[BBC News] Celebrity and the threat of bankruptcy

[hillards]

Interesting article about Celebs going bust, but includes this gem:

 

This debt management sector was the subject of a damning report by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in September which concluded that some of these firms are posing as charities and are driven by a sales culture.

 

The OFT found cases of misleading advertising, poor debt advice, and up-front charges.

 

Earlier this week, it withdrew a licence to offer credit from the Compensation Professionals Network (CPN), based in Basingstoke.

 

The regulator discovered that CPN had been sending automated messages without consent, implied that calls were being made on behalf of the government, claimed that it was able to write off consumer debts and claimed the services were free

 

How come this only makes the 'headline news' as part of another story?

[charlie*]

You might also ask, how come the government goes along with all this debt and actually does nothing to help anyone.

 

It is well able to instruct the Chancellor to order HM Treasury to print and issue as much money INTEREST FREE as the country needs to take the people out of debt.

 

There is NO law of any kind that would prevent Cameron from doing this.

 

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/2010/09/douglas-carswell

[dadofholly]

Hi Charlie

 

Notice that you are also a campaigner for monetary reform.

 

I did read somewhere that there is an EU law that prevents us from printing money to help the economy - but have not found it as yet despite researching.

 

I should imagine that like me, you are getting more and more angry with all this deficit talk on the news lately.

 

especially as we know that all this "debt" was created by banks as credit - just by adding figures into computers - AND at a rate of interest.

 

So now we as Tax payers are being screwed to pay back "Money" that did not - does not - and will never exist.

 

It is going to take a lot of work to inform people of the true nature of the banking industry - not even most politicians know how the banks create credit out of nothing.

The whole banking system is insane.

 

Best summed up by Josiah Stamp (1880-1941) President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain at the time.

 

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take away from them the power to create money and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money."

 

The second reading of Douglas Carswells Bill is due for it's second reading in parliament soon - lets hope it gets some support.

[victoria_siempre]

Hi charlie

 

The coalition is doing this; it's called Quantitative Easing (QE).

 

1. Banks buy gov debt as bills and bonds with money they haven't got. This finances the budget deficit.

 

2. Bank of England 'prints' money and buys its own debt back from banks.

 

3. Banks now have newly created 'cash' to put on balance sheet and can expand their lending activities.

 

This works for a while put tends to cause inflation.

 

Inflation has the side benefit of devaluing the national currency (unless you're in the Euro) so effectively devaluing the debt you owe to foreigners; this is why the USA likes it, because QE is 'monetizing' (reducing the real value) of its debt to China etc.

 

I'm not saying that this is good or bad, just that itis.

 

best wishes

 

vic

[dadofholly]

Hi charlie

 

The coalition is doing this; it's called Quantitative Easing (QE).

 

The Coalition is not doing this - Gordon Brown done this to try and get banks lending again = (same problem money created as debt)

 

1. Banks buy gov debt as bills and bonds with money they haven't got. This finances the budget deficit.

 

This actually causes the deficit - and at interest. In the words of Thomas Eddison

 

"If the Nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill.The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets the money broker collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20%.Whereas the currency, the honest sort provided by the Constitution pays nobody but those who contribute in some useful way. It is absurd to say our Country can issue bonds and cannot issue currency. Both are promises to pay, but one fattens the usurer and the other helps the People."

 

2. Bank of England 'prints' money and buys its own debt back from banks.

 

The Bank no longer "prints Money "- it raises it (takes it) from us in th form of cuts and increased taxes - also why not just print the money to begin with - debt free - and cut out the banks?

 

3. Banks now have newly created 'cash' to put on balance sheet and can expand their lending activities.

 

Banks create Money as soon as they make a loan - this is added to their balance sheet as an assett. As stated by Mervyn King at the TUC conference when he applogised for the fact.

 

Once this "number Money" ends up in another bank - the new bank also adds it to its balance sheet and can then lend out a factor of of £9 that does not exist to £1 that does - hence Douglas Carswells 10 minute rule bill now going through parliament.

 

This works for a while put tends to cause inflation.

 

 

Allowing commercial banks to create the nation’s money supply has led to incredible inflation. Since 1950, prices have risen by 2,554%. A product that cost £1 in 1950 will now cost £25.54; put another way, £1 in 2009 is only worth as much as 4 pennies from 1950.

 

Even these figures may understate the real extent of inflation, as the official inflation figures do not take account of the largest item in anyone’s expenditure: housing. Between 1952 and 2010, house prices have risen by 8,613%.

 

This inflation is not a ‘fact of life’ - it is a result of allowing banks to create all money as debt. Firstly, there is a ‘cost-push’ effect on inflation: since all money is created as debt, then in order to have a money supply in the economy, individuals and companies must share the debt. In order to get out of debt or even just to pay the interest on ever-expanding debt, workers will always need to demand higher salaries, and companies will always try to increase prices by a little each year.

 

Secondly, there is the ‘demand-pull’ effect: as banks create as much money as they can in order to maximise their profits, this creates a debt-fuelled spending boom in the high street where businesses take advantage of the buoyant economy to raise their prices. In the case of housing, lax lending policies by the banks meant that people could borrow more and therefore ended up paying more, even though the houses were no bigger or of better quality. Uncontrolled creation of money by profit-seeking banks is the main cause of inflation.

 

Inflation has the side benefit of devaluing the national currency (unless you're in the Euro) so effectively devaluing the debt you owe to foreigners; this is why the USA likes it, because QE is 'monetizing' (reducing the real value) of its debt to China etc.

 

 

All good economic theory - as taught in most uni's - but it does not take into account that the money supply is created by private banks - as debt.

Also as previously stated the government is not carrying out QE - QE is inflating the money supply - the coalition by taking out are deflating the money supply. = less money in the econonmy = recession.

 

I'm not saying that this is good or bad, just that itis.

 

The thing is Victoria should we continue to allow this?

 

Should the Money supply not be created debt free by our government - instead of out of thin air by private banks at interest?

 

As Henry Ford said - It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.

 

 

Here is a couple of good sites to visit to research this proposed alternative. Hope you find it interesting.

 

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

 

 

http://prosperityuk.com/

 

 

and a good article on how this has been done before by abraham lincoln - austria and in this article guernsey.

 

 

http://goldnews.bullionvault.com/guersney_experiment_credit_creation_gold_standard_051920083

 

 

 

Edited November 5, 2010 by dadofholly

[charlie*]

I appreciate all you say Victoria, but like everyone else bar a few, dadofholly and myself being two of a number of fast growing movements between here and the west coast of America ancl Canada, you are trying to excuse and fix a monetary system that is not fit for purpose any longer - it's a classic pyramid and like all pyramids it needs constantly feeding or it will collapse.... when the last of the wild countries has been drawn into the net of accepting so called democracy BY FORCE - (I call it democratic totalitarianism) and debt, the pyramid will collapse..... like all pyramids, the latest being the Old Age Pension, when they cannot be fed, they collapse.

 

I believe that by subjugating the Afghans and by forcing democracy upon them together with slavery worse than the slavery of 200 years ago, DEBT SLAVERY, then the world moves closer to monetary collapse.... even now, there are those supporting a single worldwide currency - they are naive, poor souls for in truth, they are supporting a single worldwide government with a single world bank sitting on top. I won't speculate who sits on top of the bank, pulling the strings, might land me in trouble

 

I would urge everyone to get their blasted heads out of the sand and wake up to the reality of our situation... in my view, the prognosis is far worse than 1939. At that time we were able to defeat evil, the greater evil is still here, biding its time.

 

Once the net has closed all around the world, there will be no escape, ever.

 

In 1939 this country had pride and it bred men with a capital M.... our local bike shop is owned and run to this day by one such man... all of FIVE FEET tall, he was nevertheless on the end of a parachute the day the Arnhem campaign started... now all they seem do is watch football on telly and other mind and muscle shrinking activities.

 

Some time ago one of the Rockerfellas was heard to say on US tele (I saw the UTube video) that the answer to the global population problem, when they had the power was to dispose of a couple of billion. I believe also, the Rockerfellas are also shareholders in the Federal Reserve Bank - I think they were at the Jekyll Island meeting too.

 

It suits the EU to make laws that protect their own interests... we, the British people, in the spirit of my hero, W S Churchill (who actually spoke to me once) should tell 'em go swivel.

 

So there you go, who knows, BUT there are signs there for those who look that all is not well, that 'things that go bang in the night' are moving round.

Edited November 5, 2010 by charlie*

[charlie*]

Penny to a pound DAD... there are people who will say, 'ah, but that's America, no, that doesn't happen here'.

 

99.99999% of the people do not realise that the true centre of global evil throughout the last 300 years has not been Berlin, or Moscow or anywhere else except right here inside our own country, indeed, in the EC part of our own capital London - just over Blackfriars Bridge at the bottom of Fleet Street, up Ludgate Hill and on into the Square Mile... the City of London.

 

It was here it all started - they took English Commercial/Maritime law and money to the four English speaking countries... America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand - and then there's the Inns of Court to back them up... and you know what Shakespeare said? .... he said '... the first thing to do is kill all the lawyers'. The American Bar is franchised to one of the Inns of Court - there's far more to our 'special relationship' then people think.

 

The War of Independence was all about this money business - and then, the bankers went from here to America and spread their evil all over the land, culminating in the Jekyll Island Meeting in 1910 which was followed by them taking FULL control of America when Pres Woodrow-Wilson signed, under duress in return for the bankers financing him into the White House in 1913. It is on record that at a later date he said 'I fear I have betrayed my country'.

 

Then there's young Bush - how'd the hell did a half wit like that get in the White House??????

 

And who killed John Kennedy after issuing Presidential Order 00000001 - TO REPEAL THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT and print debt free money for the people.

 

Then there was Abraham Lincoln who printed debt free money for people to pay off their debts.

 

And so it goes on , a saga that no one can believe - those who can tell the truth, dare not - or they've been very handsomely rewarded to keep their mouths shut.

Edited November 5, 2010 by charlie*

[victoria_siempre]

Thanks for the comments guys.

 

It's nice to have an intellectual discussion as a pleasant change from dealing with damn fool DCAs.

 

I'm not an advocate of this system; I merely stating how QE functions.

 

I agree that, were to look back on this system in a couple of hundred years' time, it would appear crazy and unsustainable. But capitalism and banking has only been around for a few hundred years and most accept it as a fact of nature.

 

Without wishing to cause offence, I don't support monetary reform movements because they are utopian (utopia = ideal place) and eutopian (eutopia = no place) although they have a powerful place in the history of English Christain Socialism. They don't offer a mechanism for effecting change; e.g. do I vote for somebody else next time? The socialist model of Uncle Joe didn't fare so well either.

 

I have no answer to this. But global capitalism is what we're stuck with for now, and it's better to understand how it works than not.

 

Three main points:

 

1. Money doesn't exist except as a token; it's a link between the past and the future (Keynes); it's a confidence trick in that it only has value if we believe it does (viz Northern Rock and the dangers of inflation). It's all noughts and ones.

 

2. Of course banks create money; every debt creates a corresponding asset. The controlled creation of money assists economic growth which has been viewed as 'a good thing'.

 

3. The global capitalist system is fragile and unsustainable because it is reliant upon ever increasing industrialisation and growth within finite natural resources. How this will play out, only time will tell.

 

best wishes

 

vic

[sillygirl1]

You only have to read Nicholas Nickleby to see Charles Dicken's hatred of the economy developing, "tuppence for every half-penny lent" is even more true today than it has ever been, in fact with some companies it is more like £1 for every half-penny lent.

[charlie*]

It's what it will lead to Victoria as the system runs out of steam - no suckers left to feed the pyramid.

 

Of course there are loads of conspiracy theories, but we all know that there are those who are

fundementally corrupt and evil..... and I think the banksters won the cup yonks ago... I don't mean the local managers, or even the big white chiefs, I'm talking about those whom Dennis Healey recognised, the real puppet masters whose faces are never seen, they just plan the ups and downs of the economies - especially so they can take profit out - and they can only do this by destroying many of us.

 

Personally, I think Blair has got 3 7's (or is it 6's) on his scalp - not sure about Cameron yet, he doesn't seem to have the guts to keep us safe.

 

Just ranting - not the right place so I'd better be off to Costa's and read the Daily Mail for free

Edited November 5, 2010 by charlie*

[dadofholly]

Victoria

 

It's nice to have an intellectual discussion as a pleasant change from dealing with damn fool DCAs.

 

 

 

You mean you can never have an intellectual discussion with a DCA ?

 

Without wishing to cause offence, I don't support monetary reform movements because they are utopian (utopia = ideal place) and eutopian (eutopia = no place) although they have a powerful place in the history of English Christain Socialism. They don't offer a mechanism for effecting change; e.g. do I vote for somebody else next time? The socialist model of Uncle Joe didn't fare so well either.

 

 

 

No Offence taken But i think you are mixing social reform - as avocated by historical groups such as English Christian Socialists - with monetary reform supported throughout the years by many politicians, bankers and economists - including Keynes - who you quote. And for what its worth i agree with the uncle Joe analogy.

 

The latest people to try and reform banking by introducing a 10 minute rukle bill are

 

Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative)

Steve Baker MP (Conservative)

 

Beofre them there was David Chaytor MP (Labour) and Austin Mitchell MP (Labour) - Mitchell got cross party support for his proposed bill.

 

The Forum for Stable Currencies has been meeting monthly in the House of Lords for a few years now, attracting leading figures from the world of small business and across the political spectrum - and presided over by the pipe-smoking Lord Sudeley, chairman of the Monday Club.

 

David Lloyd George then Liberal prime minister tried much the same thing after having to bale out the banks - (sound familiar) - in 1914.

 

In 1933, the Yale University economist Irving Fisher - who invented inflation indices - proposed that money should no longer be based on debt.

 

And without wishing to labour the point - but i could - Mervyn King - the head of the Bank of England himself said on Oct 25th this year said "Of all the many ways of organising Banking, the worst is the one we have today"

 

I would not call any of the above - and more besides - utopian socialists.

 

I agree that, were to look back on this system in a couple of hundred years' time, it would appear crazy and unsustainable. But capitalism and banking has only been around for a few hundred years and most accept it as a fact of nature.

 

 

I agree - this system is, as you say, Crazy & unsustainable. And you are correct the current system has only been around for a few hundred years since - 1694 in fact.

 

Before that we had the tally stick system that lasted 700 years and was inerest free. In fact some of the first shares ever purchased in the original Bank of England - which was then a private company - were purchased with a tally stick (a piece of wood) - I believe it's still on display in the BOE museum.

 

The current system, or credit cycle, ( I prefer to call it the debt cycle), goes like this.

• increasing debt, then
  
• too much debt, leading to
  
• mortgage defaults, leading to
  
• asset write-downs by the banks
  
• reduced lending
  
• recession
  

This cycle needs to be broken by taking away from private companies - The Banks - the role of creating the money supply.

 

In fact we did stop them in the Banking Charter Act of 1844. Brought in after yet another Banking crisis. This made it illegal for anyone other than the Bank of England to print pound sterling bank notes.

 

However, this law did not make it illegal for banks to create ‘bank deposits’ or ‘number money’ - the numbers in your bank account, and in the bank accounts of any citizen or company in the country.

Originally this number money was simply written into huge ledger books in the bank, but is now stored in huge computer databases maintained by the banks.

 

I have no answer to this. But global capitalism is what we're stuck with for now, and it's better to understand how it works than not.

 

 

 

Hundreds of thousands of people are about to lose their jobs - services are being cut - taxes are rising - benefits are going down - People are going to have their homes reposessed causing all the indignity and stress that goes with it - because they can't pay back money that never existed in the first place - that was invented from nothing - and never will be anything - except now to be the loss of some family home.

 

It's because i understand it that i refuse to be stuck with it.

 

Three main points:

 

1. Money doesn't exist except as a token; it's a link between the past and the future (Keynes); it's a confidence trick in that it only has value if we believe it does (viz Northern Rock and the dangers of inflation). It's all noughts and ones.

 

 

 

You are correct to an extent - Money should be nothing more than a means of exchange for goods and services - Money should be our servant - not our master.

 

2. Of course banks create money; every debt creates a corresponding asset. The controlled creation of money assists economic growth which has been viewed as 'a good thing'.

 

 

 

I would agree that the controlled creation of money should be a good thing for the reasons you state - but created debt free.

 

The problem is the creation of this money is out of control - and at interest. The consequence is that because more money is owed - than exists - then you need more creation of money to carry on - adding more debt - and more interest - meaning that we have to have growth for no other reason that to repay the debts. But repaying the debts would leave us without money - its a mad house.

 

3. The global capitalist system is fragile and unsustainable because it is reliant upon ever increasing industrialisation and growth within finite natural resources. How this will play out, only time will tell.

 

 

VIC

You finish by correctley pointing out exactley what the problem is - i think that you are a monetary reformist - You just dont know it yet.

[coledog]

Subbing - this is getting good.

[charlie*]

You are assuming, not thinking, Victoria... you are not thinking of those people who really are paying the price... would you be so

complacent if your dad had been killed in WW1, WW2 - or Korea or VietNam, Irag or Aghan - for that is the name of the game...

the pyramid needs constantly feeding.

 

Why don't you all go see at these two places... see what they have to say, after all,

THEY are trying to do something

 

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/2010/09/douglas-carswell

 

http://prosperityuk.com/

 

Both are extensive, the prosperity one especially, lots of 'read more'...

 

I think it is cruel to say that this system is best left alone when it has been the major

cause and beneficiary of most conflict since Napoleon.

[victoria_siempre]

Hi both

 

Charlie, I'm not supporting the system or complacent. I was mainly trying to explain QE.

 

Iraq and Afghanistan maybe had something to do with US geo-economic interests and oil.

 

Finance capital is now more powerful than any national government (see what happens when we try mild reforms of the City) except for the USA where it maybe is the government.

 

Even if we had a rational solution (which I can't see at the moment) there is no effective mechanism to implement it.

 

The Bilderberg group would claim 'enlightened self-interest', but global finance capitalism has no collective consciousness. 'The capitalists would sell you the rope by which you would hang them'; these days they'd lend you the money to buy the rope as well.

 

I will read all your various references to understand better monetary reform

 

Best wishes

 

vic

[thewar_man]

The latest people to try and reform banking by introducing a 10 minute rukle bill are

 

Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative)

Steve Baker MP (Conservative)

 

Dadofholly I think reading some of your posts you are indeed a monetary reformist so God bless you. If I'm right in that assumption, I think you'll agree that Douglas Carswells bill doesn't go nearly far enough.

 

Before that we had the tally stick system that lasted 700 years and was inerest free. In fact some of the first shares ever purchased in the original Bank of England - which was then a private company - were purchased with a tally stick (a piece of wood) - I believe it's still on display in the BOE museum.

 

I think you'll find that it is still a private company owned by private shareholders. It just has the illusion of being state controlled although by its own charter most of the important people making the decisions are put there by the various very high ranking banking and industrial families such as the Rothchilds and the Standard Oil interests etc. So even though most people in this country of hours believe the bank is owned by the people this is wrong.

 

The system is completely out of control. The Fed stopped reporting M3 money a couple of years ago because the debt of the US is so massive the only way to hide it is to stop reporting M3.

 

Its an interesting discussion. I've been trying to peel back the layers for a couple of years so I suppose I'm nearly at the end of my newbe status as a monetary reformist. Even so and having spent thousands of hours reading about this and researching it the layers go so deep its extremly hard to get the truth. Not unlike the legal system, which was invented and spread by the banksters.

 

And who killed John Kennedy after issuing Presidential Order 00000001 - TO REPEAL THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT and print debt free money for the people.

 

Then there was Abraham Lincoln who printed debt free money for people to pay off their debts.

 

And so it goes on , a saga that no one can believe - those who can tell the truth, dare not - or they've been very handsomely rewarded to keep their mouths shut.

 

Charlie your dead right.

[dadofholly]

Just an update on recent events.

 

Thewar_man you state that the Bank of England is still a private company - this is not the actual case at this time - but was true up until 1946 when it was nationalised by the Government.

 

It is thought in many circles that the BOE is still private for a couple of reasons - the main one being that the Federal Reserve Bank in America is a private company - and also because the BOE does have shares. However these shares are 100% held by Her Majestys Treasury Department.

 

I know it is suggested otherwise in some conspiracey theories but it is not the case. I personaly do not get involved in debating these theories for one simple reason.

 

If the theories are correct then it is very important that the current Banking system is reformed to stop any "Conspiracey" dead in it's tracks. If the theories are not correct then the Banking System still needs reforming and the current economic conditions add weight to this.

 

The BOE's role in the banking system is explained in some new videos - the link for which can be found at the end of this post.

 

Anyway - to the update i mentioned.

 

Monday 29th November there is a 3 hour debate promoted by Michael Meacher due to take place in Parliament to debate the following.

 

"That this House, concerned that no action has so far been taken which would prevent a recurrence of the financial crash, calls upon the Government to establish a clearing house for approval of all financial derivatives and to set in place alternative mechanisms to remove the implicit taxpayer guarantee, other than to purely deposit-taking banks, in the event of any future banking collapse."

 

There are also a new set of vidoes.

 

If anyone would like to learn how our debt based economy works (or rather dont work) - how the banks profit out of our debts - control the supply of our money - and therefore the economy - here are some new videos.

 

Please note that the vidoes are based around a lecture and are only a first effort - and as such are a little hard going - but these will be condensed - and more profesionaly made - in the near future - i will update the link as and when this happens.

 

Here is the Link.

 

 

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/videos/?utm_source=Positive+Money+Newsletter&utm_campaign=11cbcbc797-PM_Student_Conference_Nov_2010_10_12_2010&utm_medium=email

[thewar_man]

Thanks Dadofholly

 

 

I've seen this site but have not watched the videos I'll make time to watch them. I don't blame you for not debating these issues though. The monetary system is so complexly written and hidden from the general public that its extremely hard to get to the truth. Trying to unwrap the various layers of statutes etc when looking at the legal/banking system and the Law Merchant etc is almost impossible for the average citizen. There are a number of Acts referenced in books written throughout the 20th century (some written in the 1870/80/90's etc) that are not on the Government web site listing acts of parliament ( w w w .opsi . gov. uk/ acts. htm]) and one wonders why? It certainly doesn't help when talking about conspiracies etc.

 

Unfortunately I don't think the conspiracy will ever be stopped dead in its tracks all the time banks can at the push of a button or the stroke of a pen, create money out of thin air! As far as the BOE goes I'm not sure what I believe but I tend to think that its owned by private shareholders with the appearance that its it is owned by the government (should read people but that's not been the case for some time). You right though. There is not point getting into a debate about it because it just wastes our time and efforts when we could be doing something much more constructive like trying to peal away the layers. Consider this though. If the Government owns the BOE then why are we faced with austerity and why are we trillions of £ in debt to international banks and investors? Why when we bailed out most of the British banks and own a percentage of these banks do we owe these banks along trillions of £'s?

 

These are interesting questions but I doubt we will ever get the answers unless there is a fundamental change in the way that we are governed. Whilst political parties can receive donations from big business and promote big business buddies to all the important decision making entities and all the entities that distribute grants, funds and contracts etc things will never change.

 

Sorry to sound so depressing! Again thanks for the link. I'll take time out to study the videos.

 

Nick