WHY SHOULD WE SAVE THE BANKS?

We've just bought our own bank, Northern Rock, and been told (by the banks, the media and the EU) that we can't use it as a bank for the public, creating our own money and lending it to hard-working members of the public.

We've issued even more billions to the banks who were supposed to use that to lend out to hard-working members of the public, but they didn't. (what has it been used for instead?)

And now the Bank of England, OUR BANK, decides to tell us on a Saturday that it is going to issue £50 billion in bonds to the parasites!

What is the difference between a pound and a bond?

I'll let Thomas Edison, inventor of the light bulb, tell you;

-------------------------------

From http://www.prosperityuk.com/prosperity/articles/edison.html

In December 1921, the American industrialist Henry Ford and the inventor Thomas Edison visited the Muscle Shoals nitrate and water power projects near Florence, Alabama. They used the opportunity to articulate at length upon their alternative money theories, which were published in 2 reports which appeared in The New York Times on December 4, 1921 and December 6, 1921.

Objecting to the fact that the Government planned, as usual, to raise the money by issuing bonds which would be bought by the banking and non-banking sector -- which would then have to be paid back with money raised from taxes, and with interest added -- they proposed instead that the Government simply create the currency it required and spend it into society through this public project.

This is also the Prosperity proposal.

Thomas Edison made it plain in the following excerpt from The New York Times, December 6, 1921 issue ("Ford Sees Wealth In Muscle Shoals"). Here, the reporter is quoting Edison:

"That is to say, under the old way any time we wish to add to the national wealth we are compelled to add to the national debt.

"Now, that is what Henry Ford wants to prevent. He thinks it is stupid, and so do I, that for the loan of $30,000,000 of their own money the people of the United States should be compelled to pay $66,000,000 -- that is what it amounts to, with interest. People who will not turn a shovelful of dirt nor contribute a pound of material will collect more money from the United States than will the people who supply the material and do the work. That is the terrible thing about interest. In all our great bond issues the interest is always greater than the principal. All of the great public works cost more than twice the actual cost, on that account. Under the present system of doing business we simply add 120 to 150 per cent, to the stated cost.

"But here is the point: If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets the money brokers collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20 per cent, whereas the currency pays nobody but those who directly contribute to Muscle Shoals in some useful way.

" ... if the Government issues currency, it provides itself with enough money to increase the national wealth at Muscles Shoals without disturbing the business of the rest of the country. And in doing this it increases its income without adding a penny to its debt.

"It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30,000,000 in bonds and not $30,000,000 in currency. Both are promises to pay; but one promise fattens the usurer, and the other helps the people. If the currency issued by the Government were no good, then the bonds issued would be no good either. It is a terrible situation when the Government, to increase the national wealth, must go into debt and submit to ruinous interest charges at the hands of men who control the fictitious values of gold.

"Look at it another way. If the Government issues bonds, the brokers will sell them. The bonds will be negotiable; they will be considered as gilt edged paper. Why? Because the government is behind them, but who is behind the Government? The people. Therefore it is the people who constitute the basis of Government credit. Why then cannot the people have the benefit of their own gilt-edged credit by receiving non-interest bearing currency on Muscle Shoals, instead of the bankers receiving the benefit of the people's credit in interest-bearing bonds?"

--------------------------------------

Any bond the Bank of England creates is essentially money, because the people know it is sound. The banks know it is sound otherwise they wouldn't accept them. So by creating the bond the government will have created money.

So why do we continue to borrow money from the parasites when we can create our own money, and have no need to repay with interest, and be told we can't do this, that and the other but we must do this, that and the other otherwise we won't get to borrow the money in the first place?

Because our politicians are corrupt.

But this is corruption on a global scale.

Yes, we've known that for a long time, but what is at stake here is the that we are continually empowering the very people who sent our fathers and grandfathers into world war so that global governing institutions could be created to control us, their children and grandchildren.

So why should we save the banks?

We shouldn't.

They've shown themselves to be deceitful, selfish, arrogant, greedy and eager to finance genocidal world wars.

I urge you to write to the Governor of the Bank of England and tell him that as a public employee he is failing in his duty if he issues those £50 billion bonds to the banks.

I have no problem if he issues the £50 billion in bonds and spends them himself or by appointed proxies into the economy, possibly creating a new bank to distribute that money among the hard-working members of the public to keep a roof over their families heads.

================================

From http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/apr/19/houseprices.mortgagelendingfigures

The Bank of England is preparing to unveil a plan to inject £50bn of funds into the financial system next week in an attempt to breathe life into the moribund mortgage market, it was reported last night.

The scheme, which the Bank of England has been working on for more than six weeks, follows pleas by mortgage lenders to help unfreeze money markets paralysed by the credit crunch.

Under the scheme, the government is expected to issue bonds which lenders will be able to exchange for packages of mortgages lodged with the Bank as collateral.