• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

The Municipal United States Government has continued to defraud Americans and racketeer against them in criminal violation of their Constitutional obl

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
#81
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
21
Likes
10
#83
"the United States is not The United States of America. United States is a Corporation. A resident is a person staying someplace temporarily to do business.
The 14th was never ratified. An Arizona Supreme Court Justice wrote a book about that. It is called "The Non-Ratification of the 14th Amendment".
Additionally, your theory of "collective sovereignty" makes no sense at all. A hundred men, none of whom have any individual sovereignty or authority over their fellows decide to gather together and name their group as some sort of entity. They get other men to "vote" for them and create "The State of Whatever Legislature". Suddenly they have authority that they did not have before--- as if by magic. Explain for our reading audience how that works .
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#84
Yep.
Mike Malony is a hero.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE88E9ICdipidHkTehs1VbFzgwrq1jkUJ

They are all excellent, but Episode 4 is a real mind-blow; the inner workings of the Fed.
I don't know if he has changed his tune, but he used to get one big thing wrong.

He is one among many who believe they did not create enough money to pay the interest.
Which means he doesn't understand the difference between spending money and money creation/destruction.
Spending a dollar does not make it disappear. One dollar can be spent a million (x times) times or do the work of 1 million dollars created.
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#86

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#87
I don't know what you are talking about and it is irrelevant to his explanation of the Fed.
Ok, I listened and he is still off base on this one item.

I agree it is a very good presentation, but if he does not understand the basics, I'm going to take what he says with a grain of salt. I really like his insistence of calling it currency and not money.


He does not see that the people who get paid the interest also spend that interest. Therefor the money to pay the interest is returned to the system where it can be earned again. The same currency spent at least 3 times in my little example here.
 
Last edited:

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
#88
Spending a dollar does not make it disappear.
That seems a mis-characterization of what Maloney actually said, though I've not watched his videos on the history of money in some while.

...as I recall he said something along the lines of currency being destroyed when the debt that created them was extinguished. Clearly that's different than simply "spending" the currency. It's a nuance...yes, but an important distinction.

1581258227066.png


"Whether you're making a payment on a loan, or paying tax, to make a payment on a bond...the portion of the payment that goes to pay off the principle extinguishes that portion of the debt, but the debt also extinguishes the currency." ~Mike Maloney

This section begins right around the 14 min mark. Yes it's a nuanced argument and it may be a generalization, but is it strictly wrong? ...not from what I've seen. Bank credit conjured from thin air is quite literally debt, so it stands to reason that it is both simultaneously an asset and a liability...and could therefore be extinguished upon repayment of the principle that created it.

1581258490564.png


...and yes I agree that currency(including bank credit) can and is circulated multiple times throughout the economy...the fed calls this the velocity of "money", yet that has little to do with how currency is created or destroyed. In that role currency(debt money) is simply acting as a unit of account.
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#89
He totally ignores multiple spending of money. His example is childish version of what really happens he stacks up all the money created and all the debt owed and then subtracts the created from the owed while totally ignoring multiple spending.

It is pretty simple, just take an amortization table to see how it really works. The principal portion of the payment erases the that portion of the debt and the interest portion is returned to the economy by bankster spending.

After the bankster spends his interest portion the total amount of money in the system for that one loan is equal to your total debt.

Rinse and repeat every payment period.

Just look at one loan, not the whole economy. It works perfectly.

No new money has to be borrowed to make the loan payment system work.

The major amount of money in the system is an asset carried on the banks books and the debt owed by the public.

He says the system can't work. Please explain why it can't work?

Looks pretty simple to me.
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#90
As a side note, I smell a rat.

This version of they can't pay the debt because the system does not have enough money looks like an explanation they want us to believe.

All the econ people ever talk about is the debt. They never talk about the corresponding credit. They should always be equal.

If they can convince the public that all that is left in the system is debt, they get to keep all the credit they don't want us to see. They want us to believe all the credit went poof and it will go poof into their vaults.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
#91
What you're essentially saying is that US bank credit issued from private banks is not debt. ...and that's incorrect.

Forget spending. That's not what he said. He was very specific in what he said...and you seem focused on a graphic instead of his words spoken while standing in front of said graphic...a graphic btw labeled DEBT, not SPENDING. I even quoted the relevant section word for word and bolded it. Can you address the quote?
No new money has to be borrowed to make the system work.
That would be true ONLY if debt were never extinguished, and in so doing the currency used to extinguish such debt did not itself get extinguished.

The US "monetary" system operates on a system of debt greater than previous debt. This is necessary because currency is being extinguished as previous debt is retired.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
#92
Currently the broadest measure of currency in the fake economy...since M3 was eliminated many years prior.
The broader M2 component includes M1 in addition to saving deposits, certificates of deposit (less than $100,000), and money market deposits for individuals. Comparing the velocities of M1 and M2 provides some insight into how quickly the economy is spending and how quickly it is saving.
1581264922475.png


...and the velocity of M2:

1581265089639.png


What is it, do you suppose, that's killing M2 velocity?
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#93
What you're essentially saying is that US bank credit issued from private banks is not debt. ...and that's incorrect.

Forget spending. That's not what he said. He was very specific in what he said...and you seem focused on a graphic instead of his words spoken while standing in front of said graphic...a graphic btw labeled DEBT, not SPENDING. I even quoted the relevant section word for word and bolded it. Can you address the quote?

That would be true ONLY if debt were never extinguished, and in so doing the currency used to extinguish such debt did not itself get extinguished.

The US "monetary" system operates on a system of debt greater than previous debt. This is necessary because currency is being extinguished as previous debt is retired.
Our money is hypothicated debt, where the bank carry's on its books debits and credits, those debits and credit are a mirror image of the publics books.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
#94
Our money is hypothicated debt
...and if our "money"(bank credit) is hypothecated debt(simultaneously an asset AND a liability) then doesn't it stand to reason that said debt "money" would disappear with the debt that created it? Isn't that precisely what Mike Maloney said? ...and if that's true then how is this also true?
No new money has to be borrowed to make the system work.
It could be modified to say "No new money has to be borrowed to make the system work...FOR AWHILE, but eventually liquidity would run dry as debt is extinguished through default or repayment."
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#95
...and if our "money"(bank credit) is hypothecated debt(simultaneously an asset AND a liability) then doesn't it stand to reason that said debt "money" would disappear with the debt that created it? Isn't that precisely what Mike Maloney said? ...and if that's true then how is this also true?

It could be modified to say "No new money has to be borrowed to make the system work...FOR AWHILE, but eventually liquidity would run dry as debt is extinguished through default or repayment."
If there is only 1 loan, then there will be no money , except the base money. True.



When you look at the economy as a whole there are many loans and a lot of money and a lot of different time periods for the system to work.

Just looking at 1 loan shows how simple it is.

No new money is necessary to pay off that one loan. All the money to pay it off is in the original loan amount.
 
Last edited:

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
#96
So again...why is M2 velocity falling like a rock? M2 supply is going gangbusters, so what is happening? Why does the fed have to keep intervening to dump liquidity into a system that allegedly works without new debt? Why does the federal regime take over new debt sources, like health care, student loans, home mortgage, car loans, etc?

Could it be that they need the peasants to keep generating new debt to keep their fake monetary system afloat?

Why do we need NIRP/ZIRP policies? Why is the "price of money"(interest rates) always massaged downward by the fed?
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#97
So again...why is M2 velocity falling like a rock? M2 supply is going gangbusters, so what is happening? Why does the fed have to keep intervening to dump liquidity into a system that allegedly works without new debt? Why does the federal regime take over new debt sources, like health care, student loans, home mortgage, car loans, etc?

Could it be that they need the peasants to keep generating new debt to keep their fake monetary system afloat?

Why do we need NIRP/ZIRP policies? Why is the "price of money"(interest rates) always massaged downward by the fed?
I don't have an answer for you. I don't know, but I do know my example of 1 loan works perfectly.
After the banker spends his interest portion the amount of money for that loan is equal to your outstanding loan balance.

Maybe the banksters are up to some tricks? Maybe they are siphoning off money to Greater Israel? Never audited? What could go wrong?
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
#98
Maybe the banksters are up to some tricks?
Goes without saying...they're banksters. They may or may not be as scummy as lieyers, but they're nearly always up to mischief.

Just the same, this economic system will eventually collapse under its own weight. This is guaranteed. It's a system reliant upon debt greater than previous debt and the law of big numbers makes it harder and harder to sustain over time...and THAT'S why the US federal regime and FRBNY are behaving increasingly desperate the past 20 years. They took interest rates off the floor...merely to have more ammo to lower them again. They NEED people to borrow. They need people to generate debt. Therefore it stands to reason that if Amerikans stop generating debt the system will collapse.

When in 2008 bankster maggots nearer the top of the food chain than the bottom are desperately phoning their wives to have them exchange every last bankster credit fraud for cotton rectangles with green pictures on them...they do so because they know something is wrong in Denmark. Banks cannot survive waves of people exchanging their bankster credits for FRNs.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
#99
Goes without saying...they're banksters. They may or may not be as scummy as lieyers, but they're nearly always up to mischief.

Just the same, this economic system will eventually collapse under its own weight. This is guaranteed. It's a system reliant upon debt greater than previous debt and the law of big numbers makes it harder and harder to sustain over time...and THAT'S why the US federal regime and FRBNY are behaving increasingly desperate the past 20 years. They took interest rates off the floor...merely to have more ammo to lower them again. They NEED people to borrow. They need people to generate debt. Therefore it stands to reason that if Amerikans stop generating debt the system will collapse.

When in 2008 bankster maggots nearer the top of the food chain than the bottom are desperately phoning their wives to have them exchange every last bankster credit fraud for cotton rectangles with green pictures on them...they do so because they know something is wrong in Denmark. Banks cannot survive waves of people exchanging their bankster credits for FRNs.
The only reason for debt to increase is they have to keep the inflation pumps primed. Remember it's hypothicated debt, where the debits equal the credits.
And it seems they want us to believe all the credits are gone with only the debits left. Pull the wool over my eyes you bankster deciever.

I think one big reason for their need to put more money into the system is no one is buying our US Bonds anymore, so the Fed is buying them under the table so to speak.

And they killed our real economy by exporting all our industry to China. Now our only engines are welfare, war and financials.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,357
Likes
9,180
Debt increases when little people borrow though. The peasants themselves are increasing the "money" supply and therefore inflation...which leads to price inflation and the people erroneously believing prices go up naturally. What is actually happening is the "dollar" is becoming increasingly worth-less causing the appearance of higher prices. In response the little people demand government forces employers to increase minimum wage...which results in lots of people being unemployed.

The lack of understanding is terrifying, and the predators at the top perpetuating this immoral carnage are hardly incentivized to educate the unwashed masses. Mike Maloney as much as anyone is at least opening eyes to the mass fraud being perpetrated.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
That seems a mis-characterization of what Maloney actually said, though I've not watched his videos on the history of money in some while.

...as I recall he said something along the lines of currency being destroyed when the debt that created them was extinguished. Clearly that's different than simply "spending" the currency. It's a nuance...yes, but an important distinction.

View attachment 153863

"Whether you're making a payment on a loan, or paying tax, to make a payment on a bond...the portion of the payment that goes to pay off the principle extinguishes that portion of the debt, but the debt also extinguishes the currency." ~Mike Maloney

This section begins right around the 14 min mark. Yes it's a nuanced argument and it may be a generalization, but is it strictly wrong? ...not from what I've seen. Bank credit conjured from thin air is quite literally debt, so it stands to reason that it is both simultaneously an asset and a liability...and could therefore be extinguished upon repayment of the principle that created it.

View attachment 153864

...and yes I agree that currency(including bank credit) can and is circulated multiple times throughout the economy...the fed calls this the velocity of "money", yet that has little to do with how currency is created or destroyed. In that role currency(debt money) is simply acting as a unit of account.
"Whether you're making a payment on a loan, or paying tax, to make a payment on a bond...the portion of the payment that goes to pay off the principle extinguishes that portion of the debt, but the debt also extinguishes the currency." ~Mike Maloney

I am in total agreement with his statement here.

Where I differ is his illustration shows just a simple subtraction of the total currency from the total debt. which leaves a pile of debt with no currency to pay for it. That is where he's wrong as the currency is recycled (respent) by bankster spending.

So his premise that there has to be a deflationary collapse is bogus.

Without new loans the money supply will shrink and with no loans only base money will be left.
 
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
21
Likes
10
When you step back and look at a simplified version of the model it is simple and obvious.
Bottom line: when the system is monetized the interest and tax is not created.

Big John and James Osbourne are the only people in the world. They each borrow 100.00. The interest is 20%.
Their borrowing creates 200...nothing more. At term, the debt each of us owes is 220. But there is only 200. That is why collapse is inevitable. No need to consider taxes, that also diminishes the amount John and James have. One of us must get 20 from the other to stay afloat. The other goes down....in flames.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
When you step back and look at a simplified version of the model it is simple and obvious.
Bottom line: when the system is monetized the interest and tax is not created.

Big John and James Osbourne are the only people in the world. They each borrow 100.00. The interest is 20%.
Their borrowing creates 200...nothing more. At term, the debt each of us owes is 220. But there is only 200. That is why collapse is inevitable. No need to consider taxes, that also diminishes the amount John and James have. One of us must get 20 from the other to stay afloat. The other goes down....in flames.
Where did you find a bankster so stupid he ends up getting stiffed out of his interest?

Anyone can design a system that does not work.
That is not how our system is set up. There is a certain amount of base money.

And there are periodic payments which allow you to earn each payment. Each payment would pay 2 in interest and 10 against the principal. Each period the bankster would get his payment and would spend the 2 on a shoeshine you provided. Your labor over time would pay all the interest and the loan. No borrowing needed.
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
That is what you are doing.

You have a belief system and no evidence is accepted.

Real world bankers spend the interest they get.

You have to ignore that, for what you and Mahoney describe, to happen.
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
Describe my "belief system".
When you step back and look at a simplified version of the model it is simple and obvious.
Bottom line: when the system is monetized the interest and tax is not created.

Big John and James Osbourne are the only people in the world. They each borrow 100.00. The interest is 20%.
Their borrowing creates 200...nothing more. At term, the debt each of us owes is 220. But there is only 200. That is why collapse is inevitable. No need to consider taxes, that also diminishes the amount John and James have. One of us must get 20 from the other to stay afloat. The other goes down....in flames.
 
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
21
Likes
10
No---not my "belief system"; accurate relevant description of why the system will fail. It is fraud from the get-go. There is no money as lawfully, legally, and rationally defined; a token for something of value. There is only debt. You cannot acquire title by shifting around debt.
My belief system is metaphysical. My understanding of how business is carried on is knowledge.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
No---not my "belief system"; accurate relevant description of why the system will fail. It is fraud from the get-go. There is no money as lawfully, legally, and rationally defined; a token for something of value. There is only debt. You cannot acquire title by shifting around debt.
My belief system is metaphysical. My understanding of how business is carried on is knowledge.
We were talking about apples and now you want to talk about oranges. OK, you want to shift the discussion to metaphysical. I agree that gold is money and paper is it's claim check, but exchanging gold and paying in gold with interest works the same way.

Knowledge does not ignore the fact that banker's create the money to pay the interest by recycling (spending) the currency paid on each loan installment.

Bottom line: when the system is monetized the interest and tax is not created.

Those are your own words. Do you now disavow them?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
21
Likes
10
No. Are they incorrect?
Why TF are you making such a big attempt to disavow this well-known fact? The banking system and the 'government" of this nation is a massive criminal fraud. Your nit-picking only demonstrates that you have no ammunition, so you are tossing pebbles at me, expecting some sort of angry response. OK...here it is: Fuck you, the horse you rode in on, and your little dog too.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
21
Likes
10
The Treasurer of the foreign owned corporation, UNITED STATES, Steven Mnuchin receives his paycheck from the IMF. What more do we need to know to understand we are in very deep doo-doo.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
No. Are they incorrect?
WTF are you making such a big deal out of this trivia. The banking system and the 'government" of this nation is a massive criminal fraud. Your nit-picking only demonstrates that you have no ammunition, so you are tossing pebbles at me, expecting some sort of angry defense. Fuck you, the horse you rode in on, and your little dog too.
Wow, You are staring at incorrect and can't see it.

You are one blind motherf'r.

It is so simple, the money to pay the interest, is just recycled money from the initial loan, made possible by bankers spending the interest recieved.

Math is not your strong suit, I think you should stick with the ignorance you so proudly display.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
Again; you may think as you choose. So may I.
200-240=-40, even if you stick the FRNs up a Allen Greenspan's ass.
Don't go into banking, you will lose everything on your first loan.

It is the structure of multiple payments that allows the recycling of the interest money.

Seems to be way too complicated for you to understand?
 
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
21
Likes
10
Sure...recycling interest creates funds that do not exist. Tell that to the same people who believe that the Federal Reserve is part of the government, and you will get an audience. Do not anticipate a response from me in the future. I might occasionally, just to fuck with you, but otherwise I have more useful matters to attend.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
Sure...recycling interest creates funds that do not exist. Tell that to the same people who believe that the Federal Reserve is part of the government, and you will get an audience. Do not anticipate a response from me in the future. I might occasionally, just to fuck with you, but otherwise I have more useful matters to attend.
Well then how about if we use gold?

Works the same as paper money, the portion of the gold that the banker receives for the interest, he spends, making it available to be earned again to pay the next installment.

If you really want this to end, please stop responding.

Until then I eagerly await to hear more ignorance and a willingness to talk about anything else.

What does the Ownership of the Fed have to do with your belief that there is not enough money to pay the interest?
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,386
Likes
3,092
tollendo tollens

Also has nothing to do with being dead wrong about how banking and money work.

Mahoney's model for paying the interest only allows for spending each unit of currency ONE time.

His model is so badly flawed it's a joke.
 
Last edited: