Topic: Economic Devastation - page 43. (Read 504811 times)

Which country was this.
  In UK with one of the largest bank failures funded by government, the route they took with loans was not to call them in immediately.  Instead they put pressure on the debtor to accept extra management and 'help' in the debt finance, what this did was milk the businesses with extra bank fees and management assistance labour fees.
    In some cases the business no longer could stay ahead of its costs and the whole lot would be liquidated with the bank getting back their money in that way and in other cases the owners of the business were so upset at the trouble with this loan finance that they themselves took action to close out the debt as fast as possible because of its excessive costs.  Of course when debt is closed out often the bank charges fees for ending the agreement early and so they profited alot from this tactic.

With a mortgage bank in another example, failed bank but not failed debt due to bailout/nationalisation.  Their tactic was to refuse renewal of any debt, so if houses were financed for 5 years with renegoiation of rate after that they would refuse to give any rate close to market competitive so owners were forced to find debt finance elsewhere at any cost.  This resulted in the bank seeing a large amount of mortgages ended, paid off or the keys handed back and the houses sold with profits to the bank.   All of this was required as the money taken from government was making its debt overhang look very bad, not all countries can act like USA and ignore or somehow make it appear a reasonable percentage.  USA has a very large benefit from being a reserve currency for most of the world so I imagine in statistics all things are possible for them

It's a rough estimation but not at all impossible if you ask me. Ever since the beginning of November the newspapers here in Greece have been at it as well:

"Every new company is Mandatory to work with a POS card acceptance system from 01.01.2016"

Ministry of Finance brings measures to expand electronic trading. It was officially announced from the House the Deputy Finance Minister, mr Alexiadis.  

Extension of electronic transactions with compulsory implementation of the terminal card acceptance systems (POS) since the beginning of 2016 for all businesses that make entry announced by Deputy Minister of Finance, Trifon Alexiadis in the House and announced the promotion of measures to facilitate business difficulty procure these systems.
"Our position is the full expansion of electronic transactions. We will not hesitate to clash with any interests about it, "he said. Alexiadis response to a question by Mr ND, Christos Boukorou and announced that from January 1 will become mandatory to use card acceptance terminals.

Story Link

PS1: BTC time for Greece?
PS2:
https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/670679725652578304

Bullshit. They do, when they have to, or when they are told to. And it destroys the economy. And it has happened in my lifetime with 0.3% of the country killed by suicides alone.

Try educating yourself.

I'm skeptical of cash being removed everywhere that fast. Won't people head to dollars or other stable currencies? I mean I can't imagine people standing for negative interest rates, they'd put there money in tinned/dry food anything else that can't be stolen. I think this was mentioned up thread.
In that way wouldn't it artificially stimulate demand to a crack up boom?

I believe that they will have to wait until the (brand new) recapitalization of the 4 "systemic" banks (aka: the ones which the public owns a big percentage). After that there's nothing much left. I don't know if they will manage to do it before or after the EU upcoming split though. Everything points to that direction that the "economic scientists" have brought us. I expect this to happen roughly after January / February...

(Well, I rule out the WWIII scenario).

Remove cash, negative interest rates and other economic crimes
Saturday, November 28, 2015, 00:04

It may sound like a conspiracy theory, but, judging by the growing desperation of governments to control and "push" of the global economy, you see that not far from reality.

I refer to the idea of ​​abolition of cash (dollars, euros, pounds, etc.) in their natural form. And a basic excuse of those who support this extreme measure is to enhance the ability of central banks to impose negative interest rates.

Negative interest rates mean that lenders are literally paying businesses and consumers to borrow money! Also, they punish savers saving for future consumption, investment, or just pension or health security. The Danes and the Swiss have already fallen into negative territory, with interest rates at -0.75%.

This means that 100,000 to an account in Switzerland will be worth 99 250 after one year. Currently these rates apply only to "high reserves" that banks hold with the central bank, but nothing prevents banks to soon require all depositors share the burden.

But these "trivial" rates are not enough, according to some economists. A chief economist at Citicorp, the technocrat Willem Buiter [1], for example, believes that the US needs much lower interest rates to "boost" the economy away from recession. Proposes negative interest rates around 6% "to get the job done." But for this to happen, there is one condition: To operate this project, says Mr. Buiter, the government should abolish the cash.

It's easy to see why Mr. Buiter and proportionate bureaucrats consider "annoying" cash. If your bank grabs 6% of your savings of 100 € in your account would be worth 94 € at the end of the year, 88.36 € after two years, and 83.06 € after three years. Instead, a bank note of 100 € in circulation would still be worth ... 100 €.

Story Link

The banks never never never never ever call back loans, they will give you more loans instead if you ask nicely. So imho even if QE is debt-based effectively monetary base expands because The banks will never never never never ever call back loans.

If the banks called back all the loans, there would not be enough money in the whole world to pay them. This is not academic exercise, this is a neutron bomb that they possess because they were able to bribe the politicians for centuries, and kill the ones that did not yield.

If QE is debt-based, it does not add a cent to the monetary base.

If it is "equity-based" (printing new money without corresponding obligation to pay back) then monetary base expands.

Central bank do 2 evils, which happen to be diametrically opposite to each other, yet both are evil.

I realise there are technical points of reference but if the bank expands their balance sheet and upps my overdraft or whatever facility I can then use to withdraw bank notes.  Im taking this as cash, its exchangable for goods so that what it is.  If QE or any other central bank policy enables banks to expand balanace sheets then to me the montary base has expanded.  People may never hold the cash notes, only pass it around electronically but its money in circulation so Im counting all of this as a bigger montary base which means inflation.

  If they measure their statistics by purely cash notes they'll come up with a different figure or however they restrict their view of money used but QE is inflation seems a fair argument to me, I'll accept Im wrong in some text book if need be

The 3 camels with box cutters fairy tale.

Sort of like Dumbo The Elephant, except only 50% of the population thinks the story is true.





They also believed JFK was their savior:

http://xkcd2.com/753/

Just out of reference - most governments also raise money through the sale of assets (usually it's an issue when things fall out of public hands, but not always) as well as various business interests on publicly owned land (mining comes to mind). This all being said - I honestly don't understand how Bitcoin helps in any of this - unless there is a system societal change beyond government this kind of system will remain.

I don't believe the cashless all-fiat demurrage-tax system is at all worse than the one we currently have. Because:
- In Wörgl, it was successful
- Now, it would not be very successful because there is essentially no difference to a hyperinflation: people would choose to keep as little as possible cash in their accounts and invest in gold, silver, bitcoin, canned foods, anything, rather than cash. This is not even insidious if told in advance. The demurrage would hardly net more than the bank "service fees" now do. Even a small fee would wake up so many people (that even a 10% per year inflation did not)
- the taxation would at least in theory have a wider and fairer base, unlike currently where I used to pay up to 29% small-corp-tax (in Finland, for profit AND inflation, annually) and at the same time the multinationals pay no tax and actually get more subsidies than the small biz pay in taxes. So the current system is very evil, your proposal would be a step to right direction, unless supplemented with blatant exceptions to multinational accounts, and/or bans on holding/trading of any semi-monetary items, which kind of exceeds the scope of my assignment.

By the way, now is the time to log in to CK and do your health challenge, so that you stay in the game

The bankers are like this:



My dear sheeps you live inside the wolf's den and dont even notice it

How ignorant can you be sheeps?

I'd like to try (even though I won't accept your $1000 if you decide I win). The aforementioned mechanism would've been a monetary system based on the idea of inflationary quotes like the one issued after the 1929 crash in Austria during the Great Depression. The famous "Miracle of Wörgl", but with a twist. To remind to the reader a bit of history, the bill was issued by Michael Unterguggenberger and its success was based on the currency demurrage and the impact it had on the economy of Wörgl, a small town in Austria. For every bill to retain its value it had to be stamped every 1 month.

Now let's try this on steroids. Imagine a currency with the same properties but issued by the FED (or any other "FED") and its allies (aka: Banksters). Imagine it electronic and every month every single "coin" to lose some of its value if the people don't pay their tax. I believe we have a potential winner, for a far worse system like the one we have now, based on an (initially) pretty good idea. BUT, why this is happening? It's the same with government...

In ancient Greece, the idea of DemoCracy [Δήμoς (Demos, the people) control Kράτoς (Cratos, the Country)] had the ability to test itself through the agora; where almost every day the politicians were put to test and criticism by the civilians. The centralization of governance, money, etc is what makes things go ugly; and there's a reason for that. *MOST* people tend to behave badly when "others aren't looking", or they won't have to explain their actions to anybody. The flaw is embedded into our system.

Decentralization of everything leads to a better world.

Sources:
1. http://www.lietaer.com/2010/03/the-worgl-experiment/
2. https://mises.org/library/free-money-miracle
3. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-illusion-of-being-observed-can-make-you-better-person/

l
Man you make some wild comments. Taxes and interest are different things and unrelated.

Depends. In Euro area banknotes are not debt, they are money, even the definition of "money".

In other places there might be relics of some obligations, but "I promise to pay the bearer £10" does not mean anything since "£10" legally means the piece of paper on which it is written.

Other places even say "in silver" yet do not honor the promise.

Banks note is a symbol of debt for the central bank. It says on the bank note: I promise to pay the bearer £10.

There is no "out of thin air", stop refering to money as a concrete physical thing. it is not. Banknotes and balance sheets and papers and digital bank accounts are manifestations of money.

If it was the other way around then I could simply burn my banknotes and voila I own the ECB zip. right?

Well ECB EURO banknotes are proof of debt of ECB to the holder. But you are right Debt is not money

Money is trust, trust creates obligations symmetric to the obligation debt, when a debt gets re-payed those obligations are settled and a connection is closed.
If enought obligations get settled the network of cooperation between people dismantles, cause obligations create information channels.
Ideally everyone should owe to everyone, but banknotes make that more managable making central bank and banking system in general an obligation multiplexer.
So money is not created by banks in the same traffic is not created by the routers.

Money is created by the customer the one who accepts the obligation to be indebted (entrusted)

The bank simply facilitates the obligation (creates the connection) in behalf (with) of the rest of us