Tag Archives: usury

Hitler’s Finances And The Myth Of Nazi Anti-Usury Activism

17 Sep

Cross-posted from Anthony Migchels’ Real Currencies:

There is the widespread notion that Hitler was fighting the Money Power and that he was a problem for the Bankers because he created a Usury free economy. But there was no Usury free Third Reich economy. The German taxpayer continued to pay interest over the substantial national debt and commercial banking received interest for its fractional reserve banking based loans, which to a large extent financed the war.

“Our greatest social task is the abolition of interest slavery. This responsibility to abolish interest slavery towers above all other issues of the day. It is the only solution to the greatest problem of our time. The breaking of interest slavery is the most important moral imperative in social terms, it rises in its general significance far beyond all questions of the day, it is the solution of social questions, it is the only way out of the terrible confusion of the time. The abolition of interest slavery will deliver us from ultra-capitalist domination while avoiding both Communist destruction of the human spirit and Capitalist degradation of labour. The abolition of interest slavery opens the way to a truly social economy, by liberating us from the overwhelming domination of money. It opens the way to a state based on creative work and genuine accomplishment.” – Gottfried Feder 1919

By Anthony Migchels

Where does Hitler’s reputation for anti-Usury activism come from? It was more Nazi propaganda to get him to power than his actual policies after he did. It was not Hitler, but Gottfried Feder who was the anti-Usury man of the Nazi. Hitler in Mein Kampf:

“For the first time in my life I heard (through Feder, AM) a discussion which dealt with the principles of stock exchange capital and capital which was used for loan activities. After hearing the first lecture delivered by Feder, the idea immediately came into my head that I had found a way to one of the most essential prerequisites for the founding of a new party.

To my mind, Feder’s merit consisted in the ruthless and trenchant way in which he described the double character of the capital engaged in stock exchange and loan transactions, laying bare the fact that this capital is ever and always dependent on the payment of interest.”

And:

“The struggle against international finance capital and loan capital has become one of the most important points in the program on which the German nation has based its fight for economic freedom and independence.”

Point 11 of the NSDAP 25 point program, a manifesto that officially (but not in practice) expressed Nazi policy:

“Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.”

Hitler put it this way:

“Our financial principle: Finance shall exist for the benefit of the state; the financial magnates shall not form a state within the state. Hence our aim to break the thralldom of interest.

Relief of the state, and hence of the nation, from its indebtedness to the great financial houses, which lend on interest.

Nationalization of the Reichsbank and the issuing houses, which lend on interest.”

But as we shall see, Hitler did not implement any serious monetary reform after he came to power. He did make finance completely subservient to the State and, more specifically, rearmament. But he did not nationalize any banks and the Reichsbank was already nationalized by the Weimar Republic by the time he came to power. He did not end interest payments to ‘the issuing houses’, who must have made an uncanny fortune throughout the war. He did nothing to decouple the Stock Exchange from the economy.

Feder was made Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, but was from day one sabotaged by Reichsbank President Hjalmar Schacht and replaced by him in August 1934. It was Schacht who was to manage the Nazi economy, not Feder.

Schacht’s and Hitler’s policies allowed full control of the economy, which was used to maximize production for the sake of war. But it did absolutely nothing to limit in any way massive war profiteering by the financial and industrial classes that brought him to power.

The Reichsmark

The Reichsmark was created 1924 after its predecessor, the Papiermark, had been inflated into oblivion. 1 Reichsmark was 1 Trillion Papiermark. The Reichsmark lasted until 1948, when it was replaced by the Deutsche Mark. So Hitler simply used the monetary system that he inherited from the Weimar Republic. The Reichsmark, like any other banking unit, was lent into circulation. It was a Gold backed unit until 1931, when the depression forced the Reichsbank (the Central Bank) to implement exchange controls, which effectively took Germany off the Gold Standard. A Gold peg remained in place. There were 1, 2 and 5 Reichsmark silver coins.

Hitler inherited the official Weimar 4,5% maximum interest rate. He ruled by decree, but never changed this. In fact, after the Nazi economy began to boom due to heavy spending on rearmament, it seems interest rates were raised to combat inflation. I’ve been unable to find any data on real interest rates during the Nazi era.

Who was Hjalmar Schacht?

Schacht was born in 1877 as the son of an aristocratic family. He joined Dresdner Bank in 1903 and already in 1905 was meeting people like JP Morgan and Theodore Roosevelt. He studied Hebrew to advance his career. In 1908 he joined Freemasonry. He oversaw the financing of Belgian/German trade during WW1 and used his former employer Dresdner Bank for this. This blatant conflict of interest led to his dismissal, but the revolving door was not invented recently and he was taken back by Dresdner Bank after this.

In 1923 he joined the Reichsbank and played a key role in ending the hyperinflation of the day. A little later he was made President of the Reichsbank and remained in this post until 1930. Since at least 1923 he was actively resisting the war reparations that were destroying the German economy and called for resurrection of German power. In 1926 he became involved with the NSDAP and supported their rise to power, although he never became a member.

He oversaw the formation of I.G. Farben in the twenties.

Schacht was a member of the Keppler Circle, a small group of businessmen that were at the heart of the Nazi movement and which financed Hitler’s rise to power. Wall Street was very influential in this group and contrary to what many Hitler apologists claim, played a heavy role in both financing him and war profiteering.

Shortly after Hitler came to power he was reinstated as President of the Reichsbank and when he replaced Feder as Reichscommissar for the Economy, he basically gained full control over the economy. This lasted until he was fired in 1939, when the German economy was overheating and Schacht wanted to limit spending on rearmament and was accused of ‘mutiny’ by Hitler.

Banking in Nazi Germany before the war

After becoming President of the Reichsbank, Schacht immediately started implementing policies aiming at giving the State full control of financial markets. This was known as ‘the New Plan’:

“(1) restriction of the demand for such foreign exchange as would be used for purposes unrelated to the conspirators’ rearmament program; (2) increase of the supply of foreign exchange, as a means of paying for essential imports which could not otherwise be acquired; and (3) clearing agreements and other devices obviating the need for foreign exchange. Under the “New Plan”, economic transactions between Germany and the outside world were no longer governed by the autonomous price mechanism; they were determined by a number of Government agencies whose primary aim was to satisfy the needs of the Nazi’s military economy.”

Foreign exchange controls were implemented to manage shortages in foreign currencies. Rules for credit creation by the Reichsbank were cancelled, aimed at potentially limitless credit creation to provide the economy with the liquidity it needed to get back at full employment.

All policies were aimed at 1) making sure the Government was basically the only borrower at domestic capital markets and 2) to make sure there was always enough credit available.

Price and wage controls and indeed rising interest rates were used to combat rising prices that would have resulted from these inflating policies.

Between 31 December and 30 June 1938, the national debt of the Reich rose from 10.4 billion Marks to 19 billion Marks.

There was no nationalization of banks. In fact: some banks that the Weimar republic had nationalized during the early days of the depression, were again privatized. Private banks played a crucial role in financing the rearmament effort. They were put under close Reichsbank control to make sure their lending was what the State wanted, but nothing was done to limit their profitability.

The Stock Exchange

While railing against this typical exploitative instrument of finance during his rise to power, Hitler did nothing to limit the stock exchange’s scope and operations once he had the chance. The stock exchange system in the Reich was superficially reformed: a number of its outlets were merged and the number of exchanges declined from 25 to 9 as a result. But volume of trading was never threatened and during the early Hitler years it saw annual double digit rises until 1937, when the Reich’s economy started faltering and the stock exchange lost about 10% of its capitalization between 1937 and 1939. After the war broke out the stock market saw a massive boom, rising 50% between the falls 1939 and 1941.

In 1934 heavy taxes were levied on dividend payments higher than 6%, but the aim of this was not to limit profiteering, but to enhance self-financing of publicly traded corporations. They were expected to recycle more of their profits into their own operations, to make them independent of capital markets, which the State intended and managed to completely dominate for its own financing needs. There were loopholes to evade this measure and shareholders were not damaged, as it implied deferment of dividend payments and not real limitations.

The Reich’s policies also made sure the common man did not enter the stock market, as they were expected to lend to the Government and not to speculate. But still, the amount of funds being diverted to the stock market were not invested in the war and “It was then (1942, AM) that the government stepped in and destroyed the last relatively free market in the economy. Loans for the purchase of stocks were prohibited. Shareholders had to file a declaration with the government of all shares purchased since the outbreak of war if their market value exceeded 100,000 Reichsmark. The government could, at any time, request that any of these shares be delivered to it for cash and that the proceeds be invested in securities to be specified by the government. (Nathan)”

MEFO

While every effort was made to assure the State’s domination of capital markets, there was simply not enough liquidity in the economy to create full employment and unlock the German Folk’s full productive capacity for rearmament. This could have been solved by having the State go massively into debt, in typical Keynesian fashion. But this would have created both political and economic problems and, equally important, would have shown the full extent of rearmament to the Reich’s enemies.

Instead, Hitler, right after coming to power, fired Reichsbank President Hans Luther and reinstated Hjalmar Schacht, who was willing to build on Luther’s Oeffa’s: Government promissory notes aimed at creating employment that would create the extra liquidity needed to finance Hitler’s plans.

Schacht created a special purpose vehicle (SPV, a dummy corporation) called MEtallurgische FOrschungsgesellschaft (MEFO), which was used to accept bills of exchange drawn by German weapons manufacturers and received by all German banks for possible re-discounting by the Reichsbank. The bills were guaranteed by the Reich for five years and were thus (indirectly) convertible to Reichsmark.

MEFO bills of exchange were a pure bookkeeping operation and there were no actual paper certificates. They circulated between MEFO, the Reichsbank, commercial banks and manufacturers, not in the wider economy. At its peak there were about 12 billion worth in circulation. Key was that they were kept off the Reich’s books as all transactions were logged at the MEFO SPV. Because of this, nobody really knew the extent of spending on weaponry.

While they solved the depression and allowed for the Nazi war machine, they also created fairly serious inflationary pressures. And while this kind of construct may sound ‘innovative’ to the uninitiated, they would have been a no brainer for an experienced banker like Schacht. As said, they were based on certificates (called Oeffa) that the Weimar Republic was already circulating and national treasuries had been circulating their own certificates routinely, when pressing political issues forced them to increase their financial clout. The US Treasury had its Treasury notes before the Civil War. The UK printed ‘Bradbury Pounds’ (debt free notes) to finance WW1. The Canadian Treasury printed its own debt free money as of 1935 and during the twenties and thirties advanced monetary reform programs were widely discussed throughout the West.

Conclusion

Hitler was heavily indebted to Feder’s anti-Usury stance in coming to power. But early on during his reign he got rid of Feder and relied on Schacht for the financing of his war plans. Unlike Schacht, Feder was not heavily involved with the top bankers and industrialists of the age. The German economy was directed completely to rearmament. Consumption levels were kept low through taxation and wage controls. Imports and production of luxuries were severely restricted.

Schacht made sure the financial industry was focused solely on war preparation and in effect allowed only the State to borrow on the domestic capital markets. International trade was primarily reliant on (scarce) foreign currencies and while there was some international bartering, it was far from dominant. The Reich’s financial industry did not decouple entirely from international finance, although foreign exchange controls were strict. For instance: the Bank of International Settlements continued dealings with the Reich.

There was no usury free economy. The common man or small business actually would have next to no access to credit at all. Even manufacturers were forced to become self financing, so the State could monopolize borrowing on the capital markets. The stock market boomed like never before.

Instead, all policies were directed at securing sufficient funds for rearmament, not at minimizing financial exploitation by the parasitical class that Hitler so vehemently attacked with his rhetoric. Finance was a matter of volume, not cost. Schacht’s MEFO bills have been wrongly jumped upon to claim Hitler was an anti banker man, while Schacht himself has the typical bio of a high level Money Power operative. He was a life long friend of BoE chief Montague Norman and was acquitted at Neurenberg, where the Soviets wanted a conviction while the British made sure he was released.

The myth of Nazi anti-Usury activism is damaging, not only because of its mythological character, but because it allows the Money Power to defame anti-Usury activism through ‘guilt by association’. In fact, many Austrians and Mainstreamers, call usury-free monetary reform programs ‘fascist’. Fascism itself is being rehabilitated because of its supposed stance against finance capitalism. But as we have learned from Bolton’s ‘The Banking Swindle’, the twenties and thirties saw many monetary reform programs throughout the West, far from all associated with fascism. After the war they were relegated to a memory hole because of this false association with fascism.

War profiteering by the industrial and financial class was in no way restricted. As a result, they profited immensely from the war. This was indeed the main reason for them to enable Hitler’s rise to power and their loyal support of his policies during the rearmament and the war. Even today, the main culprits like the Thyssen family, Krupp and the Goebbels step-children owning BMW are among the richest people in Germany. The same banks that financed the Reich’s war are now among the biggest in the world.

(with special thanks to Niels Verduijn and Ad Broere)

Afterthought 1
Let me be the first to admit I, until recently, believed much of what was said about Hitler’s ‘usury-free’ economy and have inadvertently contributed to the harnessing of this meme.

Afterthought 2
I agree with much of revisionist history. Post war historiography is just wartime propaganda. The Holocaust needs serious revaluation. Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill were psychopaths who committed horrible crimes, against the Japanese, their own people, the people the colonized and against the Germans.

I do feel that at this point many in the Alternative Media go overboard, making Hitler a hero. This is unwarranted. The current article shows, in spite of what many believe, he was far from a renegade in a financial sense. There is also the Hunger Plan: Hitler and the Wehrmacht High Command intended to have the Wehrmacht live of the Russian land they were to occupy by robbing the farmers of their harvests. They cynically calculated this would starve 30 million Russians. Thankfully they never had the chance to fully implement this, but still millions of Russians starved because of the Wehrmacht taking their supplies.

The fact is that Hitler always wanted to invade Russia and his explanation that it was to save the world of Marxism, which he well analyzed to be a Jewish front, is irreconcilable with his take that Britain was a nation of Aryan brothers and the British Empire ‘necessary’ and a great civilizing force in the world: even at that time it was well known that the British Aristocracy had merged with Jewish Money and that the City of London was the Money Power’s capital.

Hitler was an imperialist who wanted to conquer Russia for the third Reich and intended to kill untold millions of Russians to take their land. His rise and fall gave the Money Power everything it wanted, including the war itself, the Zionist Entity in Palestine, the EU, Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, the destruction of the British Empire, the UN and the Cold War.

We will probably never know whether he was a useful idiot or willing stooge, but while he may have been no worse than his antagonists, he certainly also was no better.

Sources:
Hitler and the Banksters, by Ingrid Rimland
Nazi War Financing and Banking, by Otto Nathan
Ziopedia on MEFO’s
Jewish Virtual Library on Schacht
Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, by Antony Sutton

IMF Admits Usury Is The Root Problem Of The Global Financial System

6 Sep

usury

There is much of interest in the IMF’s Financial System Stability Assessment of Australia, published in November 2012.  The following line in particular caught my eye, and is worthy of comment. The context is the IMF’s consideration of what are the “key risks” to our banking system (page 10-11):

Pressure on the net interest margin, which accounts for almost two-thirds of operating income, has the potential to encourage more risk-taking by banks in order to preserve profitability.

Thoughtful readers will observe that this statement unintentionally lends direct support to a fundamental argument your humble blogger has made — that usury is the root problem of the global monetary system, and that fractional reserve banking (or endogenous money creation) is only a secondary problem.

Consider again the conclusion to my recent post, IMF Economist Says Banks’ Key Function Is To CREATE Money:

As we have oft-repeated here at barnabyisright.com, while this power to “create money” ex nihilo (out of nothing) is a key problem, it is not THE root problem.

The power to create “money” (in the form of debt) out of nothing, simply gives banks leverage.

What they leverage, is Usury.

The “net interest income” — that is, the difference (or “spread” or “margin”) between the interest % they give on deposits, and the interest % they take on loans — is the heart of the banks’ profit (and power) business model.

The power to create more and more money (“credit”), simply allows them to magnify (or leverage) their “returns” (profits) on that difference between usury paid, and usury taken.

It deeply saddens your humble blogger that there are so many highly intelligent (far moreso than I), sincere, well-meaning, altruistic men and women in the world who are keenly interested in reforming the financial system for the betterment of humanity … and yet, almost none have yet recognised that usury is the root problem.

The IMF has directly admitted that the root of banks’ profit-making model is net interest income, and that pressure on the “margin” between what they charge in interest for loans, and must offer in interest on deposits, “has the potential to encourage more risk-taking by banks in order to preserve profitability”.

What exactly is meant by “more risk-taking”?

In the footnote (3) to the IMF’s comment, we are told that:

“Riskier activities could include, for example, loosening underwriting standards or expanding too quickly into new business or geographic regions.”

In other words, making it easier for more people to borrow more debt.

Using the leverage of increased fractional reserve / endogenous money creation.

Barnaby Is Right … is right.

See also:

Looking For A Root

A Tale Of Usury, Explosions, And A Used Car Salesman

A History Of The Legal Case Against Usury

An Historical Warning For Proponents Of A Modern Debt Jubilee

Bankers Crucified On Live TV

5 Sep

WARNING: Do not watch if bad language offends.

IMF Economist Says Banks’ Key Function Is To CREATE Money

9 Aug

Cross-posted from neweconomics.net.nz (my bold added) –

Today I made the mistake of going to a Georgist website where there was a sentence which made me mad. It said that in New Zealand, banks like finance companies can only lend out deposits made with them. Well I rarely get mad these days but I don’t like untruths being perpetrated. So I thought the best way to recover would go and transcribe the first seven minutes of a talk Michael Kumhof, economist from the IMF made to a seminar in January 2013.  It is on youtube here and here is my transcript, give or take the odd aside I left out.

“Virtually all money is bank deposits.

The key function of banks is money creation not intermediation. The entire economics literature that you see out there today is that it is intermediation, taking the money from granny, storing it up and then when someone comes and needs it I can lend it out to them. That is complete nonsense. Intermediation of course exists, but it is incidental and secondary and it comes after the actual money creation. Banks do not have to attract deposits before they create money. I’m a former bank manager. I worked for Barclays for five years. I’ve created those book entries. That is how it works. And if a leading light economist like Paul Krugman tries to tell you otherwise, he does not know what he is talking about.

When you approve a loan, as a bank manager you enter on the asset side of your balance sheet the loan, which is your claim against this guy and at the exact same time you create a new deposit on the liability side. You have created new money because this gives this guy purchasing power to go out and buy something with it. Banks have created money at that point. No intermediation, because the asset and liability are in the same name at that moment. What happens afterwards is that that guy can spend it somewhere else later but it is still in the banking system. I care about the aggregate banking system. Looking at the microeconomy and transferring the logic to the macroeconomy is really wrong. Someone will accept that payment.

money

What that means is that it becomes very, very easy for banks to start or lead a lending boom even though policy makers might not, because if they feel that the time is right, they simply expand the money supply. There is no third party involved, just the bank and the customer and I make the loan. The only thing that is required is that someone else will accept that deposit, say as payment for a machine, and he knows that is acceptable because it is legal fiat.

There is an important corollary to this story. A lot of loans are not for investment purposes, in physical capital. Loans that are for investment purposes are a small fraction. The story that is often told in development economics is that first you need to have savings, then once you have the savings, you can have investment. So a country needs to have sufficient savings in order to have enough investment. Nonsense too – at least for the part of investment that is financed through banks because when a bank makes a new loan it creates new purchasing power for the investment to go ahead. The investment goes ahead. Then the investor takes his new bank deposit and gives it to someone else In the end someone is going to leave that new deposit in the bank. That is saving.  The saving is created along with the investment. It’s not that saving has to come before investment. Saving comes after investment, not before. This is important for development economics.

The deposit multiplier that is taught in economics textbooks is a fairytale. I could use less polite terms. The story goes that central bank creates narrow money and there is a multiplier because banks can lend out a fraction. It is actually exactly the opposite. Broad monetary aggregates lead the cycle and narrow monetary aggregates lag the cycle.”

***********

As we have oft-repeated here at barnabyisright.com, while this power to “create money” ex nihilo (out of nothing) is a key problem, it is not THE root problem.

The power to create “money” (in the form of debt) out of nothing, simply gives banks leverage.

What they leverage, is Usury.

The “net interest income” — that is, the difference (or “spread” or “margin”) between the interest % they give on deposits, and the interest % they take on loans — is the heart of the banks’ profit (and power) business model.

The power to create more and more money (“credit”), simply allows them to magnify (or leverage) their “returns” (profits) on that difference between usury paid, and usury taken.

It deeply saddens your humble blogger that there are so many highly intelligent (far moreso than I), sincere, well-meaning, altruistic men and women in the world who are keenly interested in reforming the financial system for the betterment of humanity … and yet, almost none have yet recognised that usury is the root problem.

One that must be dug up entirely, and killed off, else all other “reforms” are a waste of time.

The evil tree will simply regrow.

Our Chains Are Forged By Usury

31 Jul

Cross-posted from Forbidden News, this article by Anthony Migchels, inventor of the Netherlands’ “Gelre” alternate currency, and author of the Real Currencies blog:

usury

Usury is the original sin and the root cause of all our economic and political problems.

The truth is we have everything we need to create an interest-free money supply. An usury-free economy ends poverty and saves our souls in the process.

The love of money is the root of all evils. Usury is the weaponization of money love. It feeds the avarice of the usurer. It forces ever more debtors into ever more immoral behavior. It replaces love with commerce. It corrupts commerce, which becomes ever more exploitative. It rips apart the fabric of society and makes a mockery of any kind of social contract.

Billions of people live in abject poverty all over the world because of it. Entire communities, nations are gutted to pay the interest to the opulent. Nobody counts the billions dying prematurely from its effects.

Poor countries pay ten times more interest on their foreign debts than they receive development aid.

Even when not in debt, forty percent of our income is lost to interest passed on in prices by producers. The many pay anywhere between five and ten trillion per year to the wealthy. All other rents ultimately are based on cost for capital and would hardly exist without usury.

It is the ultimate centralizer of power and it is global. It has been growing at a compound interest rate for centuries, and now this incredible cancer is ready to devour the host body.

The European nations put up $4.5 trillion in handouts, easy credit and guarantees to ‘save’ their banks and the euro. The Fed provided an unimaginable $16 trillion dollars in easy credit to its banking buddies. Much of it was never repaid. This is ‘necessary’ because without banks we would not have money. So the West put up $20 trillion to have some bits and bytes and paper and coins circulate to exchange goods and services.

Surely the end of our civilization is near when we allow such rapacious plunder while there is no money to save the poor from starvation and the Earth from pollution.

evil_bankers_usury

SENSELESS

We think: “without interest there will be no credit! I would not lend if I didn’t get anything back.”

But the Money Power doesn’t lend anything!

Money is just bookkeeping and credit is an automatic result of double entry bookkeeping, which by its very nature knows debit and credit.

The problem is not the creation of money! Quite the opposite: it’s marvelous that we never need to have a shortage of money.

The problem is when the bookkeeper starts raping the debitor with interest for no other reason than the associated minus. And takes all this interest himself. Just for the service of bookkeeping!

We pay $300k in interest in thirty years for our $200k mortgage which was created by entering some numbers in a computer bookkeeping application!

GOLD SOLVES NOTHING

We don’t want to pay $300k interest in coin! We want bookkeeping at cost-price! Interest-free!

Even in ancient times Gold and Silver were circulated by private parties. This is touted as a wonderful free market operation. But who circulated the specie? Those owning the mines, of course!

They circulated the metal by lending it out at interest and manipulated the volume from day one.

Today, nobody knows how much Gold there is. All the Gold mines are owned and controlled by the Money Power. Those owning the mines are the Money Power, that’s how it all started. Vast amounts of Gold are in their vaults, ready to be unleashed onto the market through usurious lending, aiming to create asset bubbles, only to stop lending a little later to create a deflationary crash when people pay off their loans.

It is exactly the same way they create the boom-bust cycle with paper based money.

Just look at what they are doing to Gold today. They have been doing this forever.

The Golden Calf is the archetypal symbol of avarice; the Money Power is unthinkable without it.

WE WANT INTEREST-FREE MONEY

temple1

Jesus admonished us to lend freely, expecting nothing in return. The Vedas abhor usury. Moses forbade it. Half of the Q’uran is Allah threatening severe punishment for those taking Usury.

Money is bookkeeping. We don’t need interest for savers. The bank doesn’t need savers. Debit and Credit are the two sides of the coin in bookkeeping. They are automatic.

Yes, the volume must be managed, but that is unavoidable. No monetary system can exist without managing volume. The problem is not management; it is allowing vultures to do it.

The reason we have a boom-bust cycle is because we allowed private parties, banks, to manage the volume in their own interest. They set up Central Banks to create the illusion of ‘officialdom’.

Saying ‘the market must do it’ is saying the Plutocracy has been doing a good job over the last 5000 years.

We want interest-free mortgages, no income tax, no poverty. We want abundance, good will, a cultural rebirth, fairness and an end to Plutocracy.

Kill Usury!

 

The Rich “And Everyone Else” – Citigroup Global Strategist

27 Jul

“The earth is being held up by the muscular arms of its entrepreneur-plutocrats, like it, or not.”

– Citigroup ‘Plutonomy’ memos, 2005

“A plutonomy is a form of capitalism that is designed to make the rich who control a nation’s government and its economy—aka, the plutocrats—even richer.”

– Rational Wiki

Here is the result of the creeping cancer of usury — the root of capital-ism — and the usurer class.

As told by one of their own — a “global strategist”, for Citigroup.

From the Wall Street Journal, 2007 (my emphasis added):

It’s well known that the rich have an outsized influence on the economy.

The nation’s top 1% of households own more than half the nation’s stocks, according to the Federal Reserve. They also control more than $16 trillion in wealth — more than the bottom 90%.

Yet a new body of research from Citigroup suggests that the rich have other, more-surprising impacts on the economy.

Ajay Kapur, global strategist at Citigroup, and his research team came up with the term “Plutonomy” in 2005 to describe a country that is defined by massive income and wealth inequality. According to their definition, the U.S. is a Plutonomy, along with the U.K., Canada and Australia.

In a series of research notes over the past year, Kapur and his team explained that Plutonomies have three basic characteristics.

1. They are all created by “disruptive technology-driven productivity gains, creative financial innovation, capitalist friendly cooperative governments, immigrants…the rule of law and patenting inventions. Often these wealth waves involve great complexity exploited best by the rich and educated of the time.”

2. There is no “average” consumer in Plutonomies. There is only the rich “and everyone else.” The rich account for a disproportionate chunk of the economy, while the non-rich account for “surprisingly small bites of the national pie.” Kapur estimates that in 2005, the richest 20% may have been responsible for 60% of total spending.

3. Plutonomies are likely to grow in the future, fed by capitalist-friendly governments, more technology-driven productivity and globalization.

Of course, Kapur says there are risks to the Plutonomy, including war, inflation, financial crises, the end of the technological revolution and populist political pressure. Yet he maintains that the “the rich are likely to keep getting even richer, and enjoy an even greater share of the wealth pie over the coming years.”

All of which means that, like it or not, inequality isn’t going away and may become even more pronounced in the coming years.

Little wonder then, that politicians who support “protectionism” of national sovereignty — Barnaby Joyce and Bob Katter spring to mind — are mocked, smeared, and pilloried in the media as “populists”.

That “immigration” is such a vexed issue — with the general public concerned about it, and politicians (despite their rhetoric) enabling it.

That “financial innovation” presses relentlessly onwards, aided and abetted by both “sides” of politics — think covered bonds (to prop up the banks’ debt-financed housing Ponzi scheme), “emissions” trading (a gigantic derivatives time bomb), and most recently, the Rudd government’s sole idea for “managing the economic transition”; to turn Australia into a “financial services centre” for the region:

Encouraging competition and efficiency would improve the range and choice of financial products available to consumers and promote increased exports of financial services.

…Labor knows that increased trade in financial services will increase Australia’s growth prospects and standard of living.

We know positioning Australia as a financial services centre in the region means that we would be able to offer increased job opportunities for a range of skilled workers in the financial sector.

For those with eyes to see, it is perfectly clear that both “sides” of Australian politics — and the Greens too — are simply puppets of the Plutonomy.

Citizens who vote for any of them are — whether they realise it or not — actually voting for their own continued enslavement, and, gradual destruction.

The following video featuring white collar criminologist William Black, is a must-watch:

 

Usury is the root of the plutocrats’ power.

It is their most powerful weapon.

Like cancer, it is a silent, invasive killer. One that consumes the living, healthy cells of its host.

To feed its own relentless “growth”.

Anyone talking “solutions” who is not talking about eliminating usury, is not worth listening to.

“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one striking at the root.”

– Henry David Thoreau

 

Full Reserve Banking Advocates Are Myopic: Here’s Why

23 Jul

myopic-lasik

From central bank governors, to the IMF, to brilliant contrarian economists, to well-intentioned activist groups, there is a growing chorus of voices calling for an end to fractional reserve banking … or, more correctly, fractional reserve lending.

These voices are of those suffering from myopia.

Their complaint is this; that the root cause of the world’s ongoing economic ills is that, due to fractional reserve lending, private banks have been permitted to create too much “money” (debt) out of nothing, and lend it for profit.

Alas, they are only seeing what is immediately in front of their eyes.

The creation of “money” out of nothing, is only a lever.

Usury (ie, net interest income), is what is being lever-aged.

Consider the words of the National Australia Bank:

How Banks Work

…Their profit is the difference between what they pay in interest on your deposits and what you pay them in interest for the loan they made you.

Creating money — debt — out of nothing, does not make profits for bankers.

Charging interest on money (debt) created out of nothing, is what makes profits for bankers.

For those with full vision, the Big Picture is clear.

Every “solution” to the economic crisis that does not focus on the real problem — usury — is a short-sighted, and inevitably short-lived, non-solution.

4,500 years of recorded economic history prove it so.

See An Historical Warning For Proponents Of A Modern Debt Jubilee

5 Charts Show How Banks Are Raping Small Business

9 Jul

“If you owe the bank $100 that’s your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that’s the bank’s problem.”

– J. Paul Getty

With Dun & Bradstreet’s most recent ‘Business Failure and Start-up Analysis’ reporting that “the number of small businesses going bankrupt jumped by 48 per cent over the last 12 months” — growing by 57 per cent over the year among firms with less than five employees, and 40 per cent over the year among firms with six to 19 employees — and that the start-up rate for small businesses fell by 95 per cent, it is worth taking a closer look at the usury rates charged by the banks for small business loans, as compared to large ones.

The following charts show the total value of variable usury-rate business loans, that have a usury rate of 17 per cent or greater.

First, loans of $100k to less than $500k:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Loans of $500k to less than $2 million:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Loans of $2 million and over:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

And finally, loans of less than $100k:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Clearly there’s been no mercy shown by the usurers to their smallest business borrowers, post-GFC.

Here’s the direct comparison of business loans less than $100k, versus loans greater than $2 million, that are copping a 17 per cent or greater rate of usury:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

All-time record low “official” interest rates?

Perhaps someone forgot to tell the usurers.

Who needs small businesses anyway, right?

Monopoly “capitalism” is much better.

For the 0.1% at the very top.

“Competition is a sin.”

– John D. Rockefeller

Usury And The Irrelevant Complicit Church

4 Jul

With thanks and h/t to reader Phil, the following article dated May 2010 is cross-posted from the Economic Edge:

Damon thinks this is one of the most important articles he’s written. I think it’s powerful and should get you thinking regardless of your personal views. I also think it’s important to note that he is addressing religion from this perspective, “We need to avoid dialectical conflict… left vs. right, religion vs. non-religion, black vs. white, immigrant vs. citizen, etc. We need to come together to fight the monetary powers that are bringing us all down together.”

Amen to that.

The Coming Crash: Usury and the Irrelevant Church

By Damon Vrabel

Please, let us stop this usury! – Nehemiah 5:10

It’s been a wild couple of weeks—increasing unemployment, Greek debt crisis, yet another ridiculous bailout, pressure on Goldman Sachs, accusations of commodities manipulation by JP Morgan Chase, and new freakish levels of market volatility that might be signaling the next phase of market collapse. The many day-to-day issues can leave us dazed and confused, so most people ignore them. Huge mistake.They are all related to the most powerful force on earth that controls our lives because it is the very foundation of our society—usury. We are ruled not by governments anymore but by financial powers that use interest-bearing debt to exert control over governments, corporations, and people. Almost all other political issues with which we concern ourselves are secondary symptoms of or purposeful distractions from this larger narrative that is never reported by the Wall-Street-funded media. Sadly the church has remained silent as well.Explaining the details can be extremely complicated, but the basic core to understand is that the US government issues no money. Instead all money comes from private banking institutions with interest attached. At times in the past the US government issued real money for people to use—US notes and coins. But today all money comes from the Federal Reserve’s private banking system by putting the US government, i.e. 308,000,000 Americans, in debt. If the US government were not in debt to the banking system, the American people would have no money.More technically, the Fed and its Wall Street cartel banks like JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs make billions by doing nothing but controlling our money. They have the monopoly license to create the core money in our system from holding US Treasury bonds on their balance sheets. These bonds represent the debt of the United States. Thanks to interest, the bonds pull a large portion of our wages to the banks. The primary purpose of the IRS is to take your wages to pay the interest back to the banks. In effect, Wall Street owns a good bit of your labor. And the more bonds they hold, i.e. the more debt the population is in, the more money they make thanks to the interest flows and the profits from gambling on your debt. The system is very much one of “us vs. them.” Such is the nature of monopoly power and usury.

Economics and Morality

Controlling others and living off their backs by forcing them to borrow with interest in order to have any money is called usury (this does not include standard, self-liquidating bank loans to businesses to fund production). It is a system that ensures everything we do, whether in the public or private sector, feeds Wall Street and the controllers above it. It creates a two-tiered societal pyramid of money pushers on top vs. money users on bottom. The power differential is huge. Everyone is hostage. In doing something as simple as buying food to survive, we contribute to usury because we only have usury-based money, not real money. Like the slaves who built the Egyptian pyramids, today we are stuck building an invisible pyramid of monetary power.In such a system there is never enough money to pay back all the interest to the money pushers. The only solution is for the money users—government, corporations, individuals—to borrow more. This is the reason our debt continues skyrocketing to increasingly insane levels. It isn’t about politics, but the fundamental exponential math underlying the system—the users must borrow more and more to pay back interest and keep the system afloat. Such math is guaranteed to fail. Iceland and Greece have reached the point of failure. The rest of the Europe and the US will experience failure as well. Then we will see money and assets vacuumed up the pyramid by the money pushers—the banking establishment that owns the collateral and can take your property.The exponential math not only creates exponential debt growth, but also exponentially increasing:

  • Scale – government and businesses keep getting bigger; we get smaller and local communities lose their meaning
  • Velocity – the hamster wheel keeps spinning faster; human life suffers
  • Consumption – we buy more and more things that break more quickly
  • Production – we make more and more things that break more quickly
  • Inflation – the dollar buys less and less; we can’t seem to make progress

None of these things have to happen in an economic system. They only happen in ours because of debt-based money, usury, that greatly benefits the top of the pyramid while everyone else suffers to a certain degree depending on their level in the pyramid.

So this system is guaranteed to fail due to not only the impossible math, but also the fundamental immorality. Taken together those five issues paint a horrible picture. Republicans blame Democrats and vice-versa. Nope. It’s all a very simple result of a system based on usury, which used to be considered profoundly immoral. It was a fundamental violation of every major religion. It still is for Islam, but Christianity succumbed long ago. They thought a free market economic system would be beneficial, but got snookered into thinking that usury had to be part of that system. On the contrary, monolithic usury kills the free market.

Our monetary system is a top-down controlling machine, not a free market. It is run not by government, but by the most powerful financial interests in the world. Some people feel in their guts that someone must be stealing from them because they just can’t get ahead no matter how hard they work. Well that’s because it’s true—someone is legally stealing from them. The simple math of usury pulls money from people on the bottom of the pyramid who create real value toward those at the top who create no value. MBAs and others serving the system must reckon with this truth rather than remaining blind. Farmers understand it well, having lost their property over the years to the bankers. Families feel it in the fact that it’s difficult to get enough money to feed the kids compared to 50 years ago when one parent could work a standard week and feed a family of five. Everyone in the system will feel it once the debt system collapses as it is doing in Greece.

Living off the backs of others was called feudalism 300 years ago. It was slavery 100 years ago. Today it’s called the “free market” thanks to the propaganda and fraud of neoclassical economics. It completely ignores the truth of our monetary system, the math behind it, and the eventual collapse that will result from it. Greece is giving us a glimpse, but it is only a mild pre-game warmup compared to what’s coming. The world will rue the day it was ever seduced into accepting usury and the illusion of prosperity driven by nothing but debt.

The Irrelevant Church

On this issue of monolithic usury, the issue from which many of our other problems spawn, the church seems to have no voice. Recently, an older church leader told me, “Keep it up, this needs to be addressed, but you have more guts than me, I don’t want to be killed.” Sobering comment, to be sure, but in the shadow of Gandhi, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Oscar Romero, and Martin Luther King, is the church now impotent? Are its leaders now too afraid to speak truth to power, to stand against darkness? Or is the problem that the church is, like most of us, fooled by the myth that we live in a free market so we don’t realize we are immersed in an immoral system of controlling usury?

Lower class Greek citizens are now learning the painful truth about the mythical free market. A few of them have died as the police brutally repress them to enforce the usury system for the rich bankers like Goldman Sachs. Where is the voice of Bishop Romero? “I order you, stop the repression!” Iceland learned the lesson a few months ago. Several other populations have learned the lesson in the past as the controlling debt peddlers punished, conquered, and restructured their countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, India, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, England, etc.). The same lesson is coming to the rest of Europe and the United States. But again, the church seems to be oblivious. It failed to heed Martin Luther King’s warning, “One of the great liabilities of history is that all too many people fail to remain awake…today our very survival depends on our ability to stay awake.” The church has fallen asleep.

The Dialectic of Left vs. Right

A possible reason is that the church has been co-opted by the manipulative left vs. right civil war created by the corporate media. In fact, Protestant denominations have split into conservative vs. liberal camps so they war against each other—Wall Street is brilliant at divide and conquer. Some sermons in conservative denominations sound like speeches from conservative politicians. Liberal Christian magazines sometimes seem to be just liberal political magazines with an added dash of Jesus.

Postmodernism should inform us that the left vs. right narrative is contrived to keep people from noticing the real power structure behind Wall Street that controls our lives. As long as the church submits to the false framework, church leaders will be “safe.” But that means they will also be irrelevant because they are not speaking to the primary narrative in our world that has always caused problems and is getting ready to unleash far more pain and poverty in the near future—the issue of monolithic usury and debt servitude. By not speaking against usury, the church has become a pawn of it. So the church has largely been conquered by the same concocted civil war that has divided society.

Dollar Tyranny

Another reason the church may be silent is the simple fact that it depends on money just like everything else does. Since all money in our system comes from usury, it is difficult to even notice it. And what authority would the church have to speak against it since it is itself complicit in it? Anybody or any organization that uses a Federal Reserve Note or a credit/debit card, which everyone must do, is unknowingly participating in usury because, again, all of that money comes from the bonds held by Wall Street. But knowingly or not, how could the church or any organization speak against the very thing that fuels its own existence?

The church’s tax-exempt status may be another reason for the silence. Tax exemption is one of the powerful ways the financial empire system influences and controls other entities. If the wrong person says the wrong thing, the IRS has the ability to suddenly remove the exemption, which doubles the cost of running that organization. The church never should have submitted to such tyranny over what may or may not be said.

Comfort of the Middle Class Bubble

Finally, it seems the comfort provided by the monetary system for the great mass in the middle, which is a key part of the church, keeps us from wanting to really think about it. The illusion of peace and prosperity that has lasted for so long has been nice. Some of us even thought we had that comfort because we were better people, so God blessed us. Reckoning with the truth will be painful for those who believe this. The fact is that our perceived comfort today is a result of the darkness of usury. The middle can only exist because there is a bottom that keeps our system afloat. They are the only reason the middle class exists. Moreover, the comfort is currently an illusion because most in the middle class don’t realize how indebted they are. Total unfunded liabilities currently hidden on the government’s financials put each American in an extra $300,000+ in debt that they currently aren’t aware of. That debt comes from the fact that, again, our money comes from usury.

Since the bubble was built on usury, its very existence is immoral, and everyone who participates in it becomes infected. It is also flimsy because usury means the bubble is sustained by debt. Many are already aware of the hollowness of the bubble since it has destroyed the fabric of our communities and a sense of deeper meaning in life. But others are able to ignore that and focus on the material comfort. What will happen to them once the material comfort itself crashes? It will soon. Some market forecasters predict the final collapse of our debt system will be worse than the Great Depression. The math is clear—it will be worse. Just like Greece, we will then see Wall Street paying the government to crackdown on the people, cancel social programs, and take their assets from them to hand them over to the upper class behind the banks. That is the end result of usury—using debt to control others and take their assets so they have no equity. At that point it will be too late for the church to save the lower and middle classes from violent repression and the upper class from their narcissistic detachment from the horror.

“Silence is Betrayal”

So is there a wing of the church that has not yet sold its soul? Is there a remaining Christian voice against usury, or are Muslims the only people in the world who stand against it? The church must wake up to the truth of our system and become relevant again. This is the civil rights issue of the 21st century, only this time it is not black vs. white but a few money pushers vs. the great mass of users. The power of the bond market is getting ready to wreak havoc. We’re all in it together this time. As Martin Luther King said, “There comes a time when silence is betrayal….That time has come for us today.” Will the real church please speak up?

Damon added the following commentary, “We are heading toward a very dark future, unless we fix it, because our system is built on a fundamental evil–usury. This force has taken over not just our economic system, but our governments, our lives, and everything else from schools, to nonprofits, to families, and even the church. I hope the word gets out on this one. And if you attend a church, regardless of religion or denomination, I think the leadership needs to be informed about this.”

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

For readers interested in further research on this topic area, your humble  blogger recommends Michael Hoffman’s excellent book, Usury In Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was, and Now Is Not.

See also:

“I Picked 7 Billion Out Of My Arse”: Audio Reveals Bankers Joking About Bailouts

26 Jun

Screen shot 2013-06-26 at 9.07.18 AM

This is the culture, the mind-set, the spirit which has now almost completely enslaved the world to the power of usury.

From Business Insider:

Once again, we have some more embarrassing conversations between bankers…

The Irish Independent, a Dublin-based newspaper, has uncovered tapes of an internal phone conversation from September 2008 between two executives at Anglo Irish Bank during its bailout deal and they sound pretty scandalous.   The Irish Independent points out that the recordings show they misled the Central Bank.

The executives from the recording have been identified as John Bowe (head of the bank’s capital markets) and Peter Fitzgerald (director of retail banking).

However, Bowe “categorically denied” that he misled the Central Bank and Fitzgerald, who wasn’t involved in discussions with regulators, said he was unaware of any intention to mislead, the report said.

Either way, the newly revealed recordings are still embarrassing.

Here are some partial excerpts (via the Irish Independent):

The two bankers begin their conversation jokingly comparing themselves to being able to walk on water and drink beer out of both hands.

John Bowe: “Hello”

Receptionist: “John I have Peter Fitz for you.”

Bowe: “Oh yeah, OK.”

Bowe: “As me granny used to say, you must be therapeutic…”

Peter Fitzgerald: “What does that mean? Can I work the computer is it? (Both laugh)

Bowe: “Therapeutic. Therapeutic…I was just ringing you.”

Fitzgerald: “I’m ambidextrous as well. It means I can walk on land and water.” (More laughter)

Bowe: “You can drink, you can drink beer out of both hands…” (laughter)

Then they get down to business.  Bowe tells Fitzgerald that they met with the Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority (IFSRA) the previous day about getting €7 billion.  They laugh how they will never be able to pay it back.

Bowe:  ”So we went down..and we basically said. In Central, yeah. And I mean, to cut a long story short we sort of said. ‘Look, what we need is seven billion euros…and we’re going to give you and we’re going to give you, what we’re going to give you is our loan collateral so we’re not giving you ECB, we’re giving you the loan clause.

“We gave him a term sheet and we put a pro not facility together and we said that’s what we need. And that kind of sobered up everybody pretty quickly, you know.”

Fitzgerald: “Yeah.”

Fitzgerald: “And is that €7 billion a term?”

Bowe: “This is €7 billion bridging.”

Fitzgerald: “Yeah.”

Bowe: “So…so it is bridged until we can pay you back…which is never.” (Both laugh)

Then they joke how the regulators would need to change their underpants after hearing the terms of that deal.

Bowe: ”So under the terms that say repayment, we say; ‘No…’” (laughter)

Fitzgerald: (Laughing) “None…just none. Not applicable. OK and what did he say? ‘I need a change of underwear?’

Fitzgerald: “Jesus that’s a lot of dosh…Jesus f—–g hell and God…well do you know the Central Bank only has €14 billion of total investments so that would be going up 20…Gee..that would be seen.

Bowe: (Laughing) “There was a bit of that…there was a bit of that.  ’And how would we do that? We would need to give you…we need to…’Jesus you’re kind of asking us to play ducks and drakes with the regulations.’ And we said: ‘Yeah.’ We said: ‘Look what we are telling you is if we get into difficulties, we have 100,000 plus lump sum depositors in Ireland all of whom would be very vocal.’”

Fitzgerald asks Bowe how he came up with the 7 billion figure.  Bowe responds that like then-CEO David Drumm, he picked it out of his “arse.”

Fitzgerald: “Ah we are, yeah, yeah and, em, what, how did you arrive at the seven?

Bowe: “Just, as Drummer would say, ‘picked it out of my arse’, you know. Em…I mean, look, what we did was we basically said: ‘What is the amount we can securitize over the next six months?’ And basically say to them: ‘Look our problem is time, it’s not our ability to create the liquidity, the enemy is time here.’”

Fitzgerald: “Yeah.”

Bowe: “So we can rebuild, in other words, we can rebuild the liquidity off our loan book, but what we can’t do, we can’t do it now and the balance sheet’s leaking now.”

Bowe tells Fitzgerald that they actually need more money than the 7 billion figure.

Bowe: Yeah and that number is seven, but the reality is that actually we need more than that. But the strategy here is you pull them in, you get them to write a big [check] and they have to keep, they have to support their money, you know.”

Fitzgerald: “Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. They’ve got skin in the game and that’s the key.”

Bowe: “They have and they have invested a lot. If they saw, if they saw, the enormity of it up front, they might decide, they might decide they have a choice. You know what I mean? They might say the cost to the taxpayer is too high. But…em…if it doesn’t look too big at the outset…if it looks big, big enough to be important, but not too big that it kind of spoils everything,

Fitzgerald: “Yeah, Yeah.”

….

The actual audio recording is available at the link.

UPDATE:

Good to see the mainstream media picking up this story. From The Australian:

IRISH government ministers have been accused of turning a blind eye to the country’s financial collapse after tapes emerged of top bankers joking about bailouts.

In a set of phone calls recorded five years ago, executives at the toxic Anglo Irish Bank laugh about abusing a blanket bank guarantee to beef up the books at the expense of the UK and Germany.

One conversation – taped two days after the fateful September 30 2008 bank guarantee, and published by the Irish Independent – features former chief executive David Drumm giggling while his colleague John Bowe recites lines from Deutschland Uber Alles.

Drumm, who has since fled to the US, and Bowe are heard laughing about concerns that the guarantee would drive a wedge between Ireland and its EU partners.

The former said he would give “two fingers” to UK concerns…

Drumm and Bowe laugh about damage being done to Ireland’s reputation and concerns of flight of deposits out of Britain.

“So f***in’ what. Just take it anyway… stick the fingers up,” Drumm said about cash flowing in from Europe.

The bankers, recorded in January 2009, sound delighted with the temporary financial windfall, saying it was “fantastic” that if Anglo was nationalised they would keep their jobs and become civil servants.

Ah yes, a common dream of parasites everywhere.

To be a highly-paid, job-guaranteed, Big Government “employee”. A “public servant”.

Like politicians.

%d bloggers like this: