"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless" -Thomas Jefferson
As long as money exists, and more is better than less, people will use it to control others for their benefit and to make more. This only explains how debt makes a privileged few money. Money is what needs to cease to exist, but this is unlikely to happen. Rented property needs to be controlled. A buy to let should not be seen as an investment and not make anyone more than a cash ISA. Tenants should have more rights, a firm guarantee of renting a property for 10 years or more with the price fixed for that entire period. If you rent out a property you should be doing so that someone can have somewhere to live, not so that someone can make money.
I coin the term, "A steady state monetary system". Which is a fully closed system. Democratized money system. Interest on loans, comes back to source, back to the people, back to the money supply. So much money would come back to fund gov programs, we will be in constant contraction of it. To keep the dollar stable.. Gold, and bit coin would be worth nothing the next day. Gold would be 100 dollars an oz or less...
Yes, the system is flawed and abused by a VERY small percentage of the population, namely banks. It kills me though to see entrepreneurs who create jobs, help our communities, and want the best for the economy and the US to be grouped into this same evil clan simply based on our income alone. Just because someone makes 12 million dollars a year doesn't mean they are an evil banker, often times it's because they have provided extreme value to consumers and received money in exchange
interest is also responsible for the increasing disparity in wages and cost of living. in order to make a profit, businesses must pad the prices of goods and services at all levels of production with the interest on their loans, so they unwittingly impose usury on the population.
It all a crazy battle for resources powered by selfishness. I wish the world could equally rationed resources for all but it's too much of a dream. It's illegal to kill but not to let the poor starve to death.
Propaganda which encourages the 99% to believe the economy is bouncing back breeds complacency among the majority. I have been blogging ( via my posts in Life after Debt) to raise awareness about the social injustice, inequalities and absence of fair play for the victims of the banking crisis. My own case against HBOS serves to illustrate just how un-level the playing really field is and my five year battle to be heard proves that equality remains a lucrative key to the banksters success
This is not true. It is land speculation creates wealth disparities. Lord Sugar for example is worth £1.3b, but we only raised £125m selling his company, the rest comes from property. Without capital you are excluded from the property bubbles and without cash reserves you cannot make even more money when the property prices crash. Poor people are trapped in rentals that pay someone else's mortgage.
Secondly, this video and many other videos seem to assume that anyone who is in the 1% owns a freaking bank, which (sorry to burst your bubble is just not reality), business owners and entrepreneurs who earn millions a year are in the 1% as well and we do NOT give loans out and live of interest, in fact, a vast majority of the 1% did not make their money from loaning the "90%" some money out but rather building companies and creating jobs
Without income caps or massive taxation and redistribution policies capitalist profits gradually but automatically sucks money up to a minority regardless of how it's created. If we all had a fixed currency, the 1% would end up with more than 99% of that currency. For profit banks aren't the only problem.
Also they misunderstood the process what they left out is that more money is created by the debt banks owe one another not the debt of individuals See fractal reserve banking
Start on page 12 of the working paper entitled, "The Chicago Plan Revisited," Michael Kumhof and Jaromir Benes, International Monetary Fund, 2012 wp/12/202, if the historical comparison between private bank created money and nation created money. Private bank created money seems to always be much unhealthier for the economy than government created money. Please see the historical comparison.
The farm dollar will be exactly what this video says but better. When a farm dollar is created through work of a small farm it will be destroyed after it is uses for buying food. It will be part money or currency, and part futures contract. It will be like community farming, but with a currency competent.
Jct: The Professor of Banking Systems Engineering grades Positive Money A+ on how money for debt works and how the interest we can't pay is the problem. B for a half-vast solution that provides interest-free credit to the state but not to its citizens.
Money can be backed with farm goods. See my video the farm dollar to replace the us dollar. It would allow people to work on a small farm to earm dollars, and the farm dollars will go back to the farm for food.
Everyday we pay £192,000,000 to the banks. The population of the UK is 64,100,000 people So every person pays about £3 to banks The average salary is £26,000/year. If you have a minimum income, let's assume it's around £17,000. Everyday you would earn 17,000/365 = £46.6 You pay £3, which is 3/46.6 = almost 6.5% of your earnings everyday to banks if you are a typical, non-wealthy British. So banks allow us to spend more since they pump more (fake) money to the economy, which presumably boost our productivity/ability to earn if we invest correctly. But the drawback is that it takes 6.5% of what you earn. And whether you like it or not, there's no getting out of that. A way to picture this is: You are on a diet but you want to eat a burger right now. You promise yourself if you eat a burger right now you would forfeit 1.065 burger in the future. The question is: Is the 6.5% worth it?
Most of the money is numbers in a computer these days. Only around 3% or so is in the form of notes or coins. Regardless of what you believe this is a fact for us all.
nothing wrong with interest, big problem with fractional reserve banking. Interest simply indicates how much money is worth today, instead of tomorrow. Total production is very hard to work out, ie what is the "value" of 100,000 Justin Bieber cds? But inflation is at least something you can see happening. (though I agree it can be skewed eg by fuel prices, as everything is delivered somewhere) Under Positive Money's scheme there would still be interest. Which is a good thing for savers.
and how do you pay the interest? give out more money, to pay the existing interest off, wow job done, all paid, but what about the interest on the new money? oh no!. another way to pay for the old money, give the banker your assets, and your left with nothing. How do you get your assets again? barter or change the money system if you own the bank, you get all the interest(profit)
Read Herman Daly or Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen. Capitalism thinks it can break thermodynamic laws. Peter Victor, an economist, has a AI computer model which can essentially "fast forward" capitalism (like a monopoly game on speed) and show how money flows and accumulates.
One minor critique of an otherwise excellent video: The bankers aren't the top 10%, they're the top fraction of the 1%. The other 9.8% if the top 10% are just well-paid specialists like engineers and doctors, or high managers and executives. Still, it's the top 0.1-0.2% that are the multibillionaires and own the vast majority of the economy, so this is otherwise correct.
I totally agree that you shouldn't take a point from a 3 minute video. However this video should perk your interest into reading the two books, dozens of internet articles, you tube videos, radio 4 programs, parliamentary suggestions and speeches (Steve Baker MP)
If someone wants academic support for the ideas presented above, please see the working paper, "The Chicago Plan Revisited," by Michael Kumhof and Jaromir Benes, International Monetary Fund, August 2012, working paper, wp/2012/202. The working paper examines the history of monetary policy and finds that state created money is a much more successful method of creating money than our current system. In fact, the proposed system would solve our debt crisis, and keep debt manageable.
Yes thats pretty much it. Banks as they are now are not much more than wealth transferal systems imo. In the island example i gave, the banker, if he chose to would end owning it all at some point. At least until to others woke up to his game and fed him to the fishes!
What you should be asking is if everyone went and gave all the money back how much interest do we still have to pay? ALOT... Understand it isnt a myth it isnt a conspiracy this 100% fact.
I understand what you are saying, but the problem isn't inherent in the banking system, its the way people now have yo use credit. Traditionally the only people taking out large loans were businesses, who created value in what they went on to produce with that capital, and so could pay the interest on the loans without affecting the balance. But since the 70s, credit has been marketed to ordinary people more and more as an acceptable way to buy stuff rather than invest. And since most people in the US and UK haven't seen a rise in income since the 1970s, they have increasingly turned to loans to increase their standard of living. If people earned more, and thus had less need for consumer credit, banks would go back to mainly loaning to businesses - this is shown by the experience of the 1930s-1970s, where inequality fell despire the existence of fractional reserve banking.
Debts started growing in the 70's after they deregulated the financial markets. "They", (the Plutocrats) keep doing this throughout history. Check out the Green Party ideas. The problem is endemic in just about everything because the accumulation of limited resources is not limited. We need a resource based economy but need to reclaim the control of money first.
10 ปีที่แล้ว +2
All people create value so all people are producers. They get money and consume products of other people who are also only consumer due to the fact that they can create value in work. Problemem is that by machines, the machines produce value, money only goes to the few, so most people have no income. In the end there will be no one to consume either, because nobody can buy any more. The system fails..
believe the idea is to match the volume of money with production, which yields optimum employment, then monitor price indexes for changes and adjust volume accordingly. NB: usury will produce false indications of inflation, since it increases prices independent of production, so interest and fractional reserve lending must be prohibited.
this is confusing, why do you say someone, somewhere has to pay interest on every pound created by bank, ----- instead why dont you say, only some people who took loan will have to pay back all the loan money
Also i hope you understand that the moment you deposit your money into the banks accounts its not your money anymore :) because when you sign up for your account you give the bank authorization to do what they want with your cash hence why you get interest when you deposit money your money is loaned out staright away + new money is created hence if everyone pulls out their money the banks go bust thats why taking peoples savings to bail out banks is just pathetic and wont last just like in europ
there is three movies, first two are 2:00:00 minutes long, the last is 2:40:00 minutes long, the third I am 3/4 through. Sure takes a while to watch them
so, positive money is campaigning for replacing bank lending to transparent democratic productive lending, which will narrow the wealth gap, the future people who will run the system wont do the same as these present people doing, what's the guarantee
I don't support the rich hording all the wealth, and I certainly don't support banks creating money out of thin air, but this short video is incredibly oversimplified and leaves a lot of holes in its hypothesis. If the public is going to be effectively informed, we need more information with better details about what is really happening. This video is a good start, but it needs to be better.
Not only the compound interests of Banks sucks up money, but globalisation of the economy and huge fusions of corporations have to do with this gap. Furthermore we have to consider the effect of how the salary are maintained in long term under the inflation so that purchasing power diminishes. The root of the problem is more about cupidity than the enrichment. The root of the problem is the heart of men.
try and think of it in basic terms. you and ten friends on a desert island, things are going well with a basic village sorted. i 'a banker' show up one day and persuade the need of money! i loan you each 10 coins at 10% per year. a total of 100 coins. This puts me in the position of 1) a very easily earned income (money being sucked up). 2) knowing you cant repay your loans without destroying your money supply. 3) if you did all pay down your loans id still be due any outstanding interest.
It may have something to do with how banks are owned by shareholders. One could also research the links between those with money and power and how they are closely tied with the community structure of the banks. I would be surprised is any of those 10% didn't have any connections with banks
For a very clear explanation of how the debt-based, bankers-school system of money 'gravitates' both income and wealth to the top point-one percent, please have a watch of this video of German economist Dr, Bernd Senf on VIMEO - his sole English-language lecture :. go to blip.tv and find file number /4111596 It is exactly how they explain it. Thanks.
Good one Positive Money! Short, sharp and clear - sharing with our 10,000 followers on FB shortly, and will include in our next email update to our subscribers. Great work!
Blaming banks for a problem caused by genes and luck isn't fair. i'm not that smart, fairly rich and i get richer as time goes on. When I was young I bought with loan broken building, fixed it, rented it. Bank allowed me a new loan for another broken house because it was succesful, I fixed that, rented it. after a while I didn't need banks anymore, bought broken houses with rent collected, payed others to fix them for me. Now I can either work to increase how much money I make by doing nothing, or be happy with incomming money, I'm not. Had I somehow failed I would have owed the bank money for a long time, but Didn't fail, so now 31 people owe me money every month for a roof over their head. Essentially banks giving me non-existing money allowed me to build homes, employ people, improve their standard of living and improve my own significantly. How exactly is that a bad thing?
Good for you; you managed to beat the odds at the casino, but the system is structured so that only a few can do that. The odds are always in favor of the house (bank).
For such a successful person ,you certainly seem to of missed the point of Bank created money vs. Publicly created money. You could have received your loans from a private bank that had to do exactly what you had to do,. Work for it . The private bank would have raised money to lend to you ,the old fashioned way ,...paying savers less than what they charge borrowers for loans.That's called capitalism and is true savings and loan. If the bank ,could prove to the Central Bank of the country that it required more money than it could raise from depositors , to greaten the profit thus benefitting the nation through taxes paid on growth ,certainly a loan from the Central Bank as national debt would in fact be beneficial to everyone.. Its not that credit and debt are such horrible concepts ,it is that their creation should first benefit society. Capitalism must have a playing field that is owned by the nation ,not private interests.
Money is the source of every nation in this world not killing each other. They are depended on each other. It's THE positive effect of money in this world!
PDZ1122 What is your definition of super rich? If a person does not gain their wealth through honest effort and work producing a product, then they got it by taking from others. Did the Walton's (owners of WalMart) get rich by taking from others or by producing a product?
+azapps WalMart, Microsoft, Google, etc etc etc, those "super rich" used their products to get to where they are, but for example Apple, who hasnt payed taxes yet, cheated to get to where they are, regardless of how popular their products are. Why can they get away with not paying taxes when everyone else cant? just a small example, and im sure most of the other big mega corporations do the same trick. The point is that if your not "super rich", you are getting poorer and poorer and deeper into dept, while "they" become more rich by the Hour. Evidence can be drawn from prices rising all the time, and our paychecks not moving anywhere but down.
MatriXz Are we talking about rich people, or profitable corporations? If you are aware of "tricks" Apple used to pay less or no taxes, I'm sure the IRS is also aware. Do you think the IRS is giving them a free pass? Are corporations evil because they hire tax attorneys to handle the thousands of pages of tax law? Corporations don't control inflation. In the free market, prices are controlled by competition. Inflation is controlled by the central banks, the people who print and control our currency are the people who are driving up the cost of products, not big corporations. The evil super rich are the people who control the world banking industry.
Indeed, all evil springs out of private banks.. They print the money, they create fake debt, fake money, and flood markets where it profits them most.. Remove their ability to create money, and delete the already existing fake money, and we shall have much more control.. but it will cause other kinds of problems for a period of time, until we adjust..
First off, at 1:55 the idiot say's that the bottom 90% of people pay interest that lines the pockets of the top 10%, being in the top 10% is earning (don't quote me) probably less than $100,000/yr which would mean that quite a few individuals watching this video would qualify in that category. Now, if you qualify, ask yourself where is your check every month from the bottom 90%. Oh that's right, it doesn't exist. Yep, I get no check each month for a loan a bank gave out, shoot.
great vid, the money creation system is at the heart of the economic problems we are experiencing ie massive debt that can not be paid because there is now growth in the economy, no wealth creation to pay off the interest. well done more please . thanks
Some rich guy once told me If I can't work 100 hours a day, I'll never get rich. I have no idea how he works 100 hours. People say there is only 24 hours in a day, but they aren't rich, so they are just jealous.
He probably meant that you need to leverage other people's skills and time. Only a team can work 100 hours a day. If that team works for you, then you'll get rich. But there are other factors like how well that team is managed and whether there is a demand for what they do.
What they fail to mention is that Banks charge interest on the principle sum loaned to the borrower but they do not create any more money to pay off the interest. It is there fore logically impossible pay off all debts in existence.
Everything made sense up until 1:59 when you said the money from the bottom 90% is being sucked up to the top 10%, you never made the connection, you kind of just said "then this happens" but I don't get how you get from the interest (going to the banks, not the top 10%) to the bottom 90% going to the top 10%?
You're asking for evidence? You could start with Positive Monies other videos on their channel or visit positivemoney[dot]org. All the information is available if you genuinely seek it. It's a little lazy to demand evidence from YT commenters.
I agree with that. I'm confident the people at Positive Money agree with that. However, if you want to get across the message of "Don't lump US in with THEM." then state that and ONLY that. The problem is usury (ill-gotten gains), not the equitable exchange of service for money. Customers aren't mad at Bill Gates, Steve Jobs or Sam Walton. We should be infuriated with Ben Bernanke (US Fed), Todd Maclin (Chase), Douglas Flint (HSBC), Michael O'Neill (Citi), et al. Is PM's monetary solution wrong?
The really surreal thing is that people feel so secure about the notion of money, and yet they rarely have any idea how (and by whom) money is created. Use your brain power to find out, and then you'll understand one of the real secrets that divide the exploiters from the exploited.
If you want academic support for much of what this video says, please read the International Monetary Fund working paper entitled, "The Chicago Plan Revisited," by Michael Kumhof and Jaromir Benes, 2012, wp/12/202. It can be found on imf(dot)org or by searching for "The Chicago Plan Revisited" on the IMF website, wiki or in the news for condensed versions.
In “Occupying Chairlifts” a simple rule tweak on inheritance ends up changing the direction and purpose of modern human life! Here’s a fair way to transition forward to where we’re rewarded for cooperating and creating instead of competing and conquering. It's something specific we can demand. If this isnt the best answer, at least we’re thinking about what might be. Are we really just this close to having it work right? Oh yeah, it's a Ski movie! “Occupying Chairlifts” on TH-cam!
This video is very good at explaining the main point of Why are the rich getting richer and everyone else is getting poorer.The solution, in my view, is the elimination of the credit monopoly that governments grant to the banking cartel, not by putting the credit monopoly in different (government) hands, but liberating the credit commons. People and businesses can do this themselves by allocating their own credit directly via private community currencies and credit clearing circles. When these circles are networked together, they provide a means of payment that is locally controlled yet globally useful. By democratizing the control of credit, we will finally be able to democratize governments in a meaningful way.
Yes indeed, multiple marketplaces and multiple currencies. The problem under those circumstances is a byzantine system, and that a currency or marketplace could go rotten (as the USD became in the early noughties) and take down a bunch of businesses. Unearned income is one of the big problems, and if people come up with community systems (similar to building societies) then there is the strong option that a company that loses money or produces faulty goods should be remanaged or absorbed/shut down.
This is false, the richest people on earth are not banksters, because there are many banks. If banks become public, then they will have a monopoly (no competition) and create inequality. And the government would also have the power to use force, in order to get the citizens to pay, since they are public. Try to not pay taxes and wait.
You want more evidence? Here is another evidence, this one is coming from the guy that works for International Monetary Fund: /watch?v=JOqHd-G18z8?t=2m37s
The positive money plan is actually to link the monetary creation commission's ability to create money to the current state of inflation. If inflation goes above (I think) 2% then no money can be created. As if you are relying on high unemployment to make your plan work either it's very short term-ist or you are hoping it won't work :)
This may sound like a crazy idea, but why don't we replace money with an access based volunteer economy that has levels of access to reward people who work but guarantees a standard of living to everyone, similar to what Universal Basic Income sets out to do, only without the need for income.
+Socialist Skeptic i would love to see this kind of economy.. A roof over your head, and food every day, should be the minimum human right that everyone gets almost for free. And then you can "volunteer" for work, so our society can continue like it is currently.. Maybe base rewards off what kind of job a person volunteers for. So a dirty / dangerous / unsafe job gives more than a office job. Or something to promote the need to clean our toilets, or take our the garbage etc. Not many people will volunteer for those kinds of jobs, unless they have a carrot at the end of the tunnel. It could work, we just hafto rip down the entire Banking infastructure, politics as we know it, capitalism mindsets of people globally needs to change, and there will be alot of loopholes in the new system that will be exploited by the greedy, while its in the development state.
MatriXz One transitional theory involves actually exploiting the market and forcing it to implode, operating as a volunteer technocracy within controlled territory and functioning like a company towards the outside world, using revenue to expand control of resources and territory while internally reducing and eventually eliminating the need for money. It couldn't work in most West European or North American nations, but there aren't many legal obstacles in a lot of the African and Asian countries, and a few East European and South American countries might also allow it. The tricky part is getting the initial bedrock organization going and keeping it on mission, the people in the best position to do it are also the people with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
Socialist Skeptic The key is making vested interest in something without making it corruptable. The banking cabal will try again once they figure out the system.. This needs to become impossible. And thats going to be the hardest.
MatriXz Besides getting the bedrock foundation of transitional market systems set up, that remains a big concern. Even successful worker co-operatives frequently become corrupted and privatized.
Socialist Skeptic Yeah true, but thats still based on the already corrupt way of making business.. There is not many products that can be produced, managed, customer supported and sold in high enough quanitites to make a single person become a billionair, without having to cut corners, cheat and make decisions based on harmfull science in todays business world. You need to out compete all your compatition and make YOUR products the only choice that people will naturally choose, and that takes alot of evil agendas.. Even google, apple, microsoft etc etc have a dark secret that made it possible to become this big. (hint: tax avasion). So if money isnt the theme, if all products are "need based", to provide the workers with the goods they need to make them "want to work", then theres nothing to corrupt, there will be no need to cheat, since your not focusing on profit, your forcing on making products that are functionally and conveniently usefull.. :) im sure it possible in 500 years if we start giving up money today.
***** We have shared the same dream. I believe the Big Change is inevitable but certain events have to played out. Kudos to you for writing an entire book! I didn't read all of it but enjoyed the first few pages :-)
No but with more money being created, this causes inflation, which raises the price of everything such as real estate, and then if you want to buy a house you must borrow. By creating money you force debt onto people.
Inflation also means that the people who have all the money are forced to spend it...Otherwise they would just sit on their money (or gold for those who think thats a solution) causing deflation as fewer and fewer people will have money to buy things with. Inflation is not a problem when it is matched with salary increase. The issue is that your boss is increasing the price for the services he charges you provide his clients but does not pay you more for the more expensive service you provide. He just pockets the money. Record profits across all the big companies now and salaries have barely moved.
so, your idea is to compete against the current money power for business? lol good luck with that. it's funny that people think THIS is possible, but a moneyless society is not lol.
enjoy what you have now and dont have kids :P cause they will have a very bad future ahead of them exspecialy if your in the uk or usa :D atleast you will entertain me on how you deal with this issue :D Vote nigel farage !!!!! hes the only hope you have
(2/2) Secondly, I am not qualified to debate about thermodynamics or anything of that sort, I can however say this, go live in Cuba for 2 years and come back to tell me that it is better over there than it is in the states.
But without the bank your economy would contract not all the people who barrow are indebted if you barrow to buy a house you don't say your a debt slave you say you have a mortgage but have a home
Ok, so this video is not completely accurate nor inaccurate. Bankers that get rich from exploiting the flaws in the financial system to essentially transfer money from other people to themselves is wrong. Someone that gets rich by creating wealth via new technology, better goods, cheaper goods and so forth, deserves to get rich, because they make people's lives better. However, even though some bankers take advantage of the system, they are not the problem. The system is the problem. The people that are protesting the 1% and Wall St should be working to reform how the central bank/government works. If the government didn't back credit, then the bad bankers could not siphon off wealth for themselves.
IThinkWithMy Liver My comment was that the Occupy Wall Street people were focusing their efforts in the wrong area, not that they're not giving all they've got. It should be the Occupy DC movement, as that is where the power is. All the effort in the world is wasted if it is focused in the wrong area. If there is a disease, you go after the source, not the symptoms.
IThinkWithMy Liver I haven't heard of any OWS people being arrested, although I am sure that a few have been. As with any large gathering of protesters, I'm sure there were people that weren't protesting peacefully. I definitely don't agree with releasing all prisoners and getting rid of prisons.
Bankers do both...nowadays the creation of technology and goods dosent depend in one person work but the work of hundreds, the issue is that bankers are the ones who lend money and the ones who give you a job, they are owners of most Central Banks, they are the owners of the Banks and the owners of most industries.
vlad the video was just explaining whats wrong our money system. most people know and believe people who work and produce wealth deserve to be wealthy. what positive money is about is a fair system where money is issued with interest / usury attached. In the usa its actually in the constitution that the government issue our currency. allowing banks and central banks to control our money system is Theft. banks steal from us through interest and the government issues bonds that steals from the majority and pays interest payments to the holders of those bonds. thats what they're trying to show with the vaccum going to the top.
It's Green Party political policy to create such a public body for these exact reasons. THe only mainstream political party with such a progressive view!
Bitcoin is debt-free money, but obviously not created by a committee with public accountability. But maybe that is not such a bad thing because Bitcoin and all the other cryptocurrencies cause money itself to become part of the market economy. Whoever designs the cryptocurrency which is used most often by the public will supply most of the money. This automatically means innovation in security, user-friendliness etc. Probably more innovation than the situation with one currency controlled by a central body. Although the central body will probably react better to economic cycles.
hi, i totally love your videos, i learn loads from them. i would like to create similar videos for health education for my community at home. kindly point me in the right direction. will totally appreciate.
If you know someone who is bilingual in Turkish and English, you can ask them to send a transcript for this video so the channel can add Turkish captions :)
@Antoinette Which decreases their debt to the bank while increasing your own. The average American is in debt $90,000. Think about that. 97% of money in the economy is created by banks out of nothing in the form of debt with interest they make magically pop into existence. Bump that up just a few percent. Now the total amount of money in the economy is the total amount of debt people owe to the banks. All money is negative because all money is debt. I disagree with Positive Money's plan; I think it's naive. But this is what they mean by positive versus negative money.
Antoinette Micke when you take out a mortgage it tells you how much you borrow Vs what you repay. The repayment close to double on my mortgage. Also builders are involved in the corruption and horde land due to its constantly increasing value. This in turn constrains housing stock and keeps the cycle going. Builders now also hold freeholds and have created an asset class out of millions of people. The system is broken where parts of it need to benefit society rather than individuals (infrastructure and housing which need regulation). Neoliberalism is a very poor form of capatalism.
And finally, in regards to the percentage comment just below, this video is speaking about the top 10% of the US, not even the 1%. If you earn over 100k a year I would venture to bet that your in the top 10%, now tell me, do you own a bank? Do you feel the world throwing more money at you than you can spend while you sit and bathe in your new found fortune? Fuck no!
So if banks don't create money in the way outlined in the video, then where did all the extra 'non-tangible' money that you speak of come from? Your argument is self-defeating. There's nothing politically motivated about the video. It's just a simple statement of fact.
+Pupsik Its not really the point. You loan when you hafto buy a house, or a car, or start a company, or something expencive. Theres no family members who can loan you 100k+, unless they are amongst the rich 20%. Because prices are so high on such goods, your family cannot possibly help you enough to ever pay for it, so therefore you go loan in the banks. Which leads to more debt overall, thats the point.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless" -Thomas Jefferson
"Why are the rich getting richer?"
Because the government does them special favours. Why? Bribery and threats.
If you have money in the bank then the bank is using your money to create money. Taking our money out of the bank is not really viable though.
As long as money exists, and more is better than less, people will use it to control others for their benefit and to make more. This only explains how debt makes a privileged few money. Money is what needs to cease to exist, but this is unlikely to happen.
Rented property needs to be controlled. A buy to let should not be seen as an investment and not make anyone more than a cash ISA. Tenants should have more rights, a firm guarantee of renting a property for 10 years or more with the price fixed for that entire period. If you rent out a property you should be doing so that someone can have somewhere to live, not so that someone can make money.
I coin the term, "A steady state monetary system". Which is a fully closed system. Democratized money system. Interest on loans, comes back to source, back to the people, back to the money supply. So much money would come back to fund gov programs, we will be in constant contraction of it. To keep the dollar stable.. Gold, and bit coin would be worth nothing the next day. Gold would be 100 dollars an oz or less...
Yes, the system is flawed and abused by a VERY small percentage of the population, namely banks. It kills me though to see entrepreneurs who create jobs, help our communities, and want the best for the economy and the US to be grouped into this same evil clan simply based on our income alone. Just because someone makes 12 million dollars a year doesn't mean they are an evil banker, often times it's because they have provided extreme value to consumers and received money in exchange
Exactly, hard working people who create value should be rewarded.
interest is also responsible for the increasing disparity in wages and cost of living. in order to make a profit, businesses must pad the prices of goods and services at all levels of production with the interest on their loans, so they unwittingly impose usury on the population.
It all a crazy battle for resources powered by selfishness. I wish the world could equally rationed resources for all but it's too much of a dream. It's illegal to kill but not to let the poor starve to death.
Propaganda which encourages the 99% to believe the economy is bouncing back breeds complacency among the majority. I have been blogging ( via my posts in Life after Debt) to raise awareness about the social injustice, inequalities and absence of fair play for the victims of the banking crisis. My own case against HBOS serves to illustrate just how un-level the playing really field is and my five year battle to be heard proves that equality remains a lucrative key to the banksters success
This is not true. It is land speculation creates wealth disparities. Lord Sugar for example is worth £1.3b, but we only raised £125m selling his company, the rest comes from property. Without capital you are excluded from the property bubbles and without cash reserves you cannot make even more money when the property prices crash. Poor people are trapped in rentals that pay someone else's mortgage.
That is another issue.
Secondly, this video and many other videos seem to assume that anyone who is in the 1% owns a freaking bank, which (sorry to burst your bubble is just not reality), business owners and entrepreneurs who earn millions a year are in the 1% as well and we do NOT give loans out and live of interest, in fact, a vast majority of the 1% did not make their money from loaning the "90%" some money out but rather building companies and creating jobs
Without income caps or massive taxation and redistribution policies capitalist profits gradually but automatically sucks money up to a minority regardless of how it's created. If we all had a fixed currency, the 1% would end up with more than 99% of that currency. For profit banks aren't the only problem.
Also they misunderstood the process what they left out is that more money is created by the debt banks owe one another not the debt of individuals
See fractal reserve banking
Start on page 12 of the working paper entitled, "The Chicago Plan Revisited," Michael Kumhof and Jaromir Benes, International Monetary Fund, 2012 wp/12/202, if the historical comparison between private bank created money and nation created money. Private bank created money seems to always be much unhealthier for the economy than government created money. Please see the historical comparison.
The farm dollar will be exactly what this video says but better. When a farm dollar is created through work of a small farm it will be destroyed after it is uses for buying food. It will be part money or currency, and part futures contract. It will be like community farming, but with a currency competent.
Jct: The Professor of Banking Systems Engineering grades Positive Money A+ on how money for debt works and how the interest we can't pay is the problem. B for a half-vast solution that provides interest-free credit to the state but not to its citizens.
Money can be backed with farm goods. See my video the farm dollar to replace the us dollar. It would allow people to work on a small farm to earm dollars, and the farm dollars will go back to the farm for food.
Everyday we pay £192,000,000 to the banks.
The population of the UK is 64,100,000 people
So every person pays about £3 to banks
The average salary is £26,000/year. If you have a minimum income, let's assume it's around £17,000.
Everyday you would earn 17,000/365 = £46.6
You pay £3, which is 3/46.6 = almost 6.5% of your earnings everyday to banks if you are a typical, non-wealthy British.
So banks allow us to spend more since they pump more (fake) money to the economy, which presumably boost our productivity/ability to earn if we invest correctly.
But the drawback is that it takes 6.5% of what you earn. And whether you like it or not, there's no getting out of that.
A way to picture this is: You are on a diet but you want to eat a burger right now. You promise yourself if you eat a burger right now you would forfeit 1.065 burger in the future.
The question is: Is the 6.5% worth it?
Most of the money is numbers in a computer these days. Only around 3% or so is in the form of notes or coins. Regardless of what you believe this is a fact for us all.
Sorry meant to say fractional reserve banking
nothing wrong with interest, big problem with fractional reserve banking. Interest simply indicates how much money is worth today, instead of tomorrow.
Total production is very hard to work out, ie what is the "value" of 100,000 Justin Bieber cds? But inflation is at least something you can see happening. (though I agree it can be skewed eg by fuel prices, as everything is delivered somewhere)
Under Positive Money's scheme there would still be interest. Which is a good thing for savers.
and how do you pay the interest? give out more money, to pay the existing interest off, wow job done, all paid, but what about the interest on the new money? oh no!.
another way to pay for the old money, give the banker your assets, and your left with nothing. How do you get your assets again? barter or change the money system
if you own the bank, you get all the interest(profit)
Jct: About time the Positive Money LETS non-supporters get something perfectly. A+ on this part of the banking systems engineering.
Read Herman Daly or Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen. Capitalism thinks it can break thermodynamic laws. Peter Victor, an economist, has a AI computer model which can essentially "fast forward" capitalism (like a monopoly game on speed) and show how money flows and accumulates.
One minor critique of an otherwise excellent video: The bankers aren't the top 10%, they're the top fraction of the 1%. The other 9.8% if the top 10% are just well-paid specialists like engineers and doctors, or high managers and executives.
Still, it's the top 0.1-0.2% that are the multibillionaires and own the vast majority of the economy, so this is otherwise correct.
Good point
I totally agree that you shouldn't take a point from a 3 minute video. However this video should perk your interest into reading the two books, dozens of internet articles, you tube videos, radio 4 programs, parliamentary suggestions and speeches (Steve Baker MP)
If someone wants academic support for the ideas presented above, please see the working paper, "The Chicago Plan Revisited," by Michael Kumhof and Jaromir Benes, International Monetary Fund, August 2012, working paper, wp/2012/202. The working paper examines the history of monetary policy and finds that state created money is a much more successful method of creating money than our current system. In fact, the proposed system would solve our debt crisis, and keep debt manageable.
Yes thats pretty much it. Banks as they are now are not much more than wealth transferal systems imo. In the island example i gave, the banker, if he chose to would end owning it all at some point. At least until to others woke up to his game and fed him to the fishes!
What you should be asking is if everyone went and gave all the money back how much interest do we still have to pay? ALOT... Understand it isnt a myth it isnt a conspiracy this 100% fact.
This is the cause of all social and political unrest.
I feel the same way, this is the root cause.
I understand what you are saying, but the problem isn't inherent in the banking system, its the way people now have yo use credit. Traditionally the only people taking out large loans were businesses, who created value in what they went on to produce with that capital, and so could pay the interest on the loans without affecting the balance. But since the 70s, credit has been marketed to ordinary people more and more as an acceptable way to buy stuff rather than invest. And since most people in the US and UK haven't seen a rise in income since the 1970s, they have increasingly turned to loans to increase their standard of living. If people earned more, and thus had less need for consumer credit, banks would go back to mainly loaning to businesses - this is shown by the experience of the 1930s-1970s, where inequality fell despire the existence of fractional reserve banking.
Debts started growing in the 70's after they deregulated the financial markets. "They", (the Plutocrats) keep doing this throughout history. Check out the Green Party ideas. The problem is endemic in just about everything because the accumulation of limited resources is not limited. We need a resource based economy but need to reclaim the control of money first.
All people create value so all people are producers. They get money and consume products of other people who are also only consumer due to the fact that they can create value in work. Problemem is that by machines, the machines produce value, money only goes to the few, so most people have no income. In the end there will be no one to consume either, because nobody can buy any more. The system fails..
That's a good point but creating money from debt seems wrong.
Good explanation of the problem. Insane solution. The USA actually had the answer before the USA fell to central banks in 1913.
Interestingly enough however, USA became the world's biggest economy not so long after 1913
A door Just note that the US won a couple wars not long after that. Couldve played a role in them being successful ;)
100%
@@Saifthebest01 Also being the world's reserve currency they can send their inflation all over the world.
believe the idea is to match the volume of money with production, which yields optimum employment, then monitor price indexes for changes and adjust volume accordingly. NB: usury will produce false indications of inflation, since it increases prices independent of production, so interest and fractional reserve lending must be prohibited.
this is confusing, why do you say someone, somewhere has to pay interest on every pound created by bank, ----- instead why dont you say, only some people who took loan will have to pay back all the loan money
Everyone who is holding money has to pay through inflation.
Also i hope you understand that the moment you deposit your money into the banks accounts its not your money anymore :) because when you sign up for your account you give the bank authorization to do what they want with your cash hence why you get interest when you deposit money your money is loaned out staright away + new money is created hence if everyone pulls out their money the banks go bust thats why taking peoples savings to bail out banks is just pathetic and wont last just like in europ
there is three movies, first two are 2:00:00 minutes long, the last is 2:40:00 minutes long, the third I am 3/4 through. Sure takes a while to watch them
How is the electronically created money lend in the form of loan can be used for any purposes? Please explain!
so, positive money is campaigning for replacing bank lending to transparent democratic productive lending, which will narrow the wealth gap, the future people who will run the system wont do the same as these present people doing, what's the guarantee
Good point. At least you could elect different people if things aren't going well.
I don't support the rich hording all the wealth, and I certainly don't support banks creating money out of thin air, but this short video is incredibly oversimplified and leaves a lot of holes in its hypothesis. If the public is going to be effectively informed, we need more information with better details about what is really happening. This video is a good start, but it needs to be better.
John Daniels How banks make money
Not only the compound interests of Banks sucks up money, but globalisation of the economy and huge fusions of corporations have to do with this gap.
Furthermore we have to consider the effect of how the salary are maintained in long term under the inflation so that purchasing power diminishes.
The root of the problem is more about cupidity than the enrichment. The root of the problem is the heart of men.
try and think of it in basic terms. you and ten friends on a desert island, things are going well with a basic village sorted. i 'a banker' show up one day and persuade the need of money! i loan you each 10 coins at 10% per year. a total of 100 coins. This puts me in the position of
1) a very easily earned income (money being sucked up).
2) knowing you cant repay your loans without destroying your money supply.
3) if you did all pay down your loans id still be due any outstanding interest.
It may have something to do with how banks are owned by shareholders. One could also research the links between those with money and power and how they are closely tied with the community structure of the banks. I would be surprised is any of those 10% didn't have any connections with banks
Unless they're receiving dividends (and some do, but it's not much), shareholders do not benefit from the interest the banks are collecting.
For a very clear explanation of how the debt-based, bankers-school system of money 'gravitates' both income and wealth to the top point-one percent, please have a watch of this video of German economist Dr, Bernd Senf on VIMEO - his sole English-language lecture :.
go to blip.tv and find file number /4111596
It is exactly how they explain it.
Thanks.
Good one Positive Money! Short, sharp and clear - sharing with our 10,000 followers on FB shortly, and will include in our next email update to our subscribers. Great work!
Could These 3 Simple Changes to Banking Fix the Economy?
Er what is the economy, please explain ?
Blaming banks for a problem caused by genes and luck isn't fair. i'm not that smart, fairly rich and i get richer as time goes on. When I was young I bought with loan broken building, fixed it, rented it. Bank allowed me a new loan for another broken house because it was succesful, I fixed that, rented it. after a while I didn't need banks anymore, bought broken houses with rent collected, payed others to fix them for me. Now I can either work to increase how much money I make by doing nothing, or be happy with incomming money, I'm not. Had I somehow failed I would have owed the bank money for a long time, but Didn't fail, so now 31 people owe me money every month for a roof over their head. Essentially banks giving me non-existing money allowed me to build homes, employ people, improve their standard of living and improve my own significantly. How exactly is that a bad thing?
Good for you; you managed to beat the odds at the casino, but the system is structured so that only a few can do that. The odds are always in favor of the house (bank).
For such a successful person ,you certainly seem to of missed the point of Bank created money vs. Publicly created money. You could have received your loans from a private bank that had to do exactly what you had to do,. Work for it . The private bank would have raised money to lend to you ,the old fashioned way ,...paying savers less than what they charge borrowers for loans.That's called capitalism and is true savings and loan. If the bank ,could prove to the Central Bank of the country that it required more money than it could raise from depositors , to greaten the profit thus benefitting the nation through taxes paid on growth ,certainly a loan from the Central Bank as national debt would in fact be beneficial to everyone.. Its not that credit and debt are such horrible concepts ,it is that their creation should first benefit society. Capitalism must have a playing field that is owned by the nation ,not private interests.
Money is the source of every nation in this world not killing each other. They are depended on each other. It's THE positive effect of money in this world!
Huge problem here, not all of the rich 1% are bankers. It's not the rich peoples fault that we have fiat currency, it's the "bankers" fault.
+azapps But how many super rich who are not bankers, got that way through honest effort and work or by producing something useful? Very, very few.
PDZ1122
What is your definition of super rich? If a person does not gain their wealth through honest effort and work producing a product, then they got it by taking from others. Did the Walton's (owners of WalMart) get rich by taking from others or by producing a product?
+azapps
WalMart, Microsoft, Google, etc etc etc, those "super rich" used their products to get to where they are, but for example Apple, who hasnt payed taxes yet, cheated to get to where they are, regardless of how popular their products are. Why can they get away with not paying taxes when everyone else cant? just a small example, and im sure most of the other big mega corporations do the same trick.
The point is that if your not "super rich", you are getting poorer and poorer and deeper into dept, while "they" become more rich by the Hour.
Evidence can be drawn from prices rising all the time, and our paychecks not moving anywhere but down.
MatriXz
Are we talking about rich people, or profitable corporations? If you are aware of "tricks" Apple used to pay less or no taxes, I'm sure the IRS is also aware. Do you think the IRS is giving them a free pass? Are corporations evil because they hire tax attorneys to handle the thousands of pages of tax law?
Corporations don't control inflation. In the free market, prices are controlled by competition. Inflation is controlled by the central banks, the people who print and control our currency are the people who are driving up the cost of products, not big corporations. The evil super rich are the people who control the world banking industry.
Indeed, all evil springs out of private banks.. They print the money, they create fake debt, fake money, and flood markets where it profits them most.. Remove their ability to create money, and delete the already existing fake money, and we shall have much more control.. but it will cause other kinds of problems for a period of time, until we adjust..
Thank you all for your constructive replies.
FINALLY FOUND IT YES
First off, at 1:55 the idiot say's that the bottom 90% of people pay interest that lines the pockets of the top 10%, being in the top 10% is earning (don't quote me) probably less than $100,000/yr which would mean that quite a few individuals watching this video would qualify in that category. Now, if you qualify, ask yourself where is your check every month from the bottom 90%. Oh that's right, it doesn't exist. Yep, I get no check each month for a loan a bank gave out, shoot.
great vid, the money creation system is at the heart of the economic problems we are experiencing ie massive debt that can not be paid because there is now growth in the economy, no wealth creation to pay off the interest. well done more please . thanks
Some rich guy once told me If I can't work 100 hours a day, I'll never get rich. I have no idea how he works 100 hours. People say there is only 24 hours in a day, but they aren't rich, so they are just jealous.
He probably meant that you need to leverage other people's skills and time. Only a team can work 100 hours a day. If that team works for you, then you'll get rich. But there are other factors like how well that team is managed and whether there is a demand for what they do.
I worked over 100 hours a week... and got robbed by a banker (I kid you not).
What they fail to mention is that Banks charge interest on the principle sum loaned to the borrower but they do not create any more money to pay off the interest. It is there fore logically impossible pay off all debts in existence.
Everything made sense up until 1:59 when you said the money from the bottom 90% is being sucked up to the top 10%, you never made the connection, you kind of just said "then this happens" but I don't get how you get from the interest (going to the banks, not the top 10%) to the bottom 90% going to the top 10%?
You're asking for evidence? You could start with Positive Monies other videos on their channel or visit positivemoney[dot]org. All the information is available if you genuinely seek it. It's a little lazy to demand evidence from YT commenters.
I agree with that. I'm confident the people at Positive Money agree with that. However, if you want to get across the message of "Don't lump US in with THEM." then state that and ONLY that.
The problem is usury (ill-gotten gains), not the equitable exchange of service for money. Customers aren't mad at Bill Gates, Steve Jobs or Sam Walton. We should be infuriated with Ben Bernanke (US Fed), Todd Maclin (Chase), Douglas Flint (HSBC), Michael O'Neill (Citi), et al.
Is PM's monetary solution wrong?
Pretty much true. In other words convert DEBT into EQUITY.
Or the federal reserve in the US :P
The really surreal thing is that people feel so secure about the notion of money, and yet they rarely have any idea how (and by whom) money is created. Use your brain power to find out, and then you'll understand one of the real secrets that divide the exploiters from the exploited.
yes very educational, would been perfect to have it subtitled in various languages only ..
If you want academic support for much of what this video says, please read the International Monetary Fund working paper entitled, "The Chicago Plan Revisited," by Michael Kumhof and Jaromir Benes, 2012, wp/12/202. It can be found on imf(dot)org or by searching for "The Chicago Plan Revisited" on the IMF website, wiki or in the news for condensed versions.
In “Occupying Chairlifts” a simple rule tweak on inheritance ends up changing the direction and purpose of modern human life! Here’s a fair way to transition forward to where we’re rewarded for cooperating and creating instead of competing and conquering.
It's something specific we can demand. If this isnt the best answer, at least we’re thinking about what might be. Are we really just this close to having it work right?
Oh yeah, it's a Ski movie! “Occupying Chairlifts” on TH-cam!
good info but to me lousy sound quality i will try the next one with same title helas
Dam, it had been 8 years...
This video is very good at explaining the main point of Why are the rich getting richer and everyone else is getting poorer.The solution, in my view, is the elimination of the credit monopoly that governments grant to the banking cartel, not by putting the credit monopoly in different (government) hands, but liberating the credit commons.
People and businesses can do this themselves by allocating their own credit directly via private community currencies and credit clearing circles. When these circles are networked together, they provide a means of payment that is locally controlled yet globally useful.
By democratizing the control of credit, we will finally be able to democratize governments in a meaningful way.
Yes indeed, multiple marketplaces and multiple currencies.
The problem under those circumstances is a byzantine system, and that a currency or marketplace could go rotten (as the USD became in the early noughties) and take down a bunch of businesses.
Unearned income is one of the big problems, and if people come up with community systems (similar to building societies) then there is the strong option that a company that loses money or produces faulty goods should be remanaged or absorbed/shut down.
This is false, the richest people on earth are not banksters, because there are many banks.
If banks become public, then they will have a monopoly (no competition) and create inequality. And the government would also have the power to use force, in order to get the citizens to pay, since they are public.
Try to not pay taxes and wait.
You want more evidence? Here is another evidence, this one is coming from the guy that works for International Monetary Fund:
/watch?v=JOqHd-G18z8?t=2m37s
Your link is broken, what is the title of the video?
excellent video.. thank you
Yes, they are not.
The positive money plan is actually to link the monetary creation commission's ability to create money to the current state of inflation. If inflation goes above (I think) 2% then no money can be created. As if you are relying on high unemployment to make your plan work either it's very short term-ist or you are hoping it won't work :)
Great guys! Like always. Keep it up!
This may sound like a crazy idea, but why don't we replace money with an access based volunteer economy that has levels of access to reward people who work but guarantees a standard of living to everyone, similar to what Universal Basic Income sets out to do, only without the need for income.
+Socialist Skeptic
i would love to see this kind of economy..
A roof over your head, and food every day, should be the minimum human right that everyone gets almost for free.
And then you can "volunteer" for work, so our society can continue like it is currently.. Maybe base rewards off what kind of job a person volunteers for. So a dirty / dangerous / unsafe job gives more than a office job. Or something to promote the need to clean our toilets, or take our the garbage etc. Not many people will volunteer for those kinds of jobs, unless they have a carrot at the end of the tunnel.
It could work, we just hafto rip down the entire Banking infastructure, politics as we know it, capitalism mindsets of people globally needs to change, and there will be alot of loopholes in the new system that will be exploited by the greedy, while its in the development state.
MatriXz
One transitional theory involves actually exploiting the market and forcing it to implode, operating as a volunteer technocracy within controlled territory and functioning like a company towards the outside world, using revenue to expand control of resources and territory while internally reducing and eventually eliminating the need for money.
It couldn't work in most West European or North American nations, but there aren't many legal obstacles in a lot of the African and Asian countries, and a few East European and South American countries might also allow it.
The tricky part is getting the initial bedrock organization going and keeping it on mission, the people in the best position to do it are also the people with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
Socialist Skeptic
The key is making vested interest in something without making it corruptable. The banking cabal will try again once they figure out the system..
This needs to become impossible. And thats going to be the hardest.
MatriXz
Besides getting the bedrock foundation of transitional market systems set up, that remains a big concern. Even successful worker co-operatives frequently become corrupted and privatized.
Socialist Skeptic
Yeah true, but thats still based on the already corrupt way of making business.. There is not many products that can be produced, managed, customer supported and sold in high enough quanitites to make a single person become a billionair, without having to cut corners, cheat and make decisions based on harmfull science in todays business world.
You need to out compete all your compatition and make YOUR products the only choice that people will naturally choose, and that takes alot of evil agendas.. Even google, apple, microsoft etc etc have a dark secret that made it possible to become this big. (hint: tax avasion).
So if money isnt the theme, if all products are "need based", to provide the workers with the goods they need to make them "want to work", then theres nothing to corrupt, there will be no need to cheat, since your not focusing on profit, your forcing on making products that are functionally and conveniently usefull.. :) im sure it possible in 500 years if we start giving up money today.
Why worry about what other people earn? Contentment is what is needed.
- I would say to watch them all but if you watch the last one - "zeitgeist moving forward", you will be ok to get the idea
FS
Exactamente !
Thank you.
There is no political party that will help restore the balance, someone needs to start a movement that will help the ordinary man in the street.
The Green Party does!
*****
We have shared the same dream. I believe the Big Change is inevitable but certain events have to played out. Kudos to you for writing an entire book! I didn't read all of it but enjoyed the first few pages :-)
@@jasonxwillby271 100%
Would you be able to make a video on building societies?
Excellent video.. some people, like below, of hardened schools of thought may not like it.
Well no one put a gun to your head to take a loan now did they.
No but with more money being created, this causes inflation, which raises the price of everything such as real estate, and then if you want to buy a house you must borrow. By creating money you force debt onto people.
Inflation also means that the people who have all the money are forced to spend it...Otherwise they would just sit on their money (or gold for those who think thats a solution) causing deflation as fewer and fewer people will have money to buy things with.
Inflation is not a problem when it is matched with salary increase. The issue is that your boss is increasing the price for the services he charges you provide his clients but does not pay you more for the more expensive service you provide. He just pockets the money. Record profits across all the big companies now and salaries have barely moved.
@@100kby35 100%
You must work for the banks 😜
fantastic video, thank you for making it, keep educating.
Please help us translate this video on Amara(dot)org
so, your idea is to compete against the current money power for business? lol good luck with that. it's funny that people think THIS is possible, but a moneyless society is not lol.
enjoy what you have now and dont have kids :P cause they will have a very bad future ahead of them exspecialy if your in the uk or usa :D atleast you will entertain me on how you deal with this issue :D
Vote nigel farage !!!!! hes the only hope you have
(2/2) Secondly, I am not qualified to debate about thermodynamics or anything of that sort, I can however say this, go live in Cuba for 2 years and come back to tell me that it is better over there than it is in the states.
I think you missed the point of the video.
But without the bank your economy would contract not all the people who barrow are indebted if you barrow to buy a house you don't say your a debt slave you say you have a mortgage but have a home
Homes would be a lot cheaper! The government could still expand the money supply as a percentage of GDP.
The narrator sounds like the narrator from Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy. :)
Ok, so this video is not completely accurate nor inaccurate. Bankers that get rich from exploiting the flaws in the financial system to essentially transfer money from other people to themselves is wrong.
Someone that gets rich by creating wealth via new technology, better goods, cheaper goods and so forth, deserves to get rich, because they make people's lives better.
However, even though some bankers take advantage of the system, they are not the problem. The system is the problem. The people that are protesting the 1% and Wall St should be working to reform how the central bank/government works. If the government didn't back credit, then the bad bankers could not siphon off wealth for themselves.
That's the whole point of the video. Positive Money wants to reform the SYSTEM.
IThinkWithMy Liver My comment was that the Occupy Wall Street people were focusing their efforts in the wrong area, not that they're not giving all they've got. It should be the Occupy DC movement, as that is where the power is. All the effort in the world is wasted if it is focused in the wrong area.
If there is a disease, you go after the source, not the symptoms.
IThinkWithMy Liver I haven't heard of any OWS people being arrested, although I am sure that a few have been. As with any large gathering of protesters, I'm sure there were people that weren't protesting peacefully.
I definitely don't agree with releasing all prisoners and getting rid of prisons.
Bankers do both...nowadays the creation of technology and goods dosent depend in one person work but the work of hundreds, the issue is that bankers are the ones who lend money and the ones who give you a job, they are owners of most Central Banks, they are the owners of the Banks and the owners of most industries.
vlad the video was just explaining whats wrong our money system. most people know and believe people who work and produce wealth deserve to be wealthy. what positive money is about is a fair system where money is issued with interest / usury attached. In the usa its actually in the constitution that the government issue our currency. allowing banks and central banks to control our money system is Theft. banks steal from us through interest and the government issues bonds that steals from the majority and pays interest payments to the holders of those bonds. thats what they're trying to show with the vaccum going to the top.
Tons of evidence on the website positivemoney(dot)org
The discovery of major C.H. Douglas almost a 100 years
It's Green Party political policy to create such a public body for these exact reasons. THe only mainstream political party with such a progressive view!
Bitcoin!
Bitcoin is positive money!
Bitcoin is debt-free money, but obviously not created by a committee with public accountability. But maybe that is not such a bad thing because Bitcoin and all the other cryptocurrencies cause money itself to become part of the market economy. Whoever designs the cryptocurrency which is used most often by the public will supply most of the money. This automatically means innovation in security, user-friendliness etc. Probably more innovation than the situation with one currency controlled by a central body. Although the central body will probably react better to economic cycles.
hi, i totally love your videos, i learn loads from them. i would like to create similar videos for health education for my community at home. kindly point me in the right direction. will totally appreciate.
They get interest. Lol
I ask for evidence and you provide none. It's as simple as that.
John Daniels How banks make money
Plse turkish lang. add to video =)
If you know someone who is bilingual in Turkish and English, you can ask them to send a transcript for this video so the channel can add Turkish captions :)
The money of mortgages is paid to the building industry and so enters the real economy.
Yep. This movie is totally BS.
Slave2PaperWithInkOn
If you build a house and get a mortgage from the bank you pay the people who build your house with the money of the mortgage.
@Antoinette
Which decreases their debt to the bank while increasing your own.
The average American is in debt $90,000. Think about that.
97% of money in the economy is created by banks out of nothing in the form of debt with interest they make magically pop into existence.
Bump that up just a few percent.
Now the total amount of money in the economy is the total amount of debt people owe to the banks. All money is negative because all money is debt.
I disagree with Positive Money's plan; I think it's naive. But this is what they mean by positive versus negative money.
Antoinette Micke when you take out a mortgage it tells you how much you borrow Vs what you repay. The repayment close to double on my mortgage.
Also builders are involved in the corruption and horde land due to its constantly increasing value. This in turn constrains housing stock and keeps the cycle going. Builders now also hold freeholds and have created an asset class out of millions of people.
The system is broken where parts of it need to benefit society rather than individuals (infrastructure and housing which need regulation). Neoliberalism is a very poor form of capatalism.
And finally, in regards to the percentage comment just below, this video is speaking about the top 10% of the US, not even the 1%. If you earn over 100k a year I would venture to bet that your in the top 10%, now tell me, do you own a bank? Do you feel the world throwing more money at you than you can spend while you sit and bathe in your new found fortune? Fuck no!
So if banks don't create money in the way outlined in the video, then where did all the extra 'non-tangible' money that you speak of come from? Your argument is self-defeating. There's nothing politically motivated about the video. It's just a simple statement of fact.
It's a conscious choice of people themselves. Why not live by your means, save money or borrow from family members?
+Pupsik
Its not really the point. You loan when you hafto buy a house, or a car, or start a company, or something expencive. Theres no family members who can loan you 100k+, unless they are amongst the rich 20%.
Because prices are so high on such goods, your family cannot possibly help you enough to ever pay for it, so therefore you go loan in the banks. Which leads to more debt overall, thats the point.
@@matrixz12345 Thank you, I was about to say the samething.
Bitcoin or bust.
2 years ago...hope you are now living in the south of Spain
you should be reach by now