Conventional Wisdom About Money Is False

Originally posted by Mary Rose
In Chapter 3 of Web of Debt, "Experiments in Utopia: Colonial Paper Money As Legal Tender," Ellen writes . . .

One of the sources that Ellen uses in this chapter is a 1941 speech given by Congressman Charles Binderup entitled "How America Created Its Own Money in 1750: How Benjamin Franklin Made New England Prosperous." I found this speech posted on Rense.com.

In the speech the Congressman relates a story of a visit Franklin made to England and a question Franklin was asked by a friend about why New England did not have a problem with wide-spread beggars among the working class as England did. Here is the answer Franklin gave:

"That is simple. In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called 'Colonial Scrip.' We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one."

I think Franklin had it wrong. I don't see how it follows that an increase in the supply of money will keep the poor fed. Give everybody $100 and all you've done is make $100 the new penny. I would attribute the lack of beggars in colonial America to societal factors, a few of which I could delve into but this is not the thread for it.

It seems Franklin just wasn't that great an economist. From the linked article:

Benjamin Franklin also implied in A Modest Enquiry Into The Nature and Necessity of a Paper-Currency that a certain quantity of money exists that will optimize trade in a given region and that there could be overall shortages and surpluses of money in the market. Franklin also stated that a shortage of money could be the cause of a fall in trade and that excess money would be of no direct benefit to the economy.

Franklin writes, that "there is a certain proportionate quantity of money requisite to carry on the trade of a country freely and currently; more than which would be of no advantage in trade, and less, if much less, exceedingly detrimental to it."

Rothbard offers a great counter to this point in his The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar by stating that "these economists have not fully absorbed the great monetary lesson of classical economics: that the supply of money essentially does not matter. Money performs its function by being a medium of exchange; any change in its supply, therefore, will simply adjust itself in the purchasing power of the money unit, that is in the amount of other goods that money will be able to buy."

As Rothbard explains, the value of money changes as the supply is manipulated; this fact is evident in the perpetual inflation that the United States dollar has experienced since the establishment of the Federal Reserve. The US dollar has substantially decreased in value and has, likewise, significantly risen in quantity issued.

[edit on 23-8-2010 by NewlyAwakened]

Originally posted by NewlyAwakened
Give everybody $100 and all you've done is make $100 the new penny.

No one, including Franklin, has suggested this.

The Secret Of OZ - This is not a Fairytale

You need to watch this awesome documentary to understand the predicament that faces us - www.youtube.com...
The wizard of OZ is the Federal Reserve.
Enjoy or not

Originally posted by Mary Rose
. . . Damon Vrabel, who attended Harvard Business School and worked on Wall Street . . .

. . . has turned away from his former career and is trying to be part of steering the world toward a better way.

I enjoyed watching this video produced by Damon as a tutorial. Here is the description that goes with it:

This video reveals the hidden problem with the monetary system that nobody wants you to know--the fact that our money is 1) 100% debt and 2) it sits on privately held balance sheets. It also discusses some of the implications of those 2 facts.

Here's Damon's website: Council on Spiritual Psychological Economic Renewal.

I have a different idea that I believe can work. Each country could assign their citizens resource units. Resources in any country are controlled by armies and they are assigned their value by people. Let me use the US as an example. Each citizen could be given $1,000,000 of resource units. A certain percentage could be used for education, unemployment, starting a business, medical care, housing, and retirement. If you are worth over $1,000,000 , you would not be assigned resource units but could still trade in them. Each unit would be worth $1 when the price of gold was at $700 an ounce. This unit would not just be based on gold but on 5 precious metals. This way no matter what the banks do and currency they use, resource units would stay the same. Banks would still be allowed to exist but you would have no more inflation of basics. You would also eliminate the control of the world that banks have. In the US this would eliminate the huge bureaucracy of government. Everyone would have their government atm card. Since people give the value to resources, people are the valuable items. Having a highly educated populace would be the aim.

reply to post by BillfromCovina


I'm having trouble picturing what you're actually saying, but I have to say this sounds creative!

This is what we need: people proposing solutions.

reply to post by Mary Rose

Sorry Mary, wrote this down while I was playing poker. Basically the government would scrap the use of fiat money controlled by private bankers and assign resource units to people. A card would be used for transferring of these units. Government would use these units for trade and assigning of benefits. No chips! Currency could still be used by states or private banks but resource units would not be affected.

Originally posted by BillfromCovina
Each unit would be worth $1 when the price of gold was at $700 an ounce. This unit would not just be based on gold but on 5 precious metals. This way no matter what the banks do and currency they use, resource units would stay the same.

Based on the price of the 5 precious metals but not actually backed by physical metals stored in vaults?

How did you come up with this plan? Is it inspired by something you've read or is the idea entirely original?

reply to post by Mary Rose

It is entirely original I believe. In other words a person is assigned a value of so many ounces of precious metals as their worth. I came up with the $700 figure because that is what the price of gold was in 2008. Today you would be worth over $1,500,000 in federal reserve notes. This would also push the banks to make their notes worth something. People are really the precious item and give value to everything. All benefits would be assigned on 18th birthday. You may ask "how can this be done?" Through fiat just like the money system. The government controls everything through force. Who is going to pay for it? The same people that do today. No one.

reply to post by BillfromCovina


Very thought provoking!

Thanks for your input. I'm going to let this percolate for awhile.

Originally posted by thegreatone
reply to post by Mary Rose

 

2.We would have to come up with a limit to which each country can produce. Maybe come up with a mathmatical formula? heck maybe one already exists. or you could just print off 60,000 per citizen per year? idk

This idea is straight out of Atlas Shrugged. Dragging down the producers to the level of the non producers doesn't work.

Here's another of Damon's videos. Here he offers the solution of "sovereign money." This is the list he presents:

1. Sovereign money issued by Treasury to replace debt-based currency (MO) over time.
   
2. Federal Reserve nationalized during transition.
   
3. Quantity must be controlled; and usury laws enacted.
   
4. State banks replace regional Fed functions.
   
5. Banks go through bankruptcy to draw down debt.
   
6. Derivatives must be systematically cleared out.
   
7. Wall Street banks must be broken up.
   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Money being 100% debt sitting on private balance sheets was covered in the above video.

In #2, Damon lumps the banks of Britain, Germany, France, Switzerland, and Japan in with the banks of the U.S. He says we have 18 cartel banks that control the U.S. monetary system.

Is this through the stockholders of the Fed banks? He doesn't say...

Damon has produced "Debunking Money #3."

After talking about the fact that he has been threatened following his last video, in this one, he talks about the elite placing the masses into a forced labor situation because of the scarcity of credit. He says that what used to be called feudalism and serfdom, then slavery, is now called "the free market."

He then addresses specific groups who are minions perpetrating the system and need to stop: economists, corporate leaders, lawyers, and law enforcement.

This video is an appeal from the heart:

Originally posted by Mary Rose
This video is an appeal from the heart:

I see now that this video has been removed by the user. I don't know why.

Damon has produced two new videos.

In the video that follows, Damon talks about criticism he has received about the way he's dressed and the white board that he uses, and what this criticism shows about us - the fact that we need to change the way we think. I agree with him:



In the second video, I was impressed with what he said about the Fed:

"Hey, just end the Fed. That's a big movement now, right? And we can solve the whole problem by just ending the Fed. I think the reason that's a big movement now - it's in the mainstream media and being pushed, even - is because a certain faction within this capital machine wants that to happen. They'd be happy with that. They've largely moved the capital to Asia, they've transferred the production machine to China, these banks have ramped up operations in Asia, the biggest banks in the world are now in China, and this machine is trying now to align itself with them."

I'm also impressed with what he said about the idea of putting the banks through bankruptcy to teach them a lesson. He said this shows a misunderstanding of the rule of law and contract law in the U.S. The Constitution is out and what we have is the Universal Commercial Code, which enshrines the capital machine. A banking institution is kind of a merger between capital and the people. If you put a bank into bankruptcy, all that's going to do is force what's left in the people over to the capital holders. He said the Tea Party and Libertarians need to think about this.

He also said an example of the danger of bankruptcy now is the Bank of America, and the fact that Countrywide and Merrill Lynch were forced up under BoA, and if we put BoA through bankruptcy, all the unprotected assets of Merrill Lynch will be transferred up to the capital holders.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
In the second video, I was impressed with what he said about the Fed:

"Hey, just end the Fed. That's a big movement now, right? And we can solve the whole problem by just ending the Fed. I think the reason that's a big movement now - it's in the mainstream media and being pushed, even - is because a certain faction within this capital machine wants that to happen. They'd be happy with that. They've largely moved the capital to Asia, they've transferred the production machine to China, these banks have ramped up operations in Asia, the biggest banks in the world are now in China, and this machine is trying now to align itself with them."

Damon follows up on this in his blog:

dvrabel says:
October 28, 2010 at 5:36 am

. . . But just a quick note based on some emails I’ve seen: the Fed MUST be ended (or absorbed by Treasury). The point I tried to make in this video was just that it needs to be done as part of a larger strategic restructuring that includes the banks and Treasury. We can’t only end the Fed without doing anything else because we’d be thrown into chaos.

My mistake for making it sound like I want to keep the Fed around.

The next two lessons are posted.

Lesson 4 is "20th Century: Where We've Been - Alternative Perspective on the Great '-isms.'" He uses a term I'm not used to hearing: "global bond market/the global central banking network." He also mentions LLCs. I believe this is referring to limited liability corporations. The "-isms" are fascism, capitalism, and communism.



Lesson 5 is "21st Century: Where We're Going - Globalization and Huxley's Vision." He talks about what has happened in the last 50 years, and what is planned for the next 50 years.