We could “drain the swamp”
We could “arrest the cabal”
And if we left USURY in place,
The cabal, and the swamp, would be back in business without missing a beat.
The cabal, and the swamp, were able to gain power and influence thru usury.
Usury is the charging of money, for the use of money
Usury is legally defined as charging more interest than is allowed BY LAW.
Jimmy Carter deregulated usury, because poor people needed more DEBT.
Usury has an insatiable appetite, and it always starts slow, turns a corner, and “goes asymptote”, or as they say “to the moon”
Right now we are in the vertical asymptote part of the curve, which is the part just before the big crash.
The crash will happen. That is a certainty.
But how we react to that crash, will be the legacy we leave our children
We NEED to outlaw USURY, at any rate.
All money is to be lent at 0.00% interest.
Any interest rate above 0.00% is a felony punishable by 5 years in prison.
USURY is the way that “the man” skims all of the wealth off of the working people.
ALL WEALTH is derived from LABOR.
And yet, the laborers hardly have anything!
Where does the wealth go?
The wealth is taken from the worker, in the form of income taxes on his paycheck.
Those income taxes go to pay USURY, which is the interest on the so-called “national debt”
The federal income tax was put into place around 1913, which is the same time the Federal Reserve and IRS came into existence.
They had to pass the 16th CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT in 1906 to be able to tax the US workers
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
We need to repeal the 16th amendment, or better yet, amend the amendment, to specifically FORBID the US Congress from having the power to lay or collect taxes on incomes, from whatever sources derived...
Wealth is “redistributed” from the worker, to the bank, in the form of USURY.
The worker pays interest on a mortgage, and interest on a car loan, and interest on credit cards, and interest on student loans,
The worker pays USURY when he pays property taxes on his home, if that money goes to pay interest on bonds.
The USURY of the Federal Reserve is the mechanism by which the Rothschild and Rockefeller et al took over control of the US government, and the American people.
Some of you don’t remember, but back in 2008 there was a HUGE banking crisis,
And at that time, the bankers ‘metaphorically’ held a gun to Nancy Pelosi, and the bankers demanded something like $700Billion in taxpayer money. When asked about how they came up with that number, Pelosi replied that “they needed a really big number”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–2008
At that time, USURY had already run its course, and was on the verge of collapse,
The bankers frantically tried to ‘correct’, by lowering the USURY rate down lower, and lower, until it was almost at 0%
The reason the bankers kept lowering the rate, was because the internet kept talking about USURY.
So by lowering the interest rate to near 0%, the bankers were able to take USURY debate off the table, while remaining in power, playing the long game.
Recently, the Federal Reserve has been raising interest rates, because, paraphrase, they merely wanted to set interest rates to be closer to where they have traditionally been.
“Traditionally”, interest rates have been used to skim the wealth from the working people.
The Federal Reserve doubled interest rates!
And then, the Federal Reserve doubled interest rates again!
We are still paying interest on the debts incurred to fight World War 1, and World War 2, and every other conflict up to today.
https://i.redd.it/v9p3a4p3q4z31.jpg
We buy wars on credit.
“Nothing can stop what is coming”
what is coming, is a super crash.
But the people, the usurers, who are responsible for the crash, of course will want to remain in power after the crash. They have become accustomed to the lifestyle, and will do anything to maintain that lifestyle.
USURY is how they all came to power,
And ABOLISHING USURY is how they will be permanently removed from power.
End The Fed
End The IRS
Abolish Usury
Usary is not the real issue. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of opportunities for abuse in charging interest on a loan, but that is not the real problem. The real problem is Fractional Reserve Lending and countries indebting themselves for huge amounts of money to private individuals.
Imagine if someone gave you money to hold on to and you then turned around and lent it out to someone else and charged them interest on SOMEONE ELSE'S money that you were holding for them.
Then imagine that that person, after taking the loan, and agreeing to the interest, then asked you to hold onto that money in your strong house with your guards and then you took that money and LOANED IT OUT AGAIN.
That repetitive loaning is the creation of money in the economy. Through the use of bank notes (IOUs that promise redemption in real money aka gold/silver) and checking account money (which is effectively the same thing as a bank note) there is a flood of money into the system, causing inflation (a devaluing of EVERYONE's money aka a hidden tax on savings) and altering the dynamics and values of the entire economy. In addition to being just bad practice, this also opens up the door for fuckery, through manipulation of the entire economics of the country (really the world).
Charging interest on a loan is not the problem (its not the BIG problem anyways). It is the creation and deletion of money through loans on money that doesn't exist until the loan is created, and the manipulation and control that it gives that is the real problem.
That doesn't touch on the REAL real problem, which was the creation of wars so that the countries involved in the war would want to borrow money at interest from the people who created the wars in the first place.
So its two problems. Fractional reserve lending and the creation of wars. Fractional reserve lending relies on interest to be productive, but the creation of wars, and indebting countries because of those wars does not. The leverage that exists from countries being indebted to you does not rely on any interest, but on the debt itself.
Yep. A more fundamental problem, anyway.
Actually, I believe it would make sense to arrange banking into accounts where depositors PAY to have their gold or whatnot safely stored [and NO LOANS or other monkey business allowed on these accounts] and speculative accounts where the account-holders accept some risk in return for possible returns, assuming again no monkey-business on those accounts either (such as lending the same money out multiple times at once).
That way you'd still have a robust credit market but without it ballooning into the nightmare we have today.
But that's an off-the-cuff idea, so I'd be happy to hear the downside (or the outright stupidity) of the suggestion from others.
I was thinking along the same lines. Two different types of accounts. A demand deposit account where there is a charge for holding the physical asset (a small rental charge) and one where the loan interest is shared, but is not a demand deposit account.
On the other hand, I was also thinking there could be a government holding site, and money (PMs) would be tied to crypto. This would allow for easy transactions, and easy withdrawal of real assets in the infrastructure that already exists (current banks which will be defunct). I haven't worked it all out yet, but somewhere in there is a solution.
No matter what, fractional reserves are the root of all fuckery and must be eliminated. Countries going into debt by accepting loans from external (or even internal) sources to go to war must also be against the law.
If there is a real reason to go to war, the country will go to war. If there isn't, we won't. No more "experts" telling us how much more trouble there will be if we don't go to war now. Tell people the whole truth, and let them decide (sans propaganda).
I have a feeling there won't be any more wars once there are no more bankers, so it may be moot anyways.
I think you're right: since bankers fund both sides of every war (they win no matter who comes out on top!), fractional reserve banking and ESPECIALLY central banks vomiting fiat are major drivers for war, constantly. Ending fractional reserve banking and central banks would likely eliminate most wars all by itself.
I'll suggest another root to consider, though; this one is even more strongly embedded in people's minds than the framework of today's corrupt banking system -- forcible government.
There COULD be, but everything government touches turns to shit -- because government is coercion, and psychopaths and schemers ALWAYS work to subvert and gain control of that coercion, and then pretty soon the Constitution's REQUIREMENT that the States use ONLY gold and silver as money (still there, in the document; never over-ridden by Amendment) and the outright prohibition of an income tax are gone, just GONE, and fiat currency and an income tax become the law of the land.
There is no way to make the Ring of Power safe.
(Frodo, desperately handing the Ring to Gandalf) Take it, Gandalf. Take it!
(Gandalf, backing away from the Ring) No, Frodo.
(Frodo) You must take it!
(Gandalf) You cannot offer me this Ring.
(Frodo) I'm giving it to you!
(Gandalf) Don't tempt me, Frodo! I dare not take it, not even to keep it safe. Understand, Frodo – I would use this Ring from a desire to do good . . . [long pause] . . . but through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine.
Link to an excellent book on providing "government" services of ALL types via civil society (i.e., the market): https://mises.org/library/market-liberty-1
Just so we are on the same page; the government doesn't control the Fed, the Fed controls the government. We the people (and our government) have zero say in our money supply.
Government controlling the money supply is not necessarily a bad thing, at least historically. Its when government hasn't controlled the money supply that the problems have happened. The constitution states explicitly that only the federal government could control the money supply. They did that because there were always people skimming off the top if the money supply wasn't strictly controlled. This ensured a stable trade platform across states. Historically, the Byzantine empire lasted longer than any other empire (nearly a thousand years) and was the trading hub of the world because the government strictly controlled the money supply and never allowed banks (or bankers) to do anything. This made the currency super stable, and everyone wanted to trade with the Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire) for a millennia, until the bankers finally got in, then 200 years later the empire fell.
The fact that everything government touches turns to shit is because the government isn't in control of the country and the people aren't in control of their government.
We think of things in terms of how things have been since the bankers took over the United States (which was actually most of the time). We need to forget everything we think we know, because its all based on fraud and lies. Look to history to see what has worked. A federal government really only needs to do two things: control the money supply across all states, and provide the infrastructure for a common defense. Everything else can and should be taken care of by the states. That was how the original constitution was set up. We have deviated from that substantially, due to private bankers.
This is called a safety deposit box, and they already exist.
With typical checking and savings accounts the bank isn't just storing your money, they are also usually paying a bit of interest and, this is often forgotten, providing you a service by making your money more accessible. It's not free for the bank to pay tellers, build ATMs or to process all your checks and debit card transactions, so they need a source of revenue to cover those costs which is typically the interest raised by loaning your money.
Good point on the safety deposit boxes.
On the cost to operate the bank: yes, that is one reason that I mentioned paying a fee for non-speculative accounts; that could also cover checking services and debit cards, for instance, so account holders could pay by mail for instance. I didn't mention that (or other possibilities) but you'd expect banks to off those services and people to want them.
Honestly the main problem with this is that the enormous proportion of the population is far more upset by a monthly fee on their checking account than they are by the idea, which they probably aren't even very familiar with, of fractional reserve lending with their account.