Saturday, 12 April 2014

On record official documented impact of global private banking pyramid scam upon New Zealand.

Please take the time to read these on the record official document pdf files and watch these video's that detail the ever increasing inequitable transfer of New Zealand's wealth to only a few white collar criminals. 
New Zealand has had a chronic ongoing historical foreign borrowing balance of payment crisis since 1833. I don't think I can possibly do anymore in the way of official on the record documentation to show the New Zealand citizens and businesses of honest enterprise they are being absolutely scammed and ripped off by foreign bankers that are stealing under false pretences the commonwealth assets and in most cases atleast 50 odd percent of purchasing power from income of New Zealander's.

British colonial-heritage private central banking network funding pathways;

Official Bank of England Central Banking Handbook makes very clear New Zealand's place in the scheme;
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/education/Documents/ccbs/handbooks/pdf/ccbshb06.pdf
International And Local Level Lending Practice Secrecy
Centre For Central Banking Studies Bank of England
Primary Dealers In Government Securities Markets
Handbooks In Central Banking No6 1996
Pg 6-7
PRIMARY DEALERS IN GOVERNMENT
SECURITIES MARKETS

1 General
The basic objective of a government debt manager is to cover the government's borrowing needs as cheaply as possible....There are several ways of trying to achieve this but many OECD countries appoint a group of highly qualified financial firms to play a role as specialist intermediaries in the government securities markets between the authorities on the one hand and the market on the other. These are generally called primary dealers - as for example in. the United States - but they are sometimes referred to simply as market-makers. In the government securities market in the United Kingdom they are known as gilt-edged market-makers (or GEMMS - the term "gilt-edged" is used to describe government securities), while in France they are called specialists in Treasury securities (SVTs). In this Handbook the terms "primary dealer" and "market- maker" are used largely without distinction.
In return for a set of obligations, such as making continuous bid and offer prices in marketable government securities or submitting reasonable bids in the auctions, these firms receive a set of privileges in the market. The nature and content of these obligations and privileges varies greatly from country to country. In some cases there are firms which play the role of primary dealers without formal official recognition but nevertheless with a degree of official encouragement.

2 International practice
Primary dealers have existed for some time, for example in Canada, France, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. These countries all use official recognition as an incentive: it is granted under specific conditions and the "licence" thus created is reviewed from time to time. Ireland has recently introduced this system as appropriate to the stage of development of its market.
By contrast, in Australia, Germany, Japan, Netherlands and New Zealand there are no formally designated primary dealers, although in these countries a group of firms do collaborate in the allocation and proper development of the market in an informal way.
end


A Flaw in the Monetary System - http://vimeo.com/71074210


How the system funds itself;

First of all - the Bank of England is one of the senior most international financial institutions recently made this amazing - amazing historical admission in its March 2014 quarterly bulletin that what they tell government officials about how the private central banking network funds itself has been a lie;
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarterlybulletin/2014/qb14q1prereleasemoneycreation.pdf

• This article explains how the majority of money in the modern economy is created by commercial banks making loans.
• Money creation in practice differs from some popular misconceptions — banks do not act simply as intermediaries, lending out deposits that savers place with them, and nor do they ‘multiply up’ central bank money to create new loans and deposits.
• Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits.
Page 2
Two misconceptions about money creation
The vast majority of money held by the public takes the form of bank deposits. But where the stock of bank deposits comes from is often misunderstood. One common misconception is that banks act simply as intermediaries, lending out the deposits that savers place with them.......Saving does not by itself increase the deposits or ‘funds available’ for banks to lend.

Indeed, viewing banks simply as intermediaries ignores the fact that, in reality in the modern economy, commercial banks are the creators of deposit money. This article explains how, rather than banks lending out deposits that are placed with them, the act of lending creates deposits — the reverse of the sequence typically described in textbooks.(3)
Another common misconception is that the central bank determines the quantity of loans and deposits in the economy by controlling the quantity of central bank money — the so-called ‘money multiplier’.......In reality, neither are reserves a binding constraint on lending, nor does the central bank fix the amount of reserves that are available. As with the relationship between deposits and loans, the relationship between reserves and loans typically operates in the reverse way to that described in some economics textbooks.
end

Banking in New Zealand Fourth Edition - published by the New Zealand Bankers Association in 2006 - makes it very clear that presently every dollar of currency circulating in New Zealand's money system originates as an interest bearing loan owed to a private owned lending institution that supplies brand new currency and not already existing currency they act as a middleman organiser for. There is no third party, ultimately only the lender and the banking institution that sits at the end of the wholesale credit supply discount chain.
New Zealand's money system is presently administered by an international private central banking network - of which currently sits at the end of a wholesale credit liquidity discount interest chain - an accountancy system of credit weighed against available natural resources - as opposed to the re-lending of already existing pools of liquidity as often portrayed - Chapter 4 - The Creation of Money and Credit - is especially enlightening;
https://issuu.com/iainparkerpubliccreditorbust/docs/nzba_banking_in_new_zealand_fourth_
THE CREATION OF MONEY AND CREDIT
what Actually Happens in reality, although the process outlined in the previous sections could occur, cash balances in bank vaults no longer act as a constraint on bank lending in the way that they might have up until the latter part of the 20th century.......
in such an environment, there is still scope for a bank to expand its lending and create credit, but it is dependent on there being net inflows of funds into the banking system as a whole. These inflows of funds may come from depositors from outside new Zealand (and we have seen significant inflows of funds from such sources in recent years), or from the government making net deposits of funds into the banking system (through its fiscal policy, as outlined below).
We also have a situation where, since 1985, new Zealand banks have not had any specific reserve requirements applied to their deposit liabilities. This means that, in theory, banks could keep on creating credit and expanding their loan portfolios indefinitely. in such an environment, it is the cost of credit, based upon the costs that banks have to pay to raise the deposits, that becomes the constraint on the quantity of credit that is created.
end


New Zealand money system contracted out to private bankers;


The contracting out of central banking in New Zealand by its public money system administration authority - the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) - to the international private central banking network - represented in New Zealand by the New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO) that operates under the umbrella of the New Zealand Treasury advisers - is acknowledged by New Zealand Treasury in official document here;
http://www.nzdmo.govt.nz/securities/tendering/pdfs/info-tendering-18feb08.pdf
18 February 2008
GOVERNMENT SECURITIES TENDERING IMPORTANT CHANGES IN TENDERING OPERATIONS
The New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO) will be assuming responsibility for the tendering of New Zealand Government Bonds and Treasury Bills from the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ). The transfer will be a staged process that will take place over the next two months. This follows many years of the RBNZ acting as an agent for the NZDMO.
end


In New Zealand the Minister of Finance has the power to borrow on behalf of the government. The day-to-day operations arising from this authority have been delegated to the New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO), a unit of the Treasury since 1988.
Insight into New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO)

Many politicians in New Zealand are one or two social issue lobbyists that are completely financial system illiterate and very dependent upon second hand advice - so the concerns for the nation are obvious when that advice is coming from people educated from textbooks that have now been admitted at the very highest level of financial academia too have been in many cases been completely misleading in regards to the internal dynamics of the role of credit and currency within a money system. The snowball effect of this is demonstrated below in this RBNZ video; 



New Zealand Parliament officially sanctioned secrecy;


The identity of the foreign Wholesale Credit Liquidity Providers that supply our entire currency in circulation as interest bearing loans for all production and consumption - thus making our national debt as a whole mathematically unrepayable and natural abundance will never be able to head off the compounding interest hurdle as they tell us it will - is kept secret by this parliamentary legislation meaning you will not even be told when asking under the Official Information Act here;
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2009/0224/latest/DLM2303519.html
Statement of reasons
This notice, which comes into force on the day after the date of its notification in the Gazette, amends the Securities Act (Crown Wholesale Debt Securities) Exemption Notice 2004 (the principal notice) to extend the expiry date of the principal notice from 31 August 2009 to 31 August 2014. The principal notice exempts the Crown, and certain other offerors of specified debt securities, from regulation 7A(1) and clause 5(1)(b) of Schedule 3D of the Securities Regulations 1983. These provisions relate to the content of investment statements.
The Securities Commission considers it appropriate that the principal notice be renewed because the reasons justifying the original exemptions remain valid. They are as follows:
where Part 2 of the Securities Act 1978 applies to an offer of previously allotted securities to the public, both the person offering the securities and the original allotter of the securities have a responsibility for the offer as issuers. In this case, the more relevant information for disclosure to investors is about the Crown. Information about the wholesale investors (being the persons offering the securities) as issuers may not be useful to the retail investors and may also be confusing. The conditions of the exemption from regulation 7A(1) of the Securities Regulations 1983 require potential investors to be advised that the offerors remain legally responsible as issuers:
the investment statements for the offers of debt securities to the public made by the wholesale investors are prepared by the Crown. The exemptions in the principal notice recognise that certain information relating to the wholesale investors is not available to the Crown at the time the investment statement is prepared. The exemptions enable information to be given to investors in a form other than the investment statement, so long as it is given prior to subscription.
end


Interest Trap (Debt Based Monetary System) - this video encapsulates what is essentially the simple history of New Zealand - only it is not gold the foreign bankers claim gives value to the credit they type into their accounts - they then give back to us in the form of interest bearing loans to circulate as the entire currency of our money system - but it is the value of our very own efforts and assets weighed up as collateral that does;

In regards to the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement that the New Zealand Government are currently negotiating in secret - those that are not familiar with the law making process of New Zealand Parliament and think that TPP can be stopped after the Cabinet Executive signs it - learn this below - in regards to the stages that the International Finance Agreement Amendment Bill went through parliament that made International Monetary Fund financial regulation changes become automatic New Zealand financial system law without any longer passing through Parliament. In the main House of Representatives of Parliament the voting power obviously sits with the current Government and the voting power of the select committees to which citizens make submissions for or against suggested law changes are a mirror of voting power in the main House of Representatives - thus when any new law change is presented by the current government it very-very rarely ever gets changed after all the 'so-called' 'steps of parliamentary scrutiny' - no matter how many people object at the select committee submission stage;
http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/legislation/bills/00DBHOH_BILL11131_1/international-finance-agreements-amendment-bill

You can watch it on Parliament TV if you want to watch the pathetic disregard for our economic sovereignty that all present economic executives of every party currently has;
http://www.inthehouse.co.nz/video/19032

Read here pitiful Finance and Expenditure Select Committee report that so meekly gave our economic sovereignty and take note of the names on that committee!
http://www.parliament.nz/resource/0001925661


The foreword to this 2007 New Zealand Auditor-General report Effectiveness of the New Zealand Debt Management Office. makes very clear how dependent upon second-hand advice the New Zealand public service are and - how susceptible to being mislead that they are;
Foreword
The New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO) is a unit within the Treasury. It is responsible for the efficient management of the Crown’s debt and associated financial assets within an appropriate risk management framework. Its broader responsibilities include providing capital market advice and financial transaction services to other agencies of the Crown. NZDMO manages gross debt of about $40,000 million and financial assets of approximately $18,000 million.

In carrying out a performance audit of NZDMO, my overall objective was to determine NZDMO’s level of performance, under the authority of the Minister of Finance, in managing the Crown’s public debt and financial asset portfolios.

Given the specialist technical functions of NZDMO, I sought expert technical assistance with the audit. I appointed KPMG under section 33(1) of the Public Audit Act 2001 to carry out the performance audit on my behalf under section 16(1) of the Act.

The material in my audit report is of a very technical nature because of the specialist functions are undertaken by NZDMO. The non-technical reader can be assured that the audit did not identify any fundamental concerns with the performance of NZDMO.

end

Please just type - KPMG fines - into Google search - read the many cases of financial fraud that KPMG and the often referred to 'big four' global accountancy houses have been involved in and - then please consider how prudent it is to be taking second-hand auditing advice from them upon financial system issues so crucial to the equal economic opportunity of our society?


Flawed statistic methodologies designed to make things appear that they better than they actually are – Employment stats and Consumer Price Index Interest Inflation Rate Targeting;

7 - Bogus employment statistics
- On the 8th November 2004 I sent an e-mail to Steve Maharay, the then Minister for Social Development and Employment, asking him what the minimum number of hours you have to have worked in a week to be deemed to be employed?

-On the 3rd December I received a reply from Steve Maharey;
Dear Iain
Thank you for your e-mail 8th November 2004 concerning the definition of employment.
For benefit purposes section 3 of the Social Securities Act 1064 defines "employment" as paid employment.
The Social Security Act also defines full employment and part-time work as;
Full employment or part-time, in relation to any person, means-
(a)employment under contract or service or apprenticeship which requires the person to work, whether on time or piece rates, no less than an average of 30 hours each week; or
(b)self-employment of the person in any business, profession, trade, manufacture, or undertaking carried on for pecuniary profit for no less than an average of 30 hours each week; or
(c)employment of the person for any number of hours which is regarded as full-time employment for the purposes of any award, agreement, or contract relating to that employment.
part-time work[...]means work that averages not less than 15 hours a week when calculated over the preceding 3 months...
(a)under a contract of service, whether on time or piece rates ; or
(b)as a self-employed person in any business, profession, trade, manufacture, or undertaking.
I trust this has been helpful.
Yours sincerely
Steve Maharay
Minister for Social Development and Employment.

-To which I replied 3rd December 2004;
Hi
Thanks for replying to my question.
What I am really wishing to know is, what is the minimum number of hours a person would of had to of worked, in any fashion deemed to be work, before they are deemed able to be presented to the public in government statistics, as employed.
Is it as per the statistics methods used on www2.stats.govt.nz which explains -(a)worked for 1 hour or more for pay or profit in the context of an employee/employer relationship or selfemployed.
Cheers
Iain

-I then received an e-mail 6th December 2004;
Iain, can I have your postal address so the Minister can respond to the issue you raised.
Margaret Monks
Ministerial Secretary
Office of Hon Steve Maharay

- I then supplied my postal address.

- I then received this letter in the post dated 7th December 2004;
Dear Mr Parker
On behalf of Hon Steve Maharay, Minister for Social Development and Employment, thank you for your letter 3rd December 2004 regarding employment statistics.
The matter you have raised falls within the portfolio responsibilities of the acting Minister of Statistics. I have therefore referred your letter to Hon DR Michael Cullen for his consideration.
Yours sincerely
Scott Josling
Private Secretary(Social Development)

- I then received a letter by post(not dated) from Michael Cullen;

Dear Mr Parker
Thanks for your e-mail of 3 December, enquiring about employment statistics and the definition of an employed person.
In short, the answer to your question is yes, it is as per the definition on Statistics New Zealand's website.
New Zealand's official employment counts are sourced from Statistics New Zealand's quarterly Household Labour Force Survey. In this survey, a person is deemed to be employed if they worked for 1 hour or more, for pay or profit, in the context of an employee / employer relationship, or self-employed.
This definition is used as the measurement of employment because it aligns with the standard definitions of the International Labour Organisation.
I hope this response is helpful.
Yours sincerely
Hon Michael Cullen
Acting Minister of Statistics


7 - Housing removed from CPI of New Zealand and England has allowed senior elements of the Anglo-Saxon heritage private central banking network to saturate these nations with counterfeit credit without it registering as inflationary on official inflation measurement in order to rule them via enforced bankruptcy receivership under false pretenses in order that they then use their proceeds of crime excess interest repayments received to buy up the liquidated assets at distressed prices in order to then be able to toll booth the target societies for access to their necessities of life;


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 KentThank 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 WilliamsonMinister of Statistics.
BoE boss wants house prices in inflation this is Money22 July 2007, 12:00amThe Governor of the Bank of England has admitted he is ‘surprised’ that rising house prices are not included in the official inflation figures, according the BBC.Mervyn King told Radio 4’s Money Box programme that he wished the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) – the measure that tracks the cost of goods and services – did include house prices, as the previous official measure, the Retail Price Index (RPI), used to. He said: ‘Some of these issues are controversial. I wish it did include housing, but it doesn’t – at least at present. Maybe one day it will.’Since 1997 Mr King and the Monetary Policy Committee at the Bank of England has had the task of keeping the CPI around a target of 2%. It has raised interest as a method to reduce inflation if prices climb too sharply.However, critics have said that because the CPI does not include the cost of mortgage repayments, official inflation figures are artificially low. Some say this has created a bubble in the property market as house buyers are able to over-borrow with cheap loans.Currently the CPI stands at 2.4%, but the RPI – which includes mortgage repayments – stands at 4.4%.Economists expect the Bank of England to raise interest rates to 6% by September, something that could prove a problem for some homeowners struggling with large mortgages.Mr King said: ‘CPI is meant to be constructed in the same manner in all European countries, and so far the European statisticians have not worked out a way of how they can calculate the cost of housing in a way that can be done uniformly across Europe.’Notwithstanding the limitations of the CPI, Mr King defended the record of the Bank of England in setting rates. He said: ‘The track record is pretty good, so if we have made wrong decisions from time to time, there can’t have been very many of them and they can’t have been that wrong.’ ‘The Monetary Policy Committee I think was well designed. I think it’s been successful for 10 years and I see no reason to believe that it cannot be successful for another 10 years and decades after that.’ 


Anybody having taken the time to read this irrefutable on the record official document proof of - the crime of Fraudulent Conveyance of Predatory Lending of Counterfeit Credit - by the Anglo-Saxon Heritage Private Central Banking Network that we are suffering and - then chooses to remain silent on the most contributing factor of the ever growing external and internal inequities within our society - is undeniably committing an act of tyranny against wider society - plain and simple!
Any political party that can not articulate an evidence supported case for or against the foreign private authority over the nations accountancy of credit and issuance of currency - that includes the undeniable - admitted at the very highest levels from on the record official documents of how the current monetary system truly works - should remain unelectable!

Almost forgot! don't wont to cause depression by showing only the core causing fraud of most of the ever growing financial problems of society without offering my findings of the best historical evidence of the highest order of what needs reforming from the ground up in order to deliver equal economic opportunity from the ground up within natural boundaries;
http://publiccreditorbust.blogspot.co.nz/2014/04/tried-tested-and-suggested-solutions-to.html
end

Sunday, 30 March 2014

If any politician – bureaucrat or media person can't articulate a response to the question of money – they are not fit for their position!

The question of all public representatives - bureaucrats and media remains - given the level of evidence and admissions this document contains below - from the very mouths - of the very senior most levels of international high finance - that ends can not meet in the Anglo-Saxon heritage private central banking network of nations entirely interest bearing - private debt based money system structures - can they please prove how under current terms and conditions growth can exceed the debt you are forced to take on to attempt to achieve growth without first bankrupting the senior most balance sheet of sustainable natural resource collateral - if not! - when can we expect them to start doing something of substance in regards to researching the necessary reforms being discussed at the very senior most levels of international high finance to fix the current ever growing systemic inequalities of it?

Please read from the most recent quarterly bulletin of one of the very most senior global financial institutions - the Bank of England - what maybe the greatest disclosure of modern times in regards to just what is at the end of the discount interest chain and just how the private central banking network gets its funds to loan out at interest to target nations;

"Where does money come from? In the modern economy, most money takes the form of bank deposits. But how those bank deposits are created is often misunderstood. The principal way in which they are created is through commercial banks making loans: whenever a bank makes a loan, it creates a deposit in the borrower’s bank account, thereby creating new money. This description of how money is created differs from the story found in some economics textbooks."

Please watch the videos and read the pdf links from the Bank of England quarterly bulletin contained in this article below - then quite frankly if you cant figure out we are being ripped off - you deserve to keep getting ripped off!

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarterlybulletin/2014/qb14q1prereleasemoneycreation.pdf Money creation in the modern economy.

The Bank of England handbook of the private central banking network makes clear the discount interest chain pathway and New Zealand's placement in the system - especially Chapter 1 - General - and - Chapter 2 - International Practice;
Centre For Central Banking Studies Bank of England
Primary Dealers In Government Securities Markets
Handbooks In Central Banking No6 1996
Pg 6-7
PRIMARY DEALERS IN GOVERNMENT
SECURITIES MARKETS
1 General
The basic objective of a government debt manager is to cover the government's borrowing needs as cheaply as possible. To accomplish this objective, both primary and secondary markets need to be broad and efficient and the secondary market, if at all possible, deep and liquid. There are several ways of trying to achieve this but many OECD countries appoint a group of highly qualified financial firms to play a role as specialist intermediaries in the government securities markets between the authorities on the one hand and the market on the other. These are generally called primary dealers - as for example in. the United States - but they are sometimes referred to simply as market-makers. In the government securities market in the United Kingdom they are known as gilt-edged market-makers (or GEMMS - the term "gilt-edged" is used to describe government securities), while in France they are called specialists in Treasury securities (SVTs). In this Handbook the terms "primary dealer" and "market- maker" are used largely without distinction.
In return for a set of obligations, such as making continuous bid and offer prices in marketable government securities or submitting reasonable bids in the auctions, these firms receive a set of privileges in the market. The nature and content of these obligations and privileges varies greatly from country to country. In some cases there are firms which play the role of primary dealers without formal official recognition but nevertheless with a degree of official encouragement.
Of course, setting up a primary dealer system should not be undertaken in isolation from the authorities establishing a market-oriented monetary policy, developing a well-functioning money market and following a reasonably steady and predictable issuing policy, without which no-one is likely to embark on dealing in government securities or to make a regular profit out of it. And for some countries in transition at least, it should be recognised that the normal development of a primary dealer system will be out of existing banks according to the "universal bank" model; primary dealers should not necessarily be thought of as stand-alone securities firms on the "anglo saxon" model.
2 International practice
Primary dealers have existed for some time, for example in Canada, France, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. These countries all use official recognition as an incentive: it is granted under specific conditions and the "licence" thus created is reviewed from time to time. Ireland has recently introduced this system as appropriate to the stage of development of its market.
By contrast, in Australia, Germany, Japan, Netherlands and New Zealand there are no formally designated primary dealers, although in these countries a group of firms do collaborate in the allocation and proper development of the market in an informal way. In Germany and Japan the governments raise part of their financing needs through syndicates, although nowadays the greater part tends to be raised by systems offering more open access; the liquidity of both markets has been partly ensured by the strength of the respective currencies.
A primary dealer system can be particularly helpful in the transition from a directed to a fully market-based system for the sale, transfer and redemption of government securities. India would appear to present such an example.
End quote

Banking in New Zealand Fourth Edition - published by the New Zealand Bankers Association in 2006 - makes it very clear that presently every dollar of currency circulating in New Zealand's money system originates as an interest bearing loan owed to a foreign private owned lending institution and - that New Zealand's money system is presently administered by an international private central banking network - of which currently sits at the end of a wholesale credit liquidity discount interest chain - an accountancy system of credit weighed against available natural resources - as opposed to the re-lending of already existing pools of liquidity as often portrayed.

Excerpts from the document -
THE CREATION OF MONEY AND CREDIT
what Actually Happens in reality, although the process outlined in the previous sections could occur, cash balances in bank vaults no longer act as a constraint on bank lending in the way that they might have up until the latter part of the 20th century.......
in such an environment, there is still scope for a bank to expand its lending and create credit, but it is dependent on there being net inflows of funds into the banking system as a whole. These inflows of funds may come from depositors from outside new Zealand (and we have seen significant inflows of funds from such sources in recent years), or from the government making net deposits of funds into the banking system (through its fiscal policy, as outlined below).
We also have a situation where, since 1985, new Zealand banks have not had any specific reserve requirements applied to their deposit liabilities. This means that, in theory, banks could keep on creating credit and expanding their loan portfolios indefinitely. in such an environment, it is the cost of credit, based upon the costs that banks have to pay to raise the deposits, that becomes the constraint on the quantity of credit that is created.

These official government documents make it very clear that New Zealand's public servant's have condoned the contracting out of public central banking authority to a foreign private central banking network - the question must be asked - why?;
Government Securities Tendering Operations
Page updated 30 Jan 2009 (please toggle down to first pdf Feb 2008 to see how original wording has been altered since new National Party Government was elected Nov 2008)
The original from 7 April 2007 stated this;
New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO) has assumed responsibility for the tendering of New Zealand Government Bonds and Treasury Bills from the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ), which had previously acted as an agent for the NZDMO for many years.
Was changed to this January 2009;
As at 7 April 2008, the New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO) has been responsible for the tendering operations of New Zealand government bonds and treasury bills.
Visit here to witness deception - just toggle down past the bizarre disclaimer - ignore it - http://www.nzdmo.govt.nz/securities/tendering

More here re New Zealand Debt Management Office that operates under New Zealand Treasury umbrella;

New Zealander's are prevented from knowing where their currency as debt comes from! New Zealander's can ask under the Official Information Act - who are the wholesale credit liquidity providers the country deals with? - but you will not be told on the basis of this exemption;

The below exemption used to appear in the securities exemption section of the now defunct Securities Commission website that has since been replaced by the Financial Markets Authority - which no longer has an obvious exemption section but - the exemptions can be found by typing 'exemptions' in the home page search box!

Secrecy By Securities Commission Exemptions at the Sovereign Debt Level
Securities Act (Crown Wholesale Debt Securities) Exemption Notice 2004
2004/264
Gazetted on 26 August 2004
Expires on 31 August 2009
(expires 31-8-2014)
Effects of the exemption
Investment statements for debt securities originally allotted by the Crown and onsold to the public will contain information about the Crown as the issuer of the securities, but will not be required to contain information about the wholesale investors offering the securities.
Before subscription, investors will be given the name and contact details of the offeror, and information about where and to whom payments are to be made. The investment statement will state that this information will be provided to investors before subscription.
Background
The Crown offers debt securities such as New Zealand Government Bonds on a regular basis to wholesale investors, who then sell these to the public on the secondary market. The Crown is solely responsible for repayment of principal and interest in relation to these securities. The Crown provides investment statements for the wholesale investors to provide to retail investors. This exemption replaces the Securities Act (Crown Wholesale Debt Securities) Exemption Notice 1999 which expired on 31 August 2004

Secrecy of debt dealings now also applies to Local Government Authorities;
Securities (Local Authority Exemption) Amendment Bill
This bill amends the Securities Act 1978 to provide local authorities with an exemption from the full disclosure requirements of that Act when issuing debt securities to the public. This reduced disclosure requirement will exempt local authorities from the requirement to produce a prospectus signed by all councillors when issuing debt securities to the public.

An entire highest level international high finance conference was held exposing the consensus that Interest Rate Inflation Targeting - that New Zealand Reserve Bank Governor - Don Brash - was used as the flag bearer for - has completely failed and the admission from IMF Chief Economist Olivier Blanchard that under the current entirely interest bearing debt money system outputs can never cover the cost of inputs was made;
Video here;

and pdf of speech here;
Current Imf Chief Economist Olivier Blanchard said - 
“The implicit assumption was that stable inflation would deliver economic stability in the larger sense, in the sense of a stable output gap. This was the case in many formal academic models, in particular in the benchmark ―New Keynesian model, which displayed a property Jordi Gali and I called the ―divine coincidence. In these models, if you maintained stable inflation you would also maintain a stable output gap. The two went together, so there was really no reason to look at the output gap separately.
Realism on the part of central bankers made them realize that this was an extreme proposition, that there could be, at least in the short run, some distance between the two, and that they had to worry also about the output gap. That led to something called ―flexible inflation targeting, in which central banks allowed for temporary deviations from the inflation target in order to stabilize what they thought was the output gap.
Now we come to the post-crisis consensus. I’ll go through one version of it, and then through another one. We learned two main lessons from the crisis:

The first is that you can have stable inflation and a stable output gap, but things are not going well behind the---macroeconomic---scene. For example, tensions are building up in the financial sector, and financial instability eventually translates into major problems in terms of output and activity. This has led to a general consensus that the list of targets must now include financial stability, in addition to macroeconomic stability.

There is also agreement that the debate as it was framed pre-crisis – whether you should use the policy rate to try to achieve both macro and financial stability—was not the right debate. Basically, there is a whole set of instruments out there, not just the policy rate. There is no reason to rely only on the policy rate.

The second lesson is that the link between inflation stability and the output gap is probably much less tight than we pretended. In a number of countries, the behavior of inflation appears to have become increasingly divorced from the evolution of the output gap (This is clearly hard to prove, given that potential output and, by implication, the output gap are unobservable). If this is the case, then central bankers, when they care about macro stability, cannot be content just to keep inflation stable. They have to watch both inflation and the output gap, measured as best as they can. Nobody will watch the output gap for them.”
end quote

Given the concerns from some very senior most academics of the very senior most institutions of international high finance that in international trade agreements investor state commercial contract laws of corporations is undermining common law social protections of societies – I think the sooner the better that New Zealand's politicians – bureaucrats and media start looking into the obvious shortcomings of New Zealand's current money system structures or the honest citizens and businesses of legitimate enterprise outside of criminal high finance are going to be reduced to peasant tenantry in their own land.

Joseph E. Stiglitz - 2001 Nobel Laureate of Economics and former World Bank Chief Economist – about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement between 12 Pacific Rim nations currently being negotiated in secret behind closed doors;

Joseph Stiglitz March 15, 2014 - On the Wrong Side of Globalization;

“Negotiations for the TPP began in 2010, for the purpose, according to the United States Trade Representative, of increasing trade and investment, through lowering tariffs and other trade barriers among participating countries. But the TPP negotiations have been taking place in secret, forcing us to rely on leaked drafts to guess at the proposed provisions. At the same time, Congress introduced a bill this year that would grant the White House filibuster-proof fast-track authority, under which Congress simply approves or rejects whatever trade agreement is put before it, without revisions or amendments.

Controversy has erupted, and justifiably so. Based on the leaks — and the history of arrangements in past trade pacts — it is easy to infer the shape of the whole TPP, and it doesn’t look good. There is a real risk that it will benefit the wealthiest sliver of the American and global elite at the expense of everyone else. The fact that such a plan is under consideration at all is testament to how deeply inequality reverberates through our economic policies.

Worse, agreements like the TPP are only one aspect of a larger problem: our gross mismanagement of globalization.

So New Zealand politicians – bureaucrats and media – I have completely played the ball and not the man on this and – if you got to here – ignorance is no longer a legitimate excuse for you.

My essay of contemporary money system flaws and details of high level discussion of how it might be fixed are here;

To whom it may concern,

Attempting to form public policy for equal economic opportunity of all citizens without a full knowledge of the fundamentals of money as invented and intended - that this submission details - is doing so by looking at 1/3 of a many piece puzzle forced together in frustrated confusion - thinking its complete - when 2/3 of the picture needed in the middle to make clear sense of it all - is in-fact one large piece that has been hidden by a self serving few to steal from wider society under false pretences.

Professor David Miles, Monetary Policy Committee, Bank of England;
"The way monetary economics and banking is taught in many – maybe most – universities is very misleading"
Yours

Iain Parker.

Saturday, 11 January 2014

The money question as a whole - that politicians don't want asked.

The money question as a whole;

Economics is the study of the distribution of finite resources in a manner that leads to certainty and stability. The study of societies senior most balance sheet – which is its credit contract with nature.

Currency is the lifeblood of any modern economy – thus it is important to understand the role of credit and currency in the money system of an economy.

When you hear talk of right – left or centre of politics – that refers to the spectrum of ideas of how a money system should work to best bring certainty and stabilty to an economy.

Capitalism – the right of the spectrum - is the idea of individual private profit motive ownership - of every aspect of the economy – both necessity of life provision and luxuries of life provision – including credit accountancy and currency issue.

Communism – the left of the spectrum - is the idea of state ownership as a
co-operative on behalf of individual citizen members - of every aspect of the economy – both necessities of life provision and luxury of life provision – including credit accountancy and currency issue.

Centrism – middle of the spectrum – is the debated territory of a mix of the above to bring certainty and stability to an economy.

There is now a majority global consensus among economists – aside from a few minority pockets of tyranical slave-mindedness - that Capitalism and Communism - implemented in their full description - ultimately slide into caste class pyramid scams - that are offensive to individual human nature - that seeks dignified freedom of choice – thus lead to uncertainty and instabilty – thus the answer sits somewhere in the middle by cherry picking the best of the two ideas where they have been practiced thus far and discarding that – that causes uncertainty and instability.

Given the economy is essentially the body - of which - within it - money is a circulatory arterial system - that circulates currency - as the lifeblood of the economy – to understand how best to keep the economic body healthy – you must first understand the role of credit and currency in a money system to understand if yours is presently long-term healthy or not.

So in regards to New Zealand today lets explore these questions;
How does New Zealand's money system – as it is now - and predominantly has been – actually work?

Who currently does the credit accountancy of New Zealand's money system?

What circulates as currency in our money system and from who does our currency currently come?

Under what terms and conditions does it come?


Under these terms and conditions – as they currently stand – can economic growth ever cover the interest bearing debt you are forced to take on to attempt to achieve the economic growth?

Wednesday, 1 January 2014

Nitty Gritty - questions of UBI - Negative Interest Inflation Free Money System - Land Tax/Lease System

Lets get down to the nitty gritty - The question of UBI - Negative Interest Inflation Free Money System - Land Tax/lease System;

A question for Universal Basic Income or National Dividend advocates - given that most are also advocates for reform of the current entirely interest bearing – entirely private loan based money system we presently suffer – I ask - if the foreign debt that currently circulates as currency in our money system was able to be expelled by installing state accountancy of credit and currency issue and equal economic opportunity fairness prevailed - at cost price only - does the UBI you advocate have a sinking lid.

That is - does it drop away to no free grants of sovereign currency without contributing to the up keep of community or will it be continued free grants of sovereign dollars without a work or responsibility test?

I offer as research for the question (link below) - in my opinion - one of the most viable papers I have yet seen of how such a transition to the above new money system idea might be done and for the record I favour the sinking lid concept this plan contains – as I believe working in the up keep of your society gives you a sense of ownership and self esteem – contributing to unity

Also 
I would rather see the most of any UBI or National Dividend system delivered by way of the base essential of life hard services delivered at true cost price only - without additional mark up of white collar criminal middlemen. In order that most vulnerable in society - children - are ensured they get their fair share before parents can choose hand it over to those selling the vices of life before giving their children their fair share;
http://sustento.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/The-Manning-Plan.pdf

Once we have the ability to domestically balance our own economy - due to no longer being foreign debt deficit driven and - only need to trade - via barter or bi-lateral currency exchange deals - what is truly surplus to domestic requirements - for what we cant produce ourselves - what is your view of Professor Margrit Kennedy's - sadly very recently deceased – two bank account public money system idea? – every dollar of sovereign currency issued would have a date of issue attached to it – bank accounts would consist of one current spending account upon which a small weekly negative rate of interest will be charged if currency remains hoarded in it and - a second savings account into which you will move currency you don't presently need for consumption - which you will not be charged or receive any interest upon – if at the end of every financial year a large amount of the oldest year of issued currency remains hoarded in the savings accounts – this would be retired from circulation in a process called demurage.


'What the hell' I hear you scream – but - the holder of this currency excess to their immediate consumption can authorise the bank to loan out the currency as interest free loans for viable loan projects – which - until repaid - would avoid both the current consumption account negative interest rate and the hoarded currency demurage – this means that currency that real economic activity no longer needs or can support gets retired from circulation – which keeps the system balanced within the boundaries of sustainable natural resource capital - which is overall the ultimate reserve of all economic activity.

Please consider in the case of a fully reformed honest Fully Functioning Public Credit Money System - your necessity of life public utilities could be provided as a public service for free – if you work harder than the next person you will still gain more purchasing power - you will still want for nothing within the boundaries and balances of sustainable resources and population and – the honours system would change based on the tracking of which entrepenuers had the most demurage - to honour those entrepenuers that truly do create a trickle down effect for their community – instead of as presently happens – those getting knighted that hoard the first lent foreign private interest bearing debt that currently circulates as currency in our money system – then send it back out as second lent interest bearing debt – which turns the system into a systemic pyramid scam.

Margrit Kennedy wrote a great book in 1995 that rekindled the negative interest rate upon hoarded currency idea promoted by Silvio Gessel, Irving Fisher and Frederick Soddy before her;
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~roehrigw/kennedy/english/Interest-and-inflation-free-money.pdf

To me the crossing Margrit Kennedy's Inflation Free Money System idea - with Sustento Institute Sovereign Money Dialysis Transition idea - we would end up with a national currency for projects of national significance and necessities of life - but local currencies - at users own risk of course - could once again operate as they use to prior to Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act 1934 - without being deemed against the national interest – literally.

If the above were to ever become implemented government policy - and given what the contemporary capitalist system has become – in putting blind ideological emphasis upon individual property rights – while completely neglecting birthright communal property rights – I throw into the mix the land lease idea that Deirdre Kent is presently think tanking (link below) in an attempt at making the ends meet in the circulatory nature of a money system if it is to remain healthy and stable;
http://www.slideshare.net/deirdrekent (slides here)

Press Release: Deirdre Kent
Housing Bubble solved only by new currency paying for land
Wednesday, 11 September 2013,

To solve Auckland’s housing crisis we have to gradually take land out of the market so that nobody benefits from buying or selling land,” according to Deirdre Kent, a spokesperson for the New Economics Party. “Only when it is recognised that land is a gift of nature and nobody really owns land just the same as nobody owns water.”
“Land of homeowners can be paid for by Treasury with newly created Tax Credits. Homeowners who opt for this must then pay an ongoing fee or land rental to Government. Revenue should be shared by local and central government, and no more rates would be due on that land. The Tax Credits would be good for paying tax or student loans.”
“You can’t stabilise land values by changing loan to value ratios or by any of the other proposed schemes. A Capital Gains Tax is either too weak to have any effect or so strong that nobody sells their property. It is also complicated and expensive to administer. Leaving out the family home means homeowners capture all the windfall from rising land values, when that gain really belongs to the whole society.”
Our scheme is for homeowners that opt in negotiate with government to pay a land rental that is lower, (say by 10%), than their rates plus what they are paying to the bank in interest for their land.
As more and more opt in in the scheme will gradually take land out of the market place. It is similar to leasehold land but because the lease is linked to a land rental index it varies very little over time as it is adjusted annually. The land rent will only change when there is major infrastructure built or the restrictions on land use change. So it will also solve the landbanking problem where people profit from holding land off the market.
“We are not recommending land tax, but an ongoing land rental. That would require annual valuations of land and inevitably would result in disputes. And people don’t trust land taxes because they have to rise as land values drop”, she said.
ends

I ponder instead of offering people tax or rate credits to buy the land portion of their property - that the seller can then only use for paying future lease/rent at rates negligibly cheaper than prior debt encumbrances - what about if the govt using sovereign issued dollars offered to buy the entire property from debt encumbered mortgagees or those seeking to free up capital in the case of residential & commercial buildings(assists earthquake strengthening stalemate and leaky homes) and - when it comes to businesses the offer extends to land and plant or just land with seller keeping portable plant if they so wish - the sovereign dollars can then only be used for consumption or business investment within New Zealand or to pay off foreign debt - with the land lease fee being paid to the NZ govt then being massively less than their prior foreign debt price factored encumbrances - no rates to pay and full utilities provided as a public service by the govt - once the properties are purchased back - essentially from foreign owned private banks who currently hold the mortgage titles - they should be locked in a sovereign managed primary land base entity - never to be sold into individual private ownership again - only ever leased.

This is swimming against the tide of the current generally worldwide accepted orthodoxy of global private capital liberalization and individual property rights over communal property rights - but with the recent clear failings of that orthodoxy - I would hope that some individual property and business owners might be able to see that done correctly - managing assets on behalf of your fellow citizens via your elected government - in a system in which your fellow citizens can afford to enjoy your goods and services - instead of privately owned foreign banking institutions with their undoubted systemic pyramid scamming aspects - can be a viable - enjoyable and far less stressful alternative?