The New Economical System

http://neweconomicalsystem.org/

neweconomicalsystem.org The Financial Hijacking of the American Revolution How America was tricked into becoming capitalist $ 8 Can America’s gigantic public debt – officially nearly breathtaking $18,000 billion – at all be paid back? YES! The answer is that the debt amazingly easy is refundable – provided that you know th…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEV5AFFcZ-s

(Official Movie) THRIVE: What On Earth Will It Take? For the first time, Foster and Kimberly are hosting live, interactive, online video events to engage the Thrive Movement in addressing key principles and str...

¨In a few years may well Swedish economy described as a classic case of a fully visible blast mine just waiting for the foot. When foreign economists come to visit, they usually also make politicians aware of the danger."
This being said by a financial journalist in one of Sweden's largest newspapers today April 25, 2015.
What is the situation in the US?

General George Washington Crossing the Delaware.
Painting by Emanuel Leutze 1851. Oil on canvas.

A SUMMARY http://neweconomicalsystem.org/

THE HIJACKING OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION – HOW AMERICA WAS TRICKED INTO BECOMING CAPITALIST is the title of a stand-alone book that represents the 17 last chapters of Part 2 of Per Lundgren's trilogy CAPIATLISM REVEALED – THE GIGANTIC BANK FRAUD - AN OUTSTANDING ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DECEPTION. It's about a little known, but dramatic period in US history, marked by deceit and deception, and with major consequences down to our days. Events which occurred when the nation was barely born.
To understand how America was lured to become capitalist one must go back in history until the early 1700s and the living conditions of the original 13 American colonies under the leadership of social visionaries like BENJAMIN FRANKLIN. There is, as many Americans know, a period in American colonial history called "the good years", then there for quite some time (about 1720- 1750) was a relatively, yes, even a startlingly, developed social welfare in the American colonies, despite those at that time were under the jurisdiction of the English Crown, and were therefore subordinate England ́s will, the motherland where conditions were quite different. In Benjamin Franklin's society during “the good years" were unemployment and social exclusion virtually non- existent, and the economy flourished. And of this prosperity was particularly Benjamin Franklin the great architect. A note from the American colonial history: Benjamin Franklin visited England several times as colonial official representative. At one point the English officials asked how it was the colonies managed to collect enough taxes to build poor houses, and how they were able to handle the great burden of caring for the poor. Franklin's reply was most revealing: "We have no poor houses in the Colonies, and if we had, we would have no one to put in them, as in the Colonies there is not a single unemployed man, no poor and no vagabonds." He went on to explain the underlying reason for this: "It is because in the Colonies we issue our own paper money. We call it Colonial Script, and we issue only enough to move all goods freely from the producers to the Consumers; and as we create our money, we control the purchasing power of money, and have no interest to pay." (Quotations are taken from the internet).
Less well known is perhaps the background to these "good times". The root cause of these was Franklin's deep knowledge and understanding of the old and extremely smooth functioning English socio-economic TALLY SYSTEM, which had been invented by the medieval King Henry I, to then have been applied with great success in England for hundreds of years. As said, Benjamin Franklin was very familiar with this system, and introduced an enhanced version of it into of the colonies, first in Pennsylvania, later spreading to other colonies. Henry I's tally system was characterized by that it was the king, and he alone ("the Crown"), who had the full power over society's money, the so-called tally sticks, not bankers so that in a capitalist society. Franklin did not use wooden sticks (tally sticks) as Henry I, but instead paper money (colonial scripts) with the same function, manufactured and administered by the Colonial Board of Directors (the popular representation). What is important here was thus that in Franklin ́s society was it the colonial Board alone, not bankers, that had power over society's money. Which was a big thorn in contemporary English banker's eyes, and the reason that England finally decided to sabotage Franklin's socio-economic system. This was done partly in 1751, partly in 1764, when the English these years introduced together two Franklin ́s system countervailing laws in the colonies, the so-called CURRENCY ACTS, laws that basically forbade Franklin's tally-like system, and instead decreed a Central Banking economic, ie capitalist, principle, that society's money was something that should be lent at interest in banks.
It was not long after the laws' introduction until the colonial societies had drastically changed for the worse. Unemployment, social exclusion and poverty quickly became communities new hallmark. This caused naturally over time a growing and widespread discontent among the public,
especially as "the good years" were not remote in time, times people remembered; they had SOMETHING BETTER TO COMPARE WITH. (In this connection it may be mentioned that the famous British writer GEORGE ORWELL in his classic novel "1984" discusses the question of how a given power elite should act to maintain its once attained power. A risk to the power elite is that the "masses", ie the public, will have reason to rebel. Here is what Orwell says: "The masses never revolt of their own accord, and they never revolt merely because they are oppressed. Indeed, so long as they are not permitted to have STANDARDS OF COMPARISON (my caps), they never become aware that they are oppressed." Orwell also says: “If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction.” It was the mentioned great dissatisfaction among the public with a deteriorating situation in society, nota bene, that was the true cause of the American Revolution, nothing else. Revolutionaries ideal was the recollection they still had of “the good years"; it was the restoration of Franklin's society that was revolutionaries dream and goal. Several generations of American youth have subsequently been brought up with a society lie, ie falsification of history, it was yearning for freedom from English supremacy that was the primary cause of the revolution in the 1700s, but that is not true. It was the desire to restore "the good years" that triggered the revolution. The desire for freedom and independence from England arose only at a later stage.
As we know, won the colonists over the British and gained their independence. But it was a Pyrrhic victory, it would quickly prove, because they certainly won the battle against the English Crown, but lost the war against the English bankers. Early on, when the new proud nation of United States of America was formed, came namely, betrayal and treachery into the picture. The US Constitution is in many respects a masterpiece as the basis for popular democracy. But the observant sees already in at least some part of the text of the Constitution clear evidence of the conspiracy lurking in the background. For it is obvious to the perceptive, that the revolutionary ideals, with Franklin ́s social system in the high seat, deliberately are sabotaged. It was not like the revolutionaries had initially hoped, that the state, ie the Government - the extended arm of the people - alone got the power over society's foundation, ie society's money, but the state had to accept to share that power with, should occur, a much stronger party, which would very soon enter the stage, namely A CENTRAL BANK, which would not serve the people, but private shareholders. All this can be read between the lines "of those who have eyes to see", that there were forces, at least in part, behind the US Constitution that did not see the good of the people, but which primarily served another, private, power. And these dark forces' primary tool at the time was Alexander Hamilton, who was to become America's first Secretary of the Treasury. As early as 1791, Hamilton was the man behind America's first central bank, “First Bank of the United States”, formally privately owned to 80%, but in reality privately to l00%. From then on, money was something that was lent at interest by banks, ultimately by the central bank. This also applied to the state (government) itself, which had to adapt to these conditions in the form of treasury. It is fair to say that the US has been capitalist since February 25, 1791, when the first US central bank was chartered for the next 20 years by Congress, a central bank that only formally was national.
Today, after 224 years of uninterrupted capitalism/Central Banking economics in the US, it is perhaps appropriate to summarize a retrospect of this socio-economic system. 224 years in a row should be enough to fairly evaluate the system. If the evaluation is based on the revolutionary ideals, have these ever been achieved during these 224 years? The answer is no. Not even during the boom years after World War II did the nation reached up to an all-inclusive prosperity like that of Franklin's society. And what about American society today? Most likely, the American society never has been more unequal and in debt than today, with widespread unemployment, poverty and many times apathy. In fact, the American dream is the biggest myth of the capitalist system.
The question then is whether these gloomy findings can be altered in any way? Well, I guess many would agree that it will not work through more of the same (capitalism), concerning 224 years of failure. Per Lundgren suggests in his trilogy ́s third part a new socio-economic system, in which the
basics are borrowed from Henry I's and Benjamin Franklin ́s respective tally system, but significantly modernized by Per, including the addition of several "keys" based on inter alia Per ́s math skills, for it to work smoothly. Through these keys it is possible to achieve a thriving societal economy entirely without inflation, that is beneficial for almost all people. But before any change can occur, people must come to the realization that the current system represents not only a huge problem, but actually a gigantic crime, and THE UNDERSTANDING why this is so. It is for this purpose Per Lundgren has written his trilogy.
The US Constitution is very cleverly written by highly talented people from different camps. I am here thinking primarily of ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8, which regulates the Congressional powers. There are not only several LOOPHOLES in the Constitutional text, which actually gradually has enabled the background powers of capitalism/Central Banking economics to finally grip today's de facto stranglehold on the American nation. Per Lundgren also recognizes four possibilities, which he has chosen to call THE FOUR DOOR OPENERS, to stunningly easily able to correct the current problems troubling capitalist America, including that with a stroke of the pen come to terms with America's gargantuan debt, and further eliminate virtually all unemployment, a large proportion of crime and recover the true meaning of "the American dream". In other words, restore Benjamin Franklin ́s good years in America and nearly 250 years too late realizing the American Revolution ideals.

Stockholm 2014-01-05 Göran Lundgren (brother of Per Lundgren)

http://neweconomicalsystem.org/

The author and whistleblower Per Lundgren is almost always happy like this!

http://neweconomicalsystem.org/

Chapter 69 is the first chapter of the e-book THE HIJACKING OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION – HOW AMERICA WAS TRICKED INTO BECOMING CAPITALIST that is the title of a stand-alone book that represents the 17 last chapters of Part 2 of Per Lundgren's trilogy CAPIATLISM REVEALED – THE GIGANTIC BANKFRAUD - AN OUTSTANDING ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DECEPTION. "The Financial Hijacking of the American Revolution" you will find on http://neweconomicalsystem.org

CHAPTER 69

In the following 17 chapters I directly address the people of the United States of America
Dear American people! Your revolution occurred in the 1700s as the foundation of your proud nation. As we know, the United States finally declared its independence in 1776. However, today the American public is de facto withheld the real causes why your fathers, the colonists, revolted against the English crown in the mid 1760s. As a matter of fact the very first cause of the revolution was a general public discontent with a issue concerning who should be in charge of One machines manufacturing colonial paper money!
As all Americans know, Benjamin Franklin was a revolutionary portal figure. Franklin expressed himself in this blunt way about the causes of the revolution:
"The inability of the colonists to get power to issue Their Own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War . "(1)
It was plain speaking. However that is by no means how the main cause of the revolution is depicted in current textbooks of American history. Here the usual manner of the authors is instead to overemphasize the colonizers desire for freedom from the English supremacy as the main cause, while the power over money printing machines, the power over the paper money production, at most is mentioned as a side issue. Therefore it is a form of historical distortion, yes, downright a falsification of history, that we here are confronted with, that millions of Americans and others for that matter are fed with. By concealing these facts (history falsification) from the public, the American people are unable to come to knowledge about how capitalism once was introduced in America. Their history books will not give them the right answer. And people will not understand that they are cheated. Instead of telling the truth, ie the revolution was a big failure concerning the power over the mentioned machines, a picture is painted up the revolution was a success story. The actual causes, which once made people become to the extent frustrated that they revolted, are consciously hidden.
There are several crucial events and circumstances during and after the revolution, with great significance up to present days, that obscure background powers are doing their best to withhold from public awareness, which is why all facts are not mentioned in history books. I then intend events that clearly show that the American people actually, despite their dissatisfaction with the contemporary circumstances, manifested in the revolution, yet insidiously were imposed an economic system which they did not want, i.e. a “central bank economy”, synonymous with the concept of capitalism. In order to understand this we need to look at the prelude of the American revolution.
Basically a central bank economy (capitalism) is characterized in...
that money supplied to society almost exclusively comes from loans tainted with interest, and where another characteristic feature is a government (the people's extended arm) unnecessarily demanding taxes from the people. The capitalistic system also is characterized in that the state, also unnecessarily, incurs liabilities (debt). If the revolution had fully succeeded in its intentions, and its further development had continued in the spirit of Benjamin Franklin, had the United States today neither had a national debt, a taxation system, nor any poverty or unemployment. Actually it is in these basic events we are able to find the cause of today ́s U.S. economic situation, where capitalism is the undisputed master. This process, when capitalism was elbowed in place, was actually the expession of an ingeniously calculated plan, containing an abundance of outright lies, deceits and illusions, carried out in seven steps. Where the crucial milestone would be the formation of America's first central bank, First ( National ) Bank of America(2), in 1791. A bank, which to 100 percent would prove to be privately owned, did now usurpe the power over the newborn nation ́s crucial banknote production, while the country in parallel went into debt (state debt), and a tax system was developed, all according to central bank financial principles. It is about these events I intend revealingly tell you, as your own history books, as mentioned, do not present true information. The aim is that you, the American people, profoundly shall understand what in reality is going on in your country today, that you will thereby be able to take a more grounded position to your future and continued development. The choice is yours. My job is the communicator ́s, to open your eyes.
People in other nations around the world can also benefit from my story, primarily directed at the American people, as much is valid also for their part. First and foremost in the deep understanding of the three big issues I, II and III, crucial for society.
The three societal key issues
These three crucial issues, here focused on the U.S., are:
I) Who shall be in charge of (in power of) the money production in the U.S.A? That is to say over all types of money (banknotes, coins, electronic money, etc.) that is created out of thin air with the help of machines.
II) Who shall legally possess the money that is newly created out of thin air in the U.S.A? III) According to what rules (regulations) shall this money, created out of thin air, be brought
out into the American society?
By replacing the U.S. national designation against any national designation at any time, the three crucial questions can be applied to virtually any nation. The disposition is that I first describe the events briefly in an overview, then deal with them in detail, i.e. the events that American history books carefully sweep under the carpet.
The dream of the promised land – America
The rumor of the fulfillment of the Biblical prophecy(3) about "the land flowing with milk and honey" in America, spread from country to country in the impoverished Europe during the 1700s first half, which at that time went through several very deep recessions. Over a period of 22 years, between 1751 and 1773, slowed then the fame of America as the promised land. But in 1773, the year when the American Revolution fully broke out, it got renewed strength(4). The rumor told that in the American colonies across the Atlantic, one was able to decide about one ́s own life, given that one as an immigrant ended up in the right colony, where the already residing people were welcoming and understanding. "The State" or government in the form of colony boards did not meddle very much in how people lived. It was high ceilings on freedom and tolerance. As an immigrant to the colonies one could for instance easily avoid the cumbersome bureaucratic and segregating conditions prevailing in the home country.
It was thus in many ways much simpler and fairer to live in “the new world”, if you ended up in the right place, even if it was far from any bed of roses here either with all the unknown and new. The rumor in the first half of the 1700s also said that taxes in the American colonies were so low, it was as if there were no taxes at all compared to how it was at home. Yes, in the colony of Pennsylvania there was no taxation at all, it was purported. In the European home countries unemployment flourished as widespread social exclusion, poverty, begging and even starvation, when recessions hit its worst in the 1700s. While unemployment and social exclusion at the same time was unknown in some of the American colonies, as in Pennsylvania, said the rumor. Rumor also told, that in America the people, not the banks, had, through their politicians, the power over the money manufacturing machines. Which meant that immigrants could receive generous financial help to get started, if necessary. There was plenty of money on hand for newcomers.
The basic principle of the colonial economy was that everyone should have good access to money, which meant that all people could easily buy and sell goods and services(5). One was also free as an entrepreneur to start one ́s own business, such as a private farm, one ́s own livestock, or one could make a living as hunters in the wilderness. You could survive in prosperity of what you accomplished, because the money supply, and hence the money could be used to, i.e. goods and services, was not a problem. Thus was kept unemployment and social exclusion in check, because it is human nature to work – with either one or the other.
How new immigrants got integrated into society
New immigrants were thanks to this widespread welcoming social attitudes relatively quickly integrated into social circumstances and the community they had arrived in, and became an accepted part of this. Largely in contrast to today ́s circumstances in the USA (as well as in Sweden for that matter). It is no exaggeration that today's immigration policy in the United States (as in Sweden) in many respects is inhuman and hostile compared to how it could be, if the receiving society really with heart and soul worked for assimilating and integrating asylum seekers. Enthused and made it easier for people, with pride and self-esteem in the seat of honor, to learn the new language, in order to find themselves and create a new life in this new place on earth, for example through entrepreneurship. To a greater extent than is the case today, taking advantage of skills and knowledge that people already have. In short make it easier for fellow human beings. And if an immigrant today manages to get a residence permit, the next obstacle is the integration into society, which might be more or less discriminatory with low starting salaries, or cynical employers willfully exploiting these people's vulnerability, a reminiscent of the old-time slave trading I would say. Not very many American politicians telling the American people how successfully, without costs, Benjamin Franklin solved the demanding immigrant issue of his time in Pennsylvania in the 1700s. Where arriving people with immediate effect was integrated and became a part of the community. Where their brought skills were taken advantage of with gratitude.
The characteristics of Benjamin Franklin ́s monetary-financed economic system Colony residents in Pennsylvania during the so-called boom years around 1723 to 1750 who so needed got very advantageous loans of money from “the state" (sometimes at a relatively low interest rate) in order to " get started "(6). And you could also as a contractor without difficulty get investment grants from the controlling politicians in the colony, an investment subsidy that was to become a pure gift(7). The monetary-financed economic system that Benjamin Franklin used allowed that kind of generosity, which would prove to be for the good of the whole community. Money could be up reeled with the printing press to any amount, or at least as much as was needed, to virtually no cost at all, although it was entirely independent of bankers and expensive bank loans at interest.
People coming to Pennsylvania from European countries were accustomed to bankers having a discriminatory attitude, making a difference between them who would get loans and not. Which of course is true even today in capitalistic societies. Hard-pressed immigrants to America in the 1700s were accustomed to their origin country's bankers demanded bail, i.e. different types of backups and security assets, and that it was awkward and difficult to borrow money for investment purposes. That meant much hassle and fawning facing a bank manager. Lack of money was a constant yoke at home. Today it is much easier for people in common to borrow money than in the 1700s, at least during a boom. However, discrimination: who should get loans and who should be without, is still there.
The colony leaders of Pennsylvania, where, as said, book printer , scientist and "amateur politician" Benjamin Franklin stood out, managed locally in this colony to create a well- functioning monetary funded community economy, where the possession of a money-note manufacturing machine, ie Franklin's redesigned book printing machine, played an essential role. It was a type of economy, which in my application to the American people is called for a monetary funded (financed) economy in the sense that neither “the state" (the colony board) nor individual settlers had to "borrow” any money to finance expenditures. The money which the colony needed (to “the state budget”) and so the individuals, was made to cost price by the colony board using their own printing machine. In this situation the State did not take out any taxes of the people in order to finance the state budget, as I mentioned earlier. All lack of money ceased. If any taxes were collected, it was to a lesser extent, in order to have a control valve against inflation in place if necessary. Did the state need gold and foreign currency for its foreign trade, it was able to purchase both gold as currency using its own manufactured money notes, or it could borrow the gold in foreign, mainly English, banks that accepted installments in the colonists' own manufactured currency. Only a very small extent, compared to how money is distributed to the community in the capitalist system, was money transferred out essentially as loans at interest. Instead money was transferred out according to Benjamin Franklin's four rules (methods), as four different flows.
Benjamin Franklin's four rules (methods) for the exit of funds to society
Here adapted to Franklin's time during "the good years" in the 1700s (around 1723-1750).
First rule (method) in the transfer of money (new money manufactured by the colonial board) to the community was that the colony board bought (invested in) services. That is, it payed a generous salary to whatever practically favored the general needs of 1700s society, the common welfare. The needs were of course countless, touching the benefit of almost all community members. Some examples: Schools at the lower, middle and higher level, care for the disabled, the mentally ill, ordinary hospitals, building roads, bridges, canals, sewage- and drinking water culverts, sewage treatment plants, forest clearing, obtaining timber for housing, mining ores for production of metals that could be forged and machined, general sanitation services, correspondence management, administrative government jobs, decoration of the community, parks, sponsoring of artists, actors, theaters, etc. That is, in many ways needs just like today. As an actor or an artist you thus could get aid from the board. Not mingy scholarships in a discriminatory manner only given to a few in hard competition, as applicable today, but for all after his or hers ability and needs in order to contribute to the benefit of society. The important thing was that everyone was stimulated in one way or another, where everyone contributed with their particular individuality and talent. How it looked was not the priority. Thus, according to the principle of each according to his ability and needs, and that many flowers would bloom at the same time. For example, if a bridge would be built, was not the important thing if the construction took place in the German way or the Irish. The important thing was to take advantage of immigrants' skills that could look different. The state interfered with as little as possible with the result that the teams that carried out the work usually solved the main tasks in one way or another. This principle is called today to decentralize rather than centralize and top control. The colonial board could afford the extensive or very extensive funding, as it cranked up its own new banknote money cinch with Franklins book printer converted to a money printing machine. People did not need to borrow, and thus did not get into debt. Money was literally like a lubricating oil that anointed the social machinery.
Second rule (method) to exit money to the community was that the state bought (invested in) goods, which constituted material to the many projects above in 1).
Third rule (method) to bring money to society was through state granted "gifts", or direct contributions to the specific resources and actions required for the community should have the right to call itself human (people-friendly). Here, it was not about a pay principle, as in the first two methods, but “a gift principle”. The importance of this third rule or method can not be overemphasized. The rule implies that all society people must be ensured so a decent life as possible. This is in brief about taking care of and make life easier for everyone in society, including those having a need for help of one kind or another, where the reasons may be numerous.
It was about helping people who maybe were sick and disabled, or assist people that had ended up in other emergencies, such as economic, because of their home or their barn with animals and everything had burned, or that otherwise suffered for accident and/or economic loss and needed immediate assistance, such as financial, to restart their life. The needs could be said being innumerable. The aim was thus these people too would get in the first place a decent life and get the support and help they materially and in terms of care needed, preferably to return to work. But also help to develop their different talents and abilities, in order that their life would get content and be as joyful as possible. It could also be about helping people who needed to rise from the abuse of various kinds, and for that matter, needed special support and special measures. No help and resources costs, which is worthwhile to re, meant any financial burden on the colony in terms of money, because it was just about printing the money that was needed. Today's society politicians, who after all operate within the capitalist system, talking constantly about the lack of money. This was one of the things that Franklin clearly realized, why he of course recommended that taxes would not be imposed in Pennsylvania, aside from relatively little taxes in foreign trade.
Fourth exit rule (method) for money to the community was to provide opportunities for citizens and private companies that wished to make their own private large investments, because they were entrepreneurs in disposition, or by their pure interest. The colony board wanted to make it as easy as possible for them, without involving banks as unnecessary middlemen, banks that history proved to discriminate between those to get and not to get the money in hand in such situations. The basic idea was that everyone who needed investment funds would get it. The idea was to ensure that all people got started with their individual projects. That's how society's primal power was activated. That all quickly got started with what each one was good at and enjoyed doing. These investment loans were given with the condition that they would be paid back to the colony board. Franklin used these loans at a relatively low interest rate (compared to the banks applied) as a control valve against inflation, which proved to be very effective. The board had no real need to bring back the borrowed money, as it was so easy could print up new money. This fact meant that it had a very human attitude towards borrowers. Had a borrower for any reason, difficulties with repayment, he/her could negotiate a repayment plan without house and home were taken away, as occurs in capitalism, where private banks systematized expropriate people's property if they get into financial difficulties.
The four rules (methods) for the distribution of money to the community in Benjamin Franklin's economic system compared with two rules of capitalism
Benjamin Franklin ́s economic system (!" #$ #%&'"($)* #+!'$',"- #",&'&%* #.!(/&0( #!'+1$(!&'2, differs distinctly from the capitalist economic system (also known as the central bank economic system), where, in the case of the U.S., the state does not decide on its own the extent of banknote production. That is why the government is forced to raise taxes to fund its state budget and take out loans at interest to cover the expenses of the state budget in the case of taxes is not enough. And where people are forced to take loans from banks that discriminate between individuals, when they want to lend to private investments, causing great difficulties in cases where all people need access to money.
Capitalism ́s (Central Bank economy) general rule (first rule), ie main
method...
when it comes to the exit of money to the community, thus is to basically force the state (the people's extended arm) as well as a significant part of the population and community businesses to borrow money at interest to get the money in hand at all. This means that the main capitalist rule means indebtedness. Virtually all the new money brought into the community is borrowing money tainted by both amortization and interest rates.
As hopefully clear from the above, did neither colony governments nor settlers therefor during that period (1723-1750), at least not to any significant degree, incur debt at banks, which led to the bankers on the whole, lost opportunities for retaining teeth (although the colonizers had to take some loans in the form of gold and silver coins to maintain details of foreign trade). The bankers could ultimately neither take money or property from settlers or colonies as such. And all of this worked so because colonists pushed their own money, which
they called for pounds alternatively colonial scripts(8): Pennsylvania pounds, Connecticut pounds, Maryland pounds etc. Franklin now printed paper money instead of books. More remarkable than that was not it, and it worked. Printing plates etched to form substrates plus inks and the right kind of paper, and the matter was steak. They could stand all night cranking out one million colonialscrips after another, basically as much as they needed. It is not exaggerated to say that they suddenly had become extremely wealthy. Capitalism ́s (Central Bank economy) second rule (method)...
is a phenomenon of capitalism which I in the trilogy call "the secret gifts". These secret gifts means that a relatively small proportion of newly manufactured money does not constitute borrowing money, but gifts, paying bribes and corruption, going to the secret accounts of military research and security- and intelligence services. With the help of these secret gifts give capitalism protagonists (the big spiders and spiders) to themselves all the money they need to buy gadgets, travels, and real estates of all kinds. It is therefore correct to say that these individuals therefore in principle have their own printing press in the basement, where they, performed without effort, give themselves all the money they need for their life consumption. Despite these secret gifts of capitalism (Central Banks economy) thus involve a relatively small proportion of the total carried money to the community, it comes to very large sum of actual amount, earmarked and embarrassing to their recipients, if it would be seen in a public accounting. The gifts are therefore not publicly reported or booked anywhere, and need not necessarily be paid back by the recipients, and is therefore not affected by interest rate (yield). These latter funds are considered to be maintenance gifts from the big spiders and spiders to familiar and some high-priority, more or less secret parts of their overall organization in order to keep regular business going. You could say that "someting must have cost, if it tastes." The recipients are of course very little known to the public.
Examples of "gifts" in the form of "quantitative easings"...
are the three occasions, first in 2008 and then during the period 2010 - 2011, when the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) suddenly and without effort from nowhere manufactured huge sums earmarked, obs, money off the loan system, and brought these to specific selected receivers (in this case, first of all some American banks, mortgage lenders, the insurance company AIG and other agencies). In AIG's case, it's about AIG received a total of $ 182.5 billion, where also American State Treasury, and thus indirectly the American people with their taxes paid, was on a corner. FED stood alone for at least $ 85 billion to AIG. This monetary “injection", which in the world of finance is an example of what is called quantitative easing (QE), occurred on 16 September 2008, the day after Lehman Brothers had gone bankrupt and the great financial crisis was tripped. FED has similarly brought out two additional quantitative easing (gifts which not necessarily requires repayment with interest), QE1 (175 + 1,250 = 1,425 billion dollars) between 25 November 2008 to 31 March 2010 and the QE2 (600 billion dollars) between November 3, 2010 to 30 June 2011 to a range of recipients, including outside the United States. Altogether FED thus since the financial crisis took off brought out at least 1,425 + 600 + 85 = 2,110 billion, well above what corresponds to one eighth of the American national debt of approximately 15.718 billion on 13 May 2011. The money that was transferred in this way only in very modest extent benefited the ordinary man in the United States. Instead, they filled out large “holes” in the privileged recipients ́ accounting books. The money was swallowed mainly to make the loss records in the accounting books less salient, why the money only modestly came out into society. The whole thing is presented as the beneficiary banks, securities brokers and other institutions have chosen to "be on the money" until further notice, so far with no intention of bringing them to the community.
A clear discrimination becomes visible: Privileged receivers ...
Here I wish to make it clear, that these huge "injections" of money that various central banks sometimes applies (American, Japanese and English central banks, for example, in the 2008 financial crisis), thus not benefit society in terms of wealth creation (as lubricating oil money replacement of socially useful goods and services), but the money goes to the privileged recipients, gliding in a private VIP lane of society. The money is given on the grounds that society cannot do without these beneficiary institutions. Receiving banks, securities brokers and insurance companies alleged to be "too big to fail".
The EU's Lisbon Treaty does explicitly warn against the use of monetary
financed economy
A comment why I have chosen to call Franklin's financial system for a well-functioning (no inflation) monetary financed economy: Financed monetary economics is the terminology the EU ́s Lisbon Treaty(9) officially uses, when the Treaty describes (name) principle for Benjamin Franklin's type of economy, though without mentioning Franklin by name. A type of economy, which in turn relied on the core structure of King Henry I ́s tallysystem(10). One should then know that the Lisbon Treaty explicitly chooses to warn of the use of monetary financed economy by stating that the system leads to serious inflation. But is this statement true? ,!-./0.1.!2034/5!6786!06!09!:;6840:!?38:@/0:!8:A!709!954B8670C.39D! .EB.304.:69!0:!F.::95/18:08!2;3!86!/.896! #(!5.839!0:!8!3;G!H8-;I6!"( #$J"(&+K!97;G.A!6786!06!09! B.32.L6/5!B;990-/.!23;4!9;L08/!10.GB;0:6!I90:M!4;:.6830/5!2I:A.A!.L;:;45!G067;I6!0:2/860;:! 8309.N!What this creates is called a well-functioning monetary financed economy. And what is more, without the need to tax the population, and without the state having to take loans from banks. And yet, it keeps all unemployment and social exclusion completely in check. The truly remarkable thing is that the Lisbon Treaty chooses to keep quiet about this! The Lisbon Treaty recognizes nor that there has been a powerful economic experiment on the island Guernsey in the English Channel.
The island of Guernsey in the English Channel...
serves as a good example in economic history were well-functioning monetary financed economy without inflation is well demonstrated. In the early 1800s a group municipality politicians on the island, who were proficient "stage managerz" of "the machine", ran a monetarily funded economy. In 1994, wrote Professor Bob Blain (Univerity of Southern Illinois) the following on the island of Guernsey:
“In 1816 its sea walls were crumbling, its roads were muddy and only 4! feet wide. Guernsey ́s debt was 19 000 pounds. The island ́s annual income was 3 000 pounds of which 2 400 had to be used to pay interest on its debt. Not surprisingly, people were leaving Guernsey and there was little employment.
Then the government created and loaned new, interst-free state notes worth 6 000 pounds. Some 4 000 pounds were used to start the repairs of the sea walls. In 1820, another 4 500 pounds was issued, again interest-free. In 1821, another 10 000; 1824, 5 000, 1826, 20 000. By 1837, 50 000 pounds had been issued interest free for the primary use of projects like sea walls, roads, the marketplace, churches, and colleges. This sum more than doubled the island ́s money supply during this thirteen year period, but there was not inflation. In the year 1914, as the British restricted the expansion of their money supply due to World War I, the people of Guernsey commenced to issue another 142 000 pounds over the next four years and never looked back. By 1958, over 542 000 pounds had been issued, all without inflation.”
Franklin chose to skip gold backing
Benjamin Franklin and his staff did not care to have gold backing as security for their paper money, then it would have significantly hampered or nullified their experiments. In contrast, applied the private, mainly English, banks strictly this system, that all the money they lent were backed by gold (the gold standard), a method which I have reason to come back to. Here I want to briefly say that the bankers' lending of money was based on a series of serious offenses (embezzlement, counterfeiting, forgery and plain theft), where gold, which at the time was in the picture, was an important part of the deception. Embezzlement was done by using other people's gold, but that the owners of the gold were not informed that their gold disappeared. Monetary counterfeiting was that at least 80 percent of the bankers made banknote money missing gold backing. The bankers defined their money as pieces of paper backed by gold, but when gold was missing at least 80 percent, these paper scraps as defined counterfeit money(11). The process can be likened to a private person, in violation of the law, setting up a printing press in the basement, then commence printing worthless pieces of paper calling them for money. Something that of course is prohibited , because it is counterfeiting(12). The forgery(13). was about bankers fraudulently claimed it was their own money they lent out, taking it from their own underlying assets of gold. The truth was that the bankers did not use their own gold as back up(14). They took the gold of others who were embezzled. Namely gold that only 20 percent covered the manufactured pieces of paper that were brought out in the community. The paper patches which people borrowed were thus firstly worthless in the sense they were counterfeit(15), secondly impossible to lend, because only the man himself owns, can be recovered as installment. The theft was executed by the bankers began to perform foreclosures/expropriations by claiming that they did not get back their loaned money, and so they laid hands on the pledge established in mortgages when people had taken out loans. The truth was that the bankers could not demand any pledges, because they had not lent anything of their own. And anyone who happens to believe the matter is different today, is wrong.
All this: embezzlement, money counterfeiting, forgery and record the extensive thefts were very sensitive to the bankers because they constantly knew they broke the law. So, the business continues today and in even greater social scale. Today (since 1971) (16) have bankers removed the gold standard in America, whereby they have been able to remove embezzlement part of the crimes. Politicians in Congress also voted for laws that try to hide the fact that it is still ongoing counterfeiting, forgery and theft on a large social scale in America. One can say that these laws, in respect of a small group of individuals ( bankers ) in American society, trying to decriminalize three serious offenses(17). These are details that capitalism certainly do not want to come to public attention. The embezzlement, counterfeiting, forgery and plain theft are thoroughly analysed in the trilogy. Having said this, we will contact with Benjamin Franklin's financial system again.
Franklin ́s paper money was not backed by any value at all
Franklin and aides said that paper money value would only be based on – trust. Thus not have gold backing. Which was just what the English King Henry I had applied in his tally system, where ordinary English timber was used as material for the money, without any worth backing. The value of the ordinary grooved wooden sticks as money was based on trust, that the king vouched for their value only with " his word ". It was the same with the colonists' paper money. And the real big trick was about only, I say only, bringing out so much money in the community that this community could swallow in productive commercial building to its benefit. If so, no inflation occurs. Nor had the community any shortage of money because it was so easy to get hold of the material, which money was made of (paper), without the need to think about have any gold backing(18).
More freedom
The fame of the Promised Land, the American colonies, thus stated freedom and tolerance was far greater there than at home in the native countries. Freedom and tolerance was often weak with the home on virtually all areas, including the religious. In Sweden, my native land, there was a religious repression in the 1700s. For example held the commons "in God's nurture and admonition", a power lying with the parish priest, often on a directive from state power. Thus, for example, held a so-called catechism or parish catechetical meetings(19) with the public on Sundays before the morning service in the church or in the home, ie in cottages and cabins in the Swedish countryside. Sweden was a farming community. Industrialism had not yet or just barely getting started. Many times these priests appeared in the role of remarkable officials who demanded both obedience and flattery. Hearings were held on the Christian doctrine outlines and about what was in the Bible. It was expected that public, who often could not read, write or count, would have some such fundamental knowledge, which could be quite arbitrary. Catechism of the interrogations were often a pain for people in general. On Sundays they most of all needed rest and take care that their own before the work week that followed. Get sleep a little extra, be with the family, while the animals needed their care. Ordinary people did not like the authority-like “chief guardian mentality”, as it was expressed by the priests. The community was characterized by widespread poverty, inequality, often unemployment, social exclusion, begging, and sometimes even starvation in waves. When it came to extra access to money, it was usually on bank loans, and then applied as said widespread discrimination scheme, where a difference was made between people and people for which granted these loans. People were talking about that they wanted to have more freedom in their lives. And especially well into the 1800s, when the peasantry hardships were great, went the rumor in Sweden on the Promised Land America. Many Swedes, poor tenant farmers, farmhands and urban residents, had had enough of the home country. America and the alleged freedom loomed. Whole families were talking about emigrating. In the same way it was in Ireland, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Germany, France, Spain, etc. It looked a bit different, but the pattern was again in one European country after another. In Sweden, it would take a while before the great emigration waves began in earnest. It began on a small scale in the 1820s, and accelerated in the last half of the 1800s. In other European countries the emigration wave commenced already in the 1700s. Often this was a risky and arduous voyage across the Atlantic to the country as a looming, America.
Those who dared to take the plunge
Swedish history has it that it was the poorest, but also the strongest, bravest and most enterprising, who dared to take the leap to leave their country, friends, the habitual, to become Americans. The Swedish author William Moberg(20) has signed a national epic about this time, this major Swedish emigration, when more than one million Swedes, related to a population of 4-5 million, emigrated to America: The Emigrants/Onto A Good Land/The Settlers/The Last Letter Home. And ABBA composers Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus has made a musical, Kristina from Duvemåla(21), based on The emigrants. Especially if, as immigrants to America, happened to come to Pennsylvania in the period between 1723 and 1750, came true the rumor that it was "a paradise", ie highly benefited settlers. But there were also colonies where the circumstances were the other way around, where politicians were not friendly to widespread immigration, where Black slavery was widespread, and large distinction was made between people.
How slavery evolved
On some of the South's plantations had there been English convicts as labor, people that the English Parliament had deported to America, as a convenient way to empty the English prisons on criminals. This strategy was developed, however, to a big mistake, as it turned out that the English raw thugs were not easy to handle for slave owners and their supervisors. English criminals caused several times bloody rebellion, which often went very badly for both supervisors and ruthless plantation owner. It was one of the reasons that the planters chose rather to "import" black slaves from Africa, who turned out to be more docile. As we know, was kidnapped over time millions of Africans, and were transported in appalling circumstances to America on slave ships. They talked quietly about these operations, where even Sweden had a hand in the game. The slave trade(22) to the new world is a horrible chapter in human fairly recent history, without a trace of human compassion.
There was an inflation problem in some of the colonies
There were also colonies where politicians repeatedly failed to attend the monetarily funded (financed) money management. They brought out too much money in the community, with inflation. Here it never worked this type of economy satisfying. However, there were those in power in the colonies who understood that this money note printing and money transference was an extremely sensitive issue, as required both judgment and intuition, ie that all the time just would bring out just as much money to the community, which was devoted to healthy community development in each colony. In that case , and only then, would the community grow at an astonishing way and become super strong(23). To those who took on that knowledge belonged book printer Benjamin Franklin. He had carefully studied how to successfully had proceeded in Massachusetts in the late 1600s in similar circumstances. Franklin wrote a book, which at the time was much discussed: A Modest Enguiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper-Currency(24). The book was widely distributed in the 13 colonies, and to some extent internationally, and made Franklin famous. As a book printer Franklin had access to books, and he studied gladly economic history at leisure. The economic system that, thanks to Franklin's foresight and wisdom, was implemented in Pennsylvania during “the good years" 1723-1750 resulted, as mentioned, no or very low inflation. Here it worked monetarily funded (financed) economy very well, throughout the community. Already in 1690 they had gone over to monetarily financed economy in Massachusetts(25), and which made itself largely independent of foreign bankers. But it took time before the other colonies introduced their own printing presses and followed, which is why I use the year 1723 as the approximate year in which the colonies' "good years" began.
If you got it right
I repeat: As an immigrant in America during the 1700's before the revolution, it played a major role in which colony you came and settled. The different colonies were characterized by varying degrees of philanthropy and humanitarianism. You had to settle in a colony, where management
a people-friendly approach, and where society flourished economically on the basis that it had applied a well-functioning monetary funded economy. If you got it right, it was a good chance that desire for freedom came true, including smaller government and less taxes as a result. These three ideals constituted the famous foundation of the American Revolution. Thus: Benjamin Franklin was the one who created a unique functional society – without inflation, without taxes and without debt – by using what I call a well functioning monetary financed economy. Where the description "well-functioning" is because he managed to master inflation(26).
To tell truthfully about what capitalism is about
One could also say about Franklin's model of society that it was humane, because a good social atmosphere created when everyone had a job and no exclusion to speak of absence and you also exempt from paying tax. In this type of society created a community spirit where one cared about and took care of each other. The American people have hospitality and generosity of two of its prominent national traits, but today is more and more Americans on getting it so difficult economically with high unemployment, low wages, high taxes, bank foreclosures and dismantling of government safety net, that a gradually harder and colder society has grown and is growing up under the capitalist motto: you're not strong, you are weak and may blame yourself. It becomes more and more people who are mistreated because not even the state has financial muscles longer to care as it should do, and as it did on Benjamin Franklin's time in particular Pennsylvania but also in several other 13 colonies. The contemporary American does not understand what is happening on the depth of the capitalist system because the U.S. history books do not tell truthfully about what capitalism is about, as I mentioned earlier. It has been a long series of severe recessions with this type of repeated high unemployment, social exclusion, bank foreclosures in American society since 1751. 30's depression is a talked about example. I tell you these details to you, the reader must clearly see how good you had it in several of the colonies during the good years of 1723-1750 and how good social atmosphere was in these colonies. The importance of Franklin ́s societal model is that it shows the way: it is the state, the people's extended arm – not private parties of all kinds, such as bankers – to be given the responsibility to innovate and bring out society's money, if we strive for a society that looks to everyone common good. I repeat: the good of all. Not just a few people ́s best at expense of others. Only then guaranteed a wealth also for the people who do not want to live their life by sharp elbows, and by primarily, or only, meet their own needs, but who want to live in shared harmony with their fellow men, regardless of changing circumstances. Franklin was a great philanthropist, who looked to the common good.
During the same period, ie during the 1700s the first half, European bankers tried to become established in the American colonies Which failed. They were with a vengeance ousted by the colonists' economic systems, the monetary-financed economy. This despite the fact that the bankers attracted by redemption guarantee, that their lending money was backed by their own gold. The bankers claimed untruthfully right from the very beginning in the 1600s, and continuing throughout the 1700 - , 1800 - and 1900s, until 1971, that the person who borrowed banknotes in a bank, could at any time go into this and change the notes to the corresponding amount of gold. When the truth was that only about 20 percent of the bank's loan bank notes could be redeemed for gold, gold that was not truly the banker's own gold, but wealthy people's deposits. Based on this observation, one can conclude that the bankers' promise was based partly on embezzlement ( of parts of deposits ) and on air. But it is not enough. I repeat: In my trilogy, I give evidence that these cunning bankers also engaged in a form of money making that was so developed that it can rightly be called "perfect" counterfeiting in that they fabricated money without any basis other than that of air. Furthermore also theft by foreclosures/expropriations in the extension of their criminal loans. And forgery by lending something they falsely claimed were their own. But none of these saw through the passage of settlers, as well as very few people see through the same today.
Franklin applied thus a system without either actual or alleged gold backing, the latter bankers metod(27). And the system was shown to still work just fine. People in general showed the colonies' “good times” greater interest in Franklin's notes than for the bankers' gold -backed banknote money, the former thus only backed or carriers of confidence. The lesson learned here was that by far the single most important factor to achieve an economically prosperous society, is that there is ample supply of money in everyone's possession and in circulation in society. That money was not backed by gold, was crucial to ensure that the supply of money would be good (because gold is a scarce). This compares with a central banking economic ( capitalist ) system, which stands or falls with the existence of a manipulative induced chronic lack of money, which stimulates what is capitalism's lifeblood: the lending of money at interest, where gold backing can be seen as an additional way to manipulate the lack of money.
The bankers lent money thus consisted of 80 percent of the "air" (counterfeit money, thus counterfeiting ). Of course, there were laws stating individuals could not produce a new own money, having their own money printing press, but the bankers were circumventing those laws by pretending that they never lent money based on newly manufactured air, but that they took from a personal wealth. This is a private banking business in a nutshell. That's how they always have cheated people, both in Europe, in America and elsewhere. The whole thing is in fact a series of magic tricks, which is based on truth – that lending money is de facto air without owners – blinds are lowered. Because of that the whole thing has not been seen through until modern times, at least not by the general public, this deluded public over time come to accept the fraud that banks lend their own money, as a matter of course.
Nothing but pure theft
I repeat, then it is so important: Thus committing the bankers in the first instance embezzlement when they peculated rich mens possessions. In the second instance they committed two further serious breach of the law, as highly intelligent have been woven together, namely counterfeiting, as the bankers, based on the misappropriated deposits, remanifacured and lent air money ( money with no real value backing ), and forgery, by giving the impression that both others' deposits, and said "air money", were derived from their own property, when they lent against repayment and interest. In the third instance devoted himself bankers also slyly to the theft of property of others, by ruthlessly appropriating lien property, alternatively execute foreclosures of real property, where borrowers for various reasons could not meet its obligations to creditors. A pattern that is repeated everywhere that capitalist activity, ie bankers organized lending money at interest, thrive.
One should also know that the bankers gladly appeared ingratiating and articulate when they tried to deceive the people loans of gold -backed bank notes at interest. When the loan terms well was signed, it was not uncommon kindness was reversed into the opposite, especially if borrowers for some reason happened to come on insolvency. The bankers then had a tendency to show off a disagreeable side, where they merciless confiscated the people's assets, such as real values, houses, homes, sometimes entire companies. It is worth noting that the whole time was about loaned money, which was in fact impossible to lend, because – I repeat – only something of their own taken can be lent and recovered. The money the banks lent was legally not a private owned, only by assertion. Known today as "foreclosure" or "expropriation" is, when one closer analyze the matter, thus nothing but pure theft.
The bankers were simply ousted
In the American colonies during the "good years" people dicovered quite soon that life was both easier and more pleasant if you did not bother to take out bank loans, and instead embraced the provincial boards' people-friendly line, was to use and have confidence in self-produced colonial money, instead of the bankers' gold backed ditto. The only thing one in those "good years" (1723-1750) thus had to borrow from the banks was a certain amount gold and silver coins, and maybe also some amount of foreign currency to cover foreign trade and certain mandatory fees to the mother country England. (At this time the colonies had no own gold and silver deposits.) This led to that bankers found that they thus had significantly difficult to establish in the colonies. Their services (lending of gold backed currency money, gold and silver coins and foreign currency) invited only slightly during this period for the simple reason that the colonists' own monetarily funded economic system, based on Benjamin Franklin's foresight(28), was far superior. The bankers competed simply out, and with a vengeance, which grieved them very much. In Europe, the banking system evolved quite far at this time, and the bankers aim was to export the same system to North America. That is, the system today is called capitalism, which is based on money manipulative short supply in society, forcing a need for both the public and for the state to borrow money at interest, the banks benefit. The common public, as contractors, to pay whatever it wants to achieve. The state to fund its budget, that all of the obligations imposed on the state.
The taxation of the public, or, if you prefer, treating the people as a diary cow In a capitalist economy, the state budget is funded in three ways: 1. Mainly by the people taxed. 2. To a certain extent by the State as a business owner have income. 3. And as a third way through loans at interest, i.e. by national debt. Now, analyzing these ways, the last option first, you will come to the following two conclusions: The loans at interest, both to the public and to the state budget, fattens banking system through real income in the form of principal (amortization) and interest. That the taxation of the people involves two major benefits from bankers point of view: a) The people get through their labor (their taxes) account for the majority of state budget, which contributes to the public depleted, ie that the public's lack of money is maintained, which stimulates the same public needs to borrow money (from the banks). While people's time unnecessarily be utilized for work at the expense of their leisure time, and thus indirectly the opportunity to develop their interests and hobbies and spending time with family, relatives and friends. b) Taxes can, as I have mentioned earlier, be used by bankers as a unique asset, a buffer , in bankers' risk-taking when lending. Should things go wrong in risky lending activities, ie that principal and interest is not flowing in as planned, but that the talked about bright red digits occurring in the records, available with an efficient tax regimes and reliable political front men on location, is always the possibility to activate taxpayer-funded bank bailouts, which the parliament/congress decides on(29)
Therefore, the taxation of the public, or, if you like, the people as a diary cow, is a very important pillar of the capitalist structure. To compare with Benjamin Franklin's monetary- financed economic system, where money is produced in abundance, will benefit everyone, and was owned directly by the people in common, not by private bankers. Where you made sure no shortage of money arose in the society, but the opposite, while actively curbing inflation, why loans from the banking system became as unnecessary as taxes. Well, as I said, was the American colonizers self violence to afford this economic experiment with their own money manufacturing equipment ( money printing machines ), with Benjamin Franklin in the first leg, nothing that delighted the banking industry in the colonies, governed by European bankers. Bankers, who also exerted influence over the bribed and corrupt English Parliament and, one can assume, corrupt English King George II (added by the English bankers). Therefore, forged England, with bankers in the background, constantly plans on how to deprive the colonists the right to use their own money producing machines, plans also would realize, that would be the prelude to the American Revolution. I remind here on Franklin's own words:
“The inability of the colonists to get power to issue Their Own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War.”
http://neweconomicalsystem.org/