reply to post by Augustine62
So the fail really is your understanding of what the girl has said. The difference between the BoC or Bank of Canada and charted banks is the interest
that is attached. When the government borrows from the chartered banks it does attached with interest. If you are given 30 dollars with 5% interest,
where is the $1.50 com from to pay the interest? So the premise is that instead of always having that interest to pay that we borrow interest free
from the bank of Canada. The only problem is for the first couple years our buying power internationally would drop from our inflated currency. Even
though this was not so much the fact with the states when they had their bailouts the last couple years.
Your points you try to make do come across as quite arrogant. I would also like you to rethink your demeanor towards Canadians. I wonder how well our
southern neighbors would do if we revoke our electricity and fresh water contract. I always laugh when people say our economy would default. As long
as demand was high enough for lumber that would just about float us by itself. We have; oil, gold, diamonds, natural gas, lumber, fresh water, other
precious metals, agriculture and farmland. With only a 1/10 the population of the states you can imagine we haven't raped and pillaged our resources
quite the same.
Below is a latter I did to a MP that was forwarded on, yet for me to hear a reply from Flaherty.
Thank you for your e-mail.
I have forwarded it to the Minister of Finance, the Honourable Jim Flaherty for his consideration and comment. I have asked that he reply to you
I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts and opinions with me. Please feel free to contact me at any time to discuss this or any other
issue concerning the federal government.
Ron Cannan, MP
Kelowna - Lake Country
“Your Kelowna – Lake Country voice in Ottawa”
(250) 470-5075 (Constituency Office in Capri Mall)
(613) 992-7006 (Parliament Hill Office)
Sent: June 11, 2010 1:06 PM
To: Cannan, Ron - M.P.
Hello, my name is Brett Ritson, I wrote to you about bill C-428 in March. I am writing you today with some concerns with the financial situation of
our country. It seems to me that we are not taking advantage of our nations bank, the Bank of Canada. I am curious if you have any suggestions as to
The Bank of Canada Act of 1934 is a law providing it with a monopoly on the issuance of banknotes. Its stated purpose is to "promote the economic and
financial well-being of Canada. So why is it that most government spending is done through commercial chartered banks? This has led to the Bank of
Canada only issuing 5% of our currency. The other 95% is created by commercial banks with interest attached. This means with compounded interest, our
governments spending equates to about 9% towards principal (services and goods) and the other 91% towards interest.
To me, this seems like were digging our own giant grave, jeopardizing the wellbeing of the populace. We have the resources available, yet we still
rely on the commercial banks. I know for myself, alarms start going off when a country is in a recession and banks are making record profits, at $1.5
billion a quarter. To put a billion in perspective, a billion seconds ago it was 1980.
The Bank of Canada is a Crown owned corporation, therefore, it is owned by the tax payers of Canada. Now, I would say it is fiscally responsible for
the Bank of Canada to be making over 1.5 billion a quarter rather than the commercial banks. I am relatively ignorant to the subject and hope you have
some insight into our governments actions.
I appreciate your time in addressing my concerns and look forward to your response.
Thank you, Brett
P.S. Since when have stores had the right to deny taking 100 and 50 dollar bill denominations? It is legal tender and I thought no ones money can be
Notice that the same 160 million to interest alone, she must have watched the O'Canada documentary.
edit on 3-6-2012 by IronNuts because: did some proof reading
edit on 3-6-2012 by IronNuts because: (no reason given)