from IMF, Independence Party in Icelandic Parliament has put motion to withdraw from EU to be voted in Autumn. May bring government down. Under Maastricht Treaty illegal for some of these desired banking reforms to be implemented.  So get out of the EU.

@24:50 Ellen Brown: in 2001 Argentinean debt moratorium to IMF; Argentina printed pesos and used these to get the {domestic} economy moving, after 4 years 7% growth rate. {What about international obligations? How were these settled?} Turkey with IMF after 4years was desperately struggling. Greece cannot issue own money under EU rules and would have to leave EU to do so. Another option instead of default is to put up legal defences not to pay e.g. debt engineered by Goldman Sachs who did not advise on downside, maybe for misrespresentation, fraud, misadvice etc.  

@26:10 DBS said City of St Etienne in France refused to pay default interest of 1mio EUR on a US$100mio public/private partnership loan and that story was wiped off the media... counter argued fraud and invited to sue in French courts. Issue hanging. Spain is worse for public debt. Issue will be revisited over and over again. Is the credit {sc.: debt} based system viable when the politicians cannot be trusted?

Ellen Brown: if EU is to survive it must change its model as no way of getting more money into the system when needed, 3% deficit maximum and cannot print own individual nation State money or borrow from own national central banks.
ECB, the EU central bank is not meant to buy bonds of member countries direct but in case of Greece it bought them second hand in the market and to avoid inflation they "took as much money as they put out there". We are in a deflationary spiral and not possible under current system to put money into the economy.

@29:46 Rafeeq says it was clear on joining the Euro that individual State interests will not affect whether or not money printing occurs. Greece knew on joining they must manage budget responsibly -- Greece and others abused the terms and conditions which they signed up to on joining. Individual governments not the Euro are responsible for the mess.

@36:00 D Martin - under the Euro "membership" rules EU member countries should not have a national debt over 60% of GDP - Belgium and Italy were over 100% and were breaking rules when joined in first place, but allowed to so long as heading in right direction / to convergence. But this ignored the fact they were running economy on debt which is how the money came into existence. Before Quantitative Easing in UK by the Bank of England the only way to get new money into the economy was by going into debt more - 97% (i.e. as opposed to cash and coin). Under the recent UK Emergency Budget they are going to remove purchasing power from the economy to feed the banks so this will lead to economic depression. Under current rules only way to do it is by borrow more money "next time". Draft reforming legislation being examined at:

http://www.bankofenglandact.co.uk

-- the fundamental point is that only way to deal with banks which will be resisted by them is to stop banks using their customers' money for leveraging purposes. Banks' ability to create money out of nothing must be stopped and customer current accounts need to be ring fenced and off balance sheet so banks cannot touch them {how do you do that given the money is just a general debt obligation of the bank with whom the customer has his account?}. This will lead to a shortfall of money in the economy so how to create money without creating a debt?  Need a mechanism for scientific estimation of money needs in the economy to be monitored independently of political pressures {c.f. Frederick Soddy}

@42:20 DBS says the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve and the ECB have investors controlling those institutions which profit from their affiliations with these central banks. It should not work this way, the State citizens should benefit.

@44 Ellen Brown - cannot get control back through US Congress. Some control still at individual State level. If have own credit system set up then banks no longer "too large to fail" and not needed so can move over to new system. A State in the US is not permitted to issue its own money which precludes a State from simply creating and issuing its own debt-free money by paying for works, services etc in the economy rather than by borrowing the money. Nor may a EU nation issue its own. So set up bank like North Dakota which works nearly on matched deposit basis but is still charging interest on loans.

@48:15 D. Martin very cautious, thinks case not made out for public banking. A Government-created bank to play same game as the existing banks is not good idea, even if conservative approach of North Dakota Bank adopted. Need to get way from all banks' ability to create money as a debt. He discovered in Iceland that people distrust banks, governments and politicians. Money policy should be placed on same basis as State not Government {i.e. Montesquieu separation of powers?} is best protection. Money should serve the community without creating debts for the community. A recipe for disaster otherwise.

@51:24 DBS says some people pushing for the monetary policies of Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Fisk who say go back to a gold based system. Bad idea, gold was the first system where the fractional reserve based idea came about!

{Read Protocol 20 of the Protocols!!! Take gold out of circulation and money is tight - depression ensues}.

@52:00 M. Rafeeq says legal strengths requiring actions on conservativeness count. Deregulation was taking the rules away. USA has had money spent into circulation [without debt] before for the good of the people as a mechanism for the means of exchange. Changes in legislation caused this current problem. But how to make the laws stay binding on subsequent governments? Likes the North Dakota Bank because it has some legal mechanism that made it last for nearly 100 years. Entrenched laws needed.

@57:26 DBS: President Andrew Jackson regarded his greatest achievement was he killed the Bank; but they came back 70 years later and started the game again resulting in 1913 and the Federal Reserve. Need some sort of ground norm irremovable law.

@57:55 Ellen Brown says credit is needed and a good thing and USA has thrived on this for 200 years, States that went bad were the ones that issued paper without limit. Best was Bank of Pennsylvania which was part of Government who created money and lent it into the system and Government was also enabled to print some extra money which it could spend into the economy with a bit extra to cover the interest, Pennsylvanians had no income tax and no inflation.

@59:21 D. Martin asks what happened to these other banks since North Dakota is the only {sort of} 'survivor'; Ellen Brown replies that King George stopped the North American banks issuing their own money. A big economic depression followed so they started printing money again and the American Revolution followed. Continentals (currency) were the money basis on which that war was waged and the British counterfeited them to subvert the value of the currency. So it collapsed as it was diluted as against e.g. gold and other non-compromised States' money. Soldiers sold their Continental scrip to speculators before Revolutionary war ended.
Colonists when later creating US Government were afraid of paper money and putting the money creation power in the Constitution so they adopted the British model under which the money was borrowed from a privately owned banking institution on a fractional reserve basis to expand the supply of money into the economy. DBS says First Bank of the United States under (Alexander) Hamilton and boom bust cycle happened; got rid of it then 20 years later another similar one arrived! President Andrew Jackson killed the Bank and his solution stopped the problem for 70 years. Jefferson Davies Finance Minister (?) was a Rothschild banker in the Civil War subverting the debt free money system.

@1:02:39 D. Martin: dangers of debt creation basis of money are amply demonstrated and must be made illegal in an entrenched way. Price of freedom is eternal vigilance; price of financial freedom is eternal vigilance. Times of financial crisis raise interest and awareness of the subject and today is such a time, which is an opportunity.

@1:04:30 DBS saying awareness must be fostered in the alternative media as main stream media has dropped Iceland off the radar and will ignore any examination of alternative systems...

@1:05:00 Ellen Brown thinks credit based system not a bad thing and reflects the natural flow of commerce: when party A undertakes to party B to do or deliver something and party B assumes a debt or obligation to provide monetary value in settlement (community currency model) money is created as a debt to the second person and as a credit to the first person; the problem is when private lenders pretend to have money they don't have and their profiteering from a system where the interest on the debt is not created in the original transaction. A public system of money is just a series of legal agreements which engage the create credit / trust of the community for a person to make the thing he wants to build and the proceeds of that thing will enable him to pay the debt back. Should be run as an independent arm of the State like the Court System.

@1:06:50 M. Rafeeq - paper based currency / fiat successful for 300 years in Imperial China without boom bust cycles though an agricultural society. System fell apart when people wanted it gold backed. Avoid precise mechanisms at this stage; for the moment sell the principle of needing a new system.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I personally would be interested to hear in the next discussion what is the relationship of the Bromsgrove Group is to other players in the UK financial/money reform scene such as the Money Reform Party and what differences of principle exist between these groups: in part, to avoid "divide and rule".

Also maybe some thoughts on the questions/comments queries raised above, specifically on how the creation of money out of nothing does NOT in practice cause a problem for the lending bank when the "money" is paid by the borrower or his own payee into another bank e.g. by cheque which cheque is then presented for payment by the second bank to that lending bank.

Also the impact of international transaction indebtedness on this whole issue. For instance, the UK has a budget deficit on current and/or capital account. Sure, (EU rules, if applicable, allowing for purposes of argument) why not have the UK Government itself create and issue into the economy sterling on a non-interest, non-debt basis (instead of borrowing it from private banks who themselves create it out of nothing and charge interest to the Government/taxpayer for the privilege); but what about international transactions e.g. food imports which must be paid for otherwise than in sterling? The foreign exporter will want to be paid in a reserve currency, sterling hasn't had that status for many years, in his own national currency or in something else like gold. How does non-debt sterling issuance work there? Obviously you could issue it as per normal and buy the foreign currency with it but that depends on the strength of sterling and that in turn depends on the state of the UK economy, the country's credit-worthiness, and non-dilution of the currency.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Some (non-exhaustive) further reading:


Adams, Silas W. - The Federal Reserve System: Its Purposes & Functions.

Adams, Silas W. - The Legalized Crime Of Banking And A Constitutional Remedy (1958).

Armstrong, George - The Rothschild Money Trust (1940).

Astle, David - The Babylonian Woe (1993).

Astle, David - Two Essays: The Tallies, A Tangled Tale / The Beginning and the Ending (1997).

Bakewell, Jr., Paul - What Are We Using For Money (1952).

Bank Of England Acts 1694, 1946, 1967 etc.

Belloc, Hilaire - Economics For Helen.

Belloc, Hilaire - Usury (1931).

Bentkowski, K.D. - The Coming Financial Crash (2005).

Bresciani-Turroni, C. - The Economics Of Inflation.

Brown, Ellen H. - The Web Of Debt (2008).

Clark & Campbell - The Federal Reserve Monster (1922).

Cleary, Rev. Patrick - The Church And Usury.

Cobbett, W. - Paper Against Gold (1810).

Coogan, Gertrude M. - The Money Creators (1935).

Coogan, Gertrude M. - Lawful Money Explained.

Coughlin, Fr. Charles - Money: Questions And Answers.

del Mar, Alexander - A History of Monetary Crimes.

del Mar, Alexander - History of Money in America.

del Mar, Alexander - Roman And Muslem Moneys (1950).

Douglas, C.H. - The Monopoly of Credit.

Dwinell, Olive Cushing - The Story of our Money (1946).

Emery, Sarah - Seven Financial Conspiracies (1887).

Emry, Pastor Sheldon - Billions for the Bankers, Debts for the People.

Even, Louis - Salvation Island (Money Myth Exploded).

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago - Modern Money Mechanics (1994).

Field, A.N. - All These Things.

Field, A.N. - The Bretton Woods Plot (1957).

Field, A.N. - The Stabilisation of Money (1934).

Field, A.N. - The Untaught History of Money (1938).

Grem, June - The Money Manipulators (1971).

Gresham, Otto - The Greenbacks (1927).

Griffin, Albert -Substitute Honest Money For Fictitious Credit (1896).

Griffin, Des - Descent Into Slavery.

Griffin, Des - Fourth Reich of the Rich.

Griffin, G. Edward - The Creature from Jekyll Island. [should this rather be attributed to Ezra Pound/Eustace Mullins?]

Grubiak, Olive and Jan - The Guernsey Experiment (1960).

Haxey, Simon - England's Money Lords (1939).

Hobart, Mary E. - Errors In Our Monetary System (1891).

Hollis, Christopher - The Two Nations: A Financial Study Of English History (1935).

Jevons, W. Stanley - Money And The Mechanism Of Exchange (1898).

Jordan, David Starr - Unseen Empire - A Study Of The Plight Of Nations That Do Not Pay Their Debts (1912).

Kitson, Arthur - A Fraudulent Standard: an exposure of the fraudulent character of our monetary standard, with suggestions for the establishment of an invariable unit of value (1917).

Kitson, Arthur - A scientific solution of the money question (1895).

Kitson, Arthur - An Open Letter To The Right Hon. David Lloyd-George M.P. (1911).

Kitson, Arthur - The Money Problem (1894).

Kitson, Arthur - The Money Question (1903).

Kitson, Arthur - The Story of a Great Crime: The Bankers' Conspiracy which Started the World Crisis.

Knuth, E.C. - The Empire Of The City (1945).

Knupfer, George - The Struggle for World Power.

Lee, Jeremy - Upon The Millenium: Dispossessing The World's Richest Nations.

Levesque, George-Henri - Social Credit & Catholicism.

Lina, Juri - The Fight Against Usury - Barnes Review (2004).

Lindbergh, Sr., Charles A. - Banking, Currency & The Money Trust.

Mishkin, Frederic S. - The Economics Of Money Banking And Financial Markets (7ed).

Mullins, Eustace - The Secrets Of The Federal Reserve (1948).

Norburn, Charles & Russell - A New Monetary System.

Pidcock, David - The Other Road To Serfdom: How Unregulated Capital Caused The Crash of 2008 (2009).

Russell, Etta M. - Basic Principles of Constitutional Money.

Search, Dr. R.E. - Lincoln Money Martyred.

Soddy, Frederick - Demand For Monetary Reform (1943).

Soddy, Frederick - Money Reform as a Preliminary to all Reform (1950).

Soddy, Frederick - The Gold Standard Snare (1935).

Soddy, Frederick - The Role Of Money (1934).

Soddy, Frederick - Wealth, Virtual Wealth & Debt.

Mankiw - Principles Of Economics (2003).

Mullineux, A.W. & Murinde, V. - Handbook Of International Banking (2003).

Nuri, Vladimir Z. - Fractional Reserve Banking As Economic Parasitism.

Parsson, Jens O. - Dying Of Money.

Rothbard, Murray N. - The Mystery Of Banking (1983).

Rothbard, Murray N. - The Case Against The Federal Reserve (1994).

Rothbard, Murray N. - What Has Government Done To Our Money (1963).

Sutton, Antony C. - Gold Vs. Paper (1997).

Sutton, Antony C. - The Federal Reserve Conspiracy.

Swan, Arthur - The Other Road To Serfdom (1993).

Taylor, T.C. - An Introduction To Austrian Economics (1980).

Vennard, Wickliffe B. Sr. - Chronological History of Money Since Babylon.

Vennard, Wickliffe B. Sr. - The Federal Reserve Hoax.

Vennard, Wickliffe B. Sr. - The Solution To The Federal Reserve Fraud.

Vickers, Vincent Cartwright - Economic Tribulation (1940).

Walbert, M.W. - The Coming Battle (1899).

Walters, Charles - The Nature Of Money (2003).

White, A.D. - Fiat Money Inflation In France (1933).

Wilson, R. McNair - Promise to Pay (1934).

Wilson, R. McNair - The Mind Of Napoleon: A study of Napoleon, Roosevelt and the Money Power (1934).

Woolfolk, L.B. - The Great Red Dragon (1890).





-- leaflets at  http://www.moneyreformparty.org.uk

-- Hansard (UK Parliamentary debates records, available online e.g.  at http://hansard.millbanksystems.com:  

for a selection of the speeches referred to in e.g. the MRP leaflets see among others:

(a) Money Supply and the Private Banking System
HL Deb 27 November 1985 vol 468 cc935-57
5.18 p.m.
Lord Beswick


(b) The Economy
HL Deb 05 March 1997 vol 578 cc1841-914
4.52 p.m.
The Earl of Caithness

The MRP leaflets relay that in recent times other Parliamentarians have raised the money question, among them:

-- Captain Henry Kirby, who tabled an Early Day Motion in 1964;
-- Austin Mitchell and David Chayter who tabled an Early Day Motion in 1997 (EDM 390?).

[Ognir]

good stuff

[Helphand]

Something more concise after all the wordiness but which I thought got the message across and clarified the issues re: Iceland and why it is so important:

  Bill Still (he of the "Money Masters" fame)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ziWPPMdlqs

  Title: sr-15 iceland (user bstill3 )

  "Today iceland is the new battleground as it attempts to become the first nation in modern times to escape the serfdom of the debt money system. If Iceland escapes the rest of the world will be watching."

  This is the first antibailout tax revolt. Iceland is now being pressured to join the EU to be eligible for loans to repay the depositors. But Icelanders do not want more national debt to be taken on.
  "What happends in Iceland will happen on a  world-wide scale."

  @3:09 Bill Still explains: the Icelandic government bailed out the domestic, Icelandic depositors.
IceSave accounts "were not in Iceland" and were never guaranteed by the Icelandic government so were not bailed out - the UK and Dutch governments under local political pressure paid out their own domestic Icesave account holders and then demanded repayment from Iceland.

  Also some beautiful photography in the film, only abut 8minutes long. See also his website: http://www.secretofoz.com

  Last comments from me for the moment re: panel discussion:

(1) need for entrenchment of laws against changing back to fractional reserve/credit multiplier  lending: parallels already exist in e.g.the German constitutional ground-law:

http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/GG.htm

(Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany (Grundgesetz, GG))

(2) Obfuscation and avoidance from representatives of HM Government noted in this section from Ellen Brown: "Web of Debt" (2008) Chapter 41:

<<The Fate of a British Proposal for Monetary Reform.

    The Bank of England was actually nationalized in 1946, but the monetary scheme did not change much as a result. The government took over the function of _printing_ paper money; but in England, as in the United States, printed paper money makes up only a very small percentage of the money supply. The bankers still have the power to create money as loans, leaving them in control of the money spigots.3 In Monetary Reform: Making It Happen (2003), James Robertson observed that 97 percent of Britain's money supply is now created by banks when they advance credit. The result is a grossly unfair windfall to the banks, which get the use of money that is properly an asset of the people. He proposed reforming the system so that it would be illegal for banks to create money as loans, just as it is illegal to forge coins or counterfeit banknotes. Only the central bank could create new money. Commercial banks would have to borrow existing money and relend it, just as non-bank financial institutions do now. In Robertson's proposed system, new money created by the central bank would not go directly to the commercial banks but would be given to the government to spend into circulation, where it would eventually find its way back to the banks and could be recycled by them as loans.4
    It sounded good in theory, but when he ran the plan past several government officials, they objected that the banks would go broke under such a scheme. Depriving banks of the right to advance credit on the "credit multiplier" system (the British version of fractional reserve lending) would increase the costs of borrowing; would raise the costs of payment services; would force banks to cut costs, close branches and reduce jobs; and would damage the international competitiveness of British banks and therefore of the British economy as a whole.
    An official with the title of Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer warned, "Legislating against the credit multiplier would lead to the migration from the City of London of the largest collection of banks in the world. It would be a disaster for the British economy."
    Another official bearing the title of Treasury Minister argued that "if banks were obliged to bid for funds from lenders in order to make loans to their customers, the costs to banks of extending credit would be significant, adversely affecting business investment, especially of small and medium-sized firms." This official wrote in an August 2001 letter:

    "It is evident that this proposal would cause a dramatic loss in profits to the banks - all else [being] equal they would still face the costs of running the payments system but would not be able to make profitable loans using the deposits held in current accounts. In this case, it is highly likely that banks will attempt to maintain their profitability by re-locating to avoid the restriction on their operations that the proposed reform involves."5

    And there was the rub: in London, banking is very big business. If the banks were to move _en masse_ to the Continent, the British economy could collapse like a house of cards.>>

      I think David Pidock will have something to say in response to this, as he does in his book updating Arthur Swan's "The Other Road To Serfdom". Time for Daryl to have him on, ideally with other panel members?

[Helphand]

Reposting here CSR's posting to another topic:

CrackSmokeRepublican » Sat Sep 18, 2010 2:10 am

http://www.paleoprogressives.org/populi ... alism.html

There is a reason why N. Dakota has its own State Bank and is currently the only State in the Union
without deficits or failed bonds... --CSR

This is the kind of fervor and courage that we need to be inspired with today, in the face
of BushLeague fascism, and Neo-Con empire-building madness. The elder Lindbergh was
considered the chief economic theoretician of the League and of the early Farmer-Labor
Party, which, by 1932, had grown to become the largest radical-left third party ever to
appear in American history, let alone the 20th century. It was fully 15% of the entire
electorate, at the height of the movement, in the 1930s. In the election of 1916, the League
captured control of the Republican Party in North Dakota, elected the legislature, and
elected their candidate as governor in North Dakota. In a single session of the State
Legislature, they enacted all five planks of the platform of "State Socialism," including
the foundation of the state-owned Bank of North Dakota, which continues to this day. The
New York Times wrote in 1918, in genuine trepidation of "Bolshevism on the Prairie."
Today the times have changed. Many of the issues have changed, though some remain.
The Private Banking industry still lends fictitious "Credit" to people, hypothecated on real
estate as collateral. Agribusiness, international finance, and the grain cartels are certainly
still around and have virtually eliminated the family farm and the small farmers, who were
the basic interest group who organized the League and were fully half of the Farmer-
Labor Party. Crucial lessons may yet be gleaned both from the amazing organizational
acuity - and the subsequent pitfalls of this movement.

The Byzantine Solution:
Every pogrom in history has played into Talmudic hands, and has been cleverly instigated by them.
-Get the Jews out of banking and they cannot control the economic life of the community.
-Get the Jews out of education and they cannot pervert the minds of the young.
-Get the Jews out of government and they cannot betray the nation.
-Get the Jews out of media and they cannot defile the culture.
-Get the Jews out of law and they cannot corrupt the truth.
-Get the Jews out of medicine and they cannot invalidate the Hippocratic oath.