Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: We are creating a new banking system that will belong to the people!

Posted 9 years ago on Feb. 15, 2012, 11:45 a.m. EST by Ronald (0) from Натли, NJ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs -Thomas Jefferson (3rd president of US)

We are creating a new banking system that will belong to the people. Money will be fully and completely owned by the people and will work for the benefit of the people.
url: http://strongcurrency.org



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by HitGirl (2263) 9 years ago

It's what they fear most.

[-] -2 points by PretendHitGirI (13) 9 years ago

Not really, what "they" fear the very most is the majority of Americans realizing that the American Dream is nothing more than an illusion of which it's pursuit, is futile.

As clearly evidenced by the polarizing fools here, mostly stemming from anti-dem or anti-repub rhetoric, "they" already know that smokescreen has quite a few more miles left.

To think "they" are concerned about all these divided people forming any type of financial union to escape their tyranny? Preposterous and wishful dreaming at best!

[-] 2 points by Faithntruth (997) 9 years ago

People have valid reasons for the political parties they chose. Some people dont think much about it, but that is their right--they still get to vote. I could never vote republican because of their anti people anti environment policies, social conservatism that wants to dictate how people live, and how they want to force their religious dogma into our lives. They will never vote democrat because they percieve it as weak, anti religion, and fiscally irresponsible. Whilr theese may be wedge issues, they are still very real issues about how our society is goverened, what our social priorities and responsibilities are, and what role both government and business have. Add to that attitudes toward international policies and economic interactions and you have very very different groups that have some small areas of overlap.

I am pro choice and pro guns, pro environment and pro death penalty for those who take lives, or molest children, pro regulations on business and pro small business grants, anti fda and anti corporate welfare, pro taxes but anti tax loopholes, anti lobbyist and pac interference and anti term limits because they both interfere with what the people want. Classify me... I think i lean pretty hard left, but i sure have some right leaning ideas. Third parties offer more choices, but they also serve to divide one side more than the other, and i dont want my side divided. I want candidates who realize they represent everyone, even those who voted against them. I want politicians who can compromise instead of using their position to make sure one guy is not reelected. I want politicians who put the good of the country ahead of party ideology.

[-] -1 points by PretendHitGirI (13) 9 years ago

Well your list kinda leaves you right up shits creek without a paddle, ya reckon?

[-] 1 points by Faithntruth (997) 9 years ago

Nope... Like everyone else I have to play the hand thats dealt.... And organizing into groups that can make themselves heard and change the status quo is a way to draw a new card and change the play. But we have to have conversation or we might as well all fold.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 9 years ago

You're wrong.

[-] -2 points by PretendHitGirI (13) 9 years ago

Nope, not at all. However, you are wrong and I'm enjoying watching you wingers fighting that there really may be something to Ron PauI's message. Yeah, the money system has been badly fawked for 100 years, taking an even worse turn in 1933 and then in the mid 60's.

Sure, form a bank, "they" are scared shitless. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[-] 2 points by HitGirl (2263) 9 years ago

One might argue that Ron Paul is kind of a loser.

[-] 0 points by PretendHitGirI (13) 9 years ago

Many should see that Obama and the rest are only in it for themselves and the fiat money. You people don't want change, you merely want a few slight adjustments.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 9 years ago

Maybe we're just being realistic.

[-] 0 points by PretendHitGirI (13) 9 years ago

Compromise in the face of evil and corruption and you are not better, only inducted.

[-] 1 points by bobjr508atyahoocom (22) from Nantucket, MA 9 years ago

I not only support this but would love to make a suggestion... instead of putting the faces of presidents on the money(i.e. andrew jackson-who owned, whipped, beat and raped slaves. then he really fucked the indians.) can we instead somehow acknowledge the contributions of lets say.....howard zinn, george washington carver, frederick douglass etc. then theres the pyramid (scheme) on the other side.....you get the idea....thanks.

[-] 1 points by NewlyEconGradurate (4) 9 years ago

The link sounds more like some Bernard Madoff nonsense for 2 reasons. They have no way of creating money, and the system can be easily exploited.

"Magic money" from savings banks, they are created as "loans" and therefore obligated to "pay back" to fill the hole. "Magic money" from the Federal Reserve are created by printing US Dollar that this system still runs on (on actual paper or virtual). This proposed system by contrast, has no way of generating new revenue except from more people "promise to pay", so it is a pyramid scheme that collapses the moment the imbalance became obvious to the participants.

Second, this system cannot enforce the promises. Therefore it encourages promises huge amount of money you never intend to give out, take as much money each month as possible, and opt out when someone ask you for your cash.

[-] 1 points by shield (222) 9 years ago

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation..."

It is a common misconception that "private" banks are the source of the problems of inflation, deflation, etc. It is monopolistic currency that is the problem. There is nothing to prevent a government (public, lol) bank from perpetrating the same crimes.

The only solution that I see to the "money problem" is to abolish the idea of someone having the legitimate authority to establish a coercive monopoly on currency. If anyone was able to produce their own currency, so long as they backed it with goods held in reserve and published their reserve holdings, it would allow a money system to come into being which was backed by wealth, rather than imagination.

As far as I can tell, the link you posted performs the same "money out of nowhere!" magic trick as the Federal Reserve. It makes no difference that we don't call their bank the Federal Reserve because it operates on the same detrimental premise. First of all, the credit in your account is backed by Federal Reserve Notes pledged (not even deposited!!!!) to the bank (0.o facepalm). In other words, you essentially pledge $10, someone else pledges $10, etc. Let's use their number and imagine 1 million people do this. That's $10 million pledged to the bank, ready to be actually transferred to the bank when requested. Your "account" grows at 5% per month. Here is the problem. After the first month, there is $12 million in everyone's account backed by $10 million in real Federal Reserve Notes. It grows from there.

Am I understanding this correctly? cite from here if I am not: http://strongcurrency.org/more.php

[-] 1 points by NewlyEconGradurate (4) 9 years ago

While private banks does affect inflation and deflation in many ways (include collapse of the economy), private banks does not affect inflation or deflation through creating money. A finite amount of "I owe you" (money) is created each time a loan is established. Because a % must be reserved, the loaning process will eventually reach 0. This is the money multiplier.

Fed have full control on the maximum amount of currency floating around through money multiplier effect. So for example, a 10% reserve rate = maximum of 10 times the money supply originally issued by the fed (though in the real world it's more like 2 times). The Fed is fully aware of the current multiplier effect and therefore have near full control over the total money supply in circulation (and various ways to increase/decrease them).

As for "anyone can produce currency", well actually everyone can. A pharmacy like CVS can have their own $10 gift card and that's essentially currency for their store. Chuck E. Cheese can have their own tokens for their machines. In both cases their currency are back by the products they have, but that alone is not enough for anyone to take it as an universal currency. Would you take a CVS gift card for money? Would anyone else? The Feds money is just accepted universally because it is backed by the US government and it's military/police, which is a lot more reassuring than the boxes of Shampoos in CVS.

[-] 0 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 9 years ago

Subvert Big Money, subvert Wall Street.


[-] 0 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 9 years ago

Are you kidding with this?