Obamanomics a re-run of the crash of 1345?

Are we about to see a re-run of 1345AD, the biggest banking crash in history?

The bankers from Venice and Florence built up a banking system that went quasi-global, encompassing banking from England to China and involving large scale manipulation to destroy national Governments and create a new one-world Government based on the equivalent of Credit Default Swaps and paper-based credit.

By 1342, many of the smaller banks collapsed and were shored up with public funds as they were considered "Too bug to fail"

Finally, in 1345AD, the Bardi and Peruzzi banks failed spectacularly after England who had been running a super-costly occupation of France went spectacularly bankrupt and defaulted on it vast debt under King Edward III.

The final collapse in 1345AD, two years after the crisis began, resulted in:-

- Almost total collapse in all credit, leaving no credit available ANYWHERE.
- Manipulation by Bardi and Peruzzi and the other banks had already destroyed all textile industries in England, Holland and Spain, by financing the flooding of the European markets with cheap slave labour goods from Mongol occupied China.
- The quasi-globalisation resulted in diseases like the bubonic plague spreading like wildfire across Europe form China.
- Large scale looting of small local businesses by the banks, mainly through vaccuuming in vailout money resulted in the collapse of most local and small scale farming.

In the 60 years that followed 1345AD...
- Disease spread across Europe and Asia
- Trade totally collapsed
- Famine spread on a massive scale.
- Governments collapsed all over the place into civil war, such as England that ended up as the Medieval equivalet of a banaa republic until 1492AD (nearly 140 years of catastrophic starvation and civil war on and off).
- THE POPULATION OF THE PLANET FELL BY 30%.

Many educated writers often spoke in support of the collapse at the start, suggesting that the large scale reduction in population would be a good thing as iit would leave more for the survivors. After a few years they admitted that they were wrong, and that severe shortages and starvation in what had been lands of plenty resulted.

This is not beyond the realm of possibility today. We do see deadly, often unknown, sometimes vanquished diseases brought along with the cheap labor supplies imported by trans-national corporations in search of lower costs of labor.

The main difference is that today's people do not understand that "money" = dots on a computer screen with no intrinsic value. In prior times, everyone knew that credit was a claim to real money.

I guess the point is, Will anyone today reject fiat money when the dollar is replaced by another brand of "cash".

I am sure things look a little different in the job markets and banking markets compared to over 600 years ago. This is way to far of a stretch and to compare the two I believe is foolish. Apples and oranges is the term that comes to mind.

Originally posted by joeofthemountain
The main difference is that today's people do not understand that "money" = dots on a computer screen with no intrinsic value. In prior times, everyone knew that credit was a claim to real money.

I guess the point is, Will anyone today reject fiat money when the dollar is replaced by another brand of "cash".

During the 1330's, inceasingly the Venetians used "bills od trade" and other paper cash with rapidly declining usage or consideration of the actual cash backing the paperwork.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
I am sure things look a little different in the job markets and banking markets compared to over 600 years ago. This is way to far of a stretch and to compare the two I believe is foolish. Apples and oranges is the term that comes to mind.

So what are these "little differences"?

Population size,jobs,regulations,markets, I am not a historian on this matter but to say things are the same is full of sh*t. What kind of stock markets did they have back in the day?

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Subjective Truth]

reply to post by Subjective Truth


The Venetians and Florentines built up a quasi-global banking market stretching from England to China which became increasingly integrated.

As interest was not legal most of the time, they required "conditions" in which they would loan to countries on the basis that they would control trade interests. In some countries, they arranged that they would receive all the tax income and then pay all the countries outgoings, similar to the Fed now. As a commission under Ronald Reagan pointed out, before a single cent of income tax reaches the US Treasury. it has all gone on servicing the US Debt.

The Venetians and Florentines steadily moved Europe onto a gold standard backed by their own reserves and Asia onto a silver standard again backed by their own reserves.

They also carried out what is identical to "mark to market". Farmers, producers and bankers would sell of the entire future proceeds of farm income for fixed amounts of cash.

With control over many countries treasuries, the Venetians and Florentines shifted taxes away from business interests and the city dwellers onto the poor and the country peasants.

With the collapse in value of income had taken place due to foreign imports and high taxes, the farmers found themselves in negative equity and a collapse in amount of fields farmed followed and land prices crashed in a way similar to that of Detroit today, resulting in the bankers becoming the largest agricultural land owners.

reply to post by aristocrat2


Well you get a flag for that answer thanks!! you are very well versed on the era and I would be stupid to argue points without good arguments on the issue. It just seems like such a large distance in years to compare but if the facts fit. I have a off topic question and I hope to not derail your thread but has Sweden every monetized its debt and was it a good thing for them? I know it is off topic but you you could send me the answer that would very cool thank you.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by aristocrat2

 

I have a off topic question and I hope to not derail your thread but has Sweden every monetized its debt and was it a good thing for them?

You are out drunk-driving. You go round a bend too fast and nearly lose control of the vehicle. Do you go off the cliff and get killed or slam into that police car and kill one of the cops? The better of the two solutions is to hit the Police car and spend serious time in jail for murder/manslaughter.

Of course, most people would say that you should never have got drunk in the first place and certainly not gone out speeding in your car, but by the time of the bend those are the only two choices you have left.