Sunday, 30 June 2013

Is it time to call 'Fraud' on media and public servants proven to have been 'making money' for just parroting hand me downs they had no understanding of?

Is it time to call 'Fraud' on the majority of media and public servants proven to have been 'making money' for just parroting 'hand me downs' they had no understanding of ?
Iain Parker June 30 2013

Chris Trotter - New Zealand political commentator - had an article published nationwide by Fairfax Newspapers - June 28 2013 - 
( http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/2013/06/making-money.html?showComment=1372377634650 ) – which proposed – in the main;
“The funny thing about money – given how vital it is to our lives – is that hardly anyone knows anything about how governments create their currencies, and even fewer understand why banks are allowed to ‘make’ money at all. Indeed, a recent British survey revealed that most people assume that a bank’s lending cannot exceed the value of its deposits. The idea that banks can, by means of a simple accounting entry, create hundreds of millions of dollars, tends to be greeted with considerable scepticism.”
end quote

 New Zealand Prime Minister and former international investment banker - John Key -17 November 2012 - said;
“Our (Govt) debt to GDP levels by then will top at just under 30 percent - in other words - um - we'll be relatively lowly indebted compared to countries like America and Europe. But - I put it to you - we are a small open economy. We have high levels of private sector debt. We- mum and dad - have borrowed that debt effectively from foreigners - because their local bank has sourced that from foreigners.”

Chris Trotter has portrayed himself as having a better understanding than most of the internal dynamics of just from where - and what - currently circulates as New Zealand's money supply - and sadly he is correct - but still his article contained many misleading inaccuracies:
Chris Trotter said;
“But the truth of the matter is that only two things in this world “make” money: governments and banks. (If you’re ‘making’ money and you’re NOT one of those two things, then you’re a counterfeiter.)”
end quote

This statement displays a lack of knowledge of the fundamentals of money as a 'system' - as invented and intended - many thousands of years ago. The 'money system' was invented to improve upon barter – or raid - as an easier 'means of distribution' of 'goods or services' if scarce in your realm of influence. 

 A 'money system' is a 'circulatory arterial system' made up of several layers. An accountancy system of 'contracts of credit' for 'future exchange of goods or services'. A 'monetising' of 'natural resource collateral' on the other side of a 'balance sheet' that must 'circulate' in the correct amounts - under the correct pressure - to keep the 'economic body' healthy. 

When size and trust allow it can be 'accounted' in the heads of trading partners as 'memories' only. But when on a larger more complex scale - involving more traders - a 'ledger entry accountancy system' is employed to keep the layers of the system in 'balance' and a 'token of exchange' is agreed upon as a 'go between' transferred to 'clear' - 'contracts of credit' - when the 'physical real trade' is proven complete. 

 At this time - having served the 'productive purpose' for which it was authorised - having allowed the 'production' and 'distribution' of a 'goods' for 'consumption' - or built a 'physical asset' providing an ongoing 'service' - if there is no other 'real' productive purpose for it in the economy - in the interest of keeping the economy healthy - the 'token of exchange' needs to be 'retired from circulation' to maintain 'value' and 'confidence' in the system.

If a trade means immediate swapping of real physical goods or services available without trading partners leaving the line of sight of each other – no 'token of exchange' is required as the 'contract of trade' is immediately 'cleared' by whats clearly 'real' and 'readily available'.

When 'trade' requires a 'delayed clearing' of the 'contract of trade' out of line of sight of a 'trading partner' – a 'contract of credit' is required to be 'cleared' at a later time. It is this 'contract of credit' that is the 'essence of money' of which a physical 'token of exchange'- is agreed upon by trading partners - as a 'go between' - that 'represents' the 'contract of credit' - to be transferred at a later time to 'clear' it - after the delayed 'real physical trade' is 'proven complete'. 'Money' is a 'transfer'-'payment'-'settlement'- 'clearing house'- system.

If a person trades their 'services' for 'tokens of exchange' agreed upon by a wider community to 'represent' and be 'accepted' later as 'payment' to 'clear' other 'contracts of trade' - you have in-fact 'traded' and 'cleared' a 'negotiable contract of credit' within a 'money system'.

Thus 'money' is in-fact 'created' every day - in many forms - outside of governments and banks without being 'counterfeit'.

 Chris Trotter seems to have confused 'counterfeit' with 'fiat'.

'Ponzi counterfeit money system fraud' is when a trading partner - or an administrator of a 'money system' - pursues short-term 'profits' from the soliciting of - or authorisation of - 'contracts of credit' - knowing that the 'clearing' of them was never possible in the normal course of business or within the boundaries of sustainable 'natural collateral'. They have 'made money' which they gained use of first while having no consideration for keeping in balance what is 'fiscally possible' with what is 'physically possible'.

'Fiat' is when a government decrees what form the 'token of exchange' will take - to be - 'lawfully accepted' as 'legal tender' in its boundaries of influence to 'clear' 'contracts of credit'.

The New Zealand Government currently decrees that we surrender the administration of 'our money system' to a foreign international private central banking network to 'issue' entirely as interest bearing loans. The interest and fees the private bankers charge are supposed to add up to fair reward - after running costs - for their acumen in keeping the 'money system' in 'sustainable balance'.

 Despite history being littered with chapter upon chapter of slave-minded selfish monopolist's subverting and perverting the social intent of money as invented - the New Zealand Government swallowed the spin - that these private institutions - if allowed to administer the money system - they would do it for the greater good of humanity and not keep repeating their pyramid scamming crimes.

 Surprise - surprise they did it again. 

 It is the New Zealand Government that are currently far more 'a party to counterfeit fraud' -on a global grand scale never seen before - far in excess of any of its citizens and businesses of legitimate enterprise – who are in-fact being eaten alive by the financial trickery sector it co-ops.

 Chris Trotter said;
“A reasonable policy, you might have thought, in the light of New Zealand’s over-valued dollar and the damage it is doing to the economy. But, no. The Green co-leader’s QE proposal was decried by politicians, journalists, bloggers and bank economists, as tantamount to “printing money”.
end quote

It is not dropping the value of the New Zealand dollar that will alleviate the distress of the average battler – but addressing the ever growing internal and external inequities caused by the entirely interest bearing – private loan based – money supply system – that we currently suffer.

Sadly it was both the Likes of Chris Trotter and Russel Norman's inability to articulate the various forms of 'monetary easing' that have incorrectly seen them all being referred to as 'printing money' - that might have seen a great opportunity missed to educate wider society to the pyramid aspects of the current private money supply system we suffer. 

 Far more born of private bankers 'printing debt' as our money – than would be the government administration of a 'non interest bearing primary money system' of 'sovereign dollars' to fund our 'primary economic base of necessity of life infrastructure' to then be provided as a 'national dividend' as a 'public service' at the 'cheapest possible cost'.

Chris Trotter said;
“Sadly, the cacophony of ill-informed criticism directed at Dr Norman’s QE proposal was sufficient to bring about its withdrawal.
As I watched the Greens back away from their perfectly reasonable and generous plans, I wondered why we have heard no similar outcry against the QE being practised by this country’s Australian-owned banks.
Every month, New Zealand’s privately-owned financial institutions conjure billions of dollars out of thin air in the form of mortgages. No printing presses are required to ‘make’ this money – a computer does the job in a fraction of a second. And, when the mortgage is granted on an existing property, adding nothing to the nation’s stock of material assets, is the effect inflationary?”
end quote

New Zealand banks are not Australian owned. If you go to their annual reports – Shareholding Interests sections - where their 20 largest majority stakeholders are documented – you will inevitably find both New Zealand banks and their so-called Australia parents are in-turn majority stakeholder owned by the same very few private institutions that just happen to be the very same few private institutions who are the international money 'wholesalers' who hold the very few international banking lisences in existence. 

 If you follow the ownership trail to the very end - they in-turn belong to the family trust funds of the worlds ultra-inter-generational-wealth-families.

The internal domestic banks of New Zealand & Australia earn profits by soliciting loans at a higher interest rate than they know they can refinance with at a 'discount' cheaper interest rate with the international 'money wholesalers' – who truly are the institutions - and their owners - as 'market liquidity underwriters' - who can buy into everything below them for nothing – but no body can buy into them – you have to be born into them.

As for the massive increase of money as debt supply of recent decades not showing up in the Consumer Price Index official measure of inflation - despite household debt v expendable income rising from 30% odd to 160% odd over the same period - this below government interaction re the subject makes very clear how the figures were 'doctored' to hide the greedy private banker fueled housing bubble beyond what our economy - or those on the average wage - could ever sustain in the normal coarse of business;
20 February 2012 Deirdre Kent put this Official Information Act question to New Zealand Minister of Statistics;

- Despite the fact that section prices tripled in fifteen years to 2007, land is not now included in the Consumer Price Index. This means that the official measure of inflation is unreliable as it is far lower than the actual figure.

and received this reply;

Today I received a letter back from the Minister of Statistics, Hon Maurice Williamson. I had heard that land went out of the CPI but couldn’t remember when or why so I sent in an Official Information request. The Minister dates the letter 14 Mar 2012 and says;
Dear Ms Kent
Thank you for your letter of 20 February regarding the exclusion of the price of land from the Consumers Price Index (CPI) basket of goods.
I am advised by Statistics New Zealand that land (i.e. residential section) was included in the CPI until the June 1999 quarter. Following a review of the CPI in 1997 land was excluded, taking effect from the September 1999 quarter.
The 1997 review by an external advisory committee confirmed the CPI’s main purpose as being informing monetary policy setting, and that the CPI should be focussed on the concept of acquisition. The reason given for excluding land from the CPI from 1999 was that it was considered to represent the investment component of home ownership (with dwellings representing the shelter component).
The September 1999 quarter CPI information release explained it as follows: A dwelling provides shelter over a long period of time. Over time land is not consumed and so can be considered to represent the investment component of home ownership. As investment expenses are outside the scope of the CPI the rebased CPI excludes expenditure on residential sections.
Information on the sale of land is available from QV (www.qv.co.nz) and the Real Estate Insititute of New Zealand (www.reinz.co.nz).
I trust this information meets your needs and thank you again for taking the time to write.
Yours sincerely
Hon Maurice Williamson
Minister of Statistics.
End quote

I have recently waded my way through the transcripts of the 2013 Budget Debate speeches of the five Members of Parliament spread throughout my Taranaki region – Andrew Little – Johnathan Young - Shane Ardern – Chester Burrows – Tariana Turia – all of whom - if they have any knowledge of the internal dynamics of how New Zealand is currently funded – and the detrimental impact upon every aspect of daily life of every citizen – they sure are not letting on. Most blame the Global Financial Crisis as to why they cant deliver upon election promises and most lashed out at the Green Party's Russel Norman for talking 'voodoo economics' when mentioning having a 'real' conversation about how our nation is 'really' funded.

The exchange between New Zealand Prime Minister John Key and Leader of the Opposition Phil Goff  (November 9 2010) regarding the NZ dollar was very enlightening:
Labour leader Phil Goff earlier reiterated his party’s proposals on monetary policy, saying it should not just be reliant on the current objectives and the current tools.
“Clearly the [NZ] dollar is at such a high level that it’s helping to destroy the manufacturing industry in this country at the moment,” Goff said.
“We have to take that seriously and I would expect the government, with its army of bureaucrats, to have some answers, so far we've seen none,” he said.
John Key later retorted that Goff was talking about "the same army of bureaucrats that worked for Labour when it was in power".

Matt Taibbi - http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog?page=3 - who is now widely acknowledged in international circles as one of the hardest working investigative journalists looking into international financial system corruption – described in a recent speech how he had begun as a political reporter until one day he turned to a fellow Capital Hill reporter and asked if they were 'frauds' for just writing what they were told without knowing if its actually how it works. I would recommend any New Zealand media commentator watch that speech here;
Matt Taibbi 2013 Public Banking Institute Conference Speech (first 30 odd secs are a bit shaky)

and several of his now world renowned articles:
“If true, that would leave us living in an era of undisguised, real-world conspiracy, in which the prices of currencies, commodities like gold and silver, even interest rates and the value of money itself, can be and may already have been dictated from above. And those who are doing it can get away with it. Forget the Illuminati – this is the real thing, and it's no secret. You can stare right at it, anytime you want.”

“I don't often get angered by the things press spokespeople say. Most of these people have difficult jobs and are often forced to be the public faces of policies they had nothing to do with creating.
But in this case, S&P just a few weeks before had sworn before a judge that its reassurances about objectivity, integrity and independence were not legally binding, vague, and so generalized as to be essentially meaningless.

Yet when I contacted this company, they sent me exactly, and I mean exactly, the same reassurances about objectivity, integrity, and independence that they themselves had laughed at as "mere puffery," "vague," and "so generalized that a reasonable investor would not depend" on them.

Then they went on to deride the plaintiffs in their lawsuit for not being smart enough to do their own research and make their own assessments about the meaning of an S&P rating, and the value of its reassurances of independence and integrity. Yet us reporters are apparently still expected to take such assurances at face value, which if my math is correct means that in their eyes, we must be even dumber than the investors in the products they rate. What a bunch of assholes!”
end quote

And of course New Zealand media and public servants if you want to know the truth from a New Zealand perspective – my very own;
http://publiccreditorbust.blogspot.co.nz/2013/04/universal-public-credit-public-policy.html


Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)