What's wrong with a little debt?
There is a kind of
fascinating appeal to this theory. It gives those who expound it an
aura of intellectualism, the appearance of being able to grasp a
complex economic principle that is beyond the comprehension of mere
mortals. And, for the less academically minded, it offers the
comfort of at least sounding moderate. After all, what's wrong
with a little debt, prudently used and intelligently managed? The
answer is nothing, provided the debt is based on an honest
transaction. There is plenty wrong with it if it is "based upon
fraud".
An honest transaction is one in which a borrower pays an agreed
upon sum in return for the temporary use of a lender's asset.
That asset could be anything of tangible value. If it were an
automobile, for example, then the borrower would pay "rent." If it
is money, then the rent is called "interest." Either way, the
concept is the same.
When we go to a lender -- either a bank or a private party -- and
receive a loan of money, we are willing to pay interest on the loan
in recognition of the fact that the money we are borrowing is an
asset which we want to use. It seems only fair to pay a rental fee
for that asset to the person who owns it. It is not easy to acquire
an automobile, and it is not easy to acquire money -- real money,
that is. If the money we are borrowing was earned by someone's labor
and talent, they are fully entitled to receive interest on it. But
what are we to think of money that is created by the mere stroke of
a pen or the click of a computer key? Why should anyone collect a
rental fee on that?
When banks place credits into your checking account, they are
merely pretending to lend you money. In reality, they have nothing
to lend. Even the money that non-indebted depositors have placed
with them was originally created out of nothing in response to
someone else's loan. So what entitles the banks to collect rent
on nothing? It is immaterial that men everywhere are forced by law
to accept these nothing certificates in exchange for real goods and
services. We are talking here, not about what is legal, but what is
moral. As Thomas Jefferson observed at the time of his protracted
battle against central banking in the United States, "No one has
a natural right to the trade of money lender, but he who has money
to lend."
Let us, therefore, look at debt and interest in this light. Thomas
Edison summed up the
immorality of the system when he said:
People who will not turn a shovel of
dirt on the project [Muscle Shoals] nor contribute a pound of
materials will collect more money...than will the people who will
supply all the materials and do all the work.
Is that an
exaggeration? Let us consider the purchase of a $100,000 home in
which $30,000 represents the cost of the land, architect's fee,
sales commissions, building permits, and that sort of thing and
$70,000 is the cost of labor and building materials. If the home
buyer puts up $30,000 as a down payment, then $70,000 must be
borrowed. If the loan is issued at 11% over a 30-year period, the
amount of interest paid will be $167,806. That means the amount paid
to those who loan the money is about 2 1/2 times greater than paid
to those who provide all the labor and all the materials. It is true
that this figure represents the time-value of that money over thirty
years and easily could be justified on the basis that a lender
deserves to be compensated for surrendering the use of his capital
for half a lifetime. But that assumes the lender actually had
something to surrender, that he had earned the capital, saved it,
and then loaned it for construction of someone else's house. What
are we to think, however, about a lender who did nothing to earn the
money, had not saved it, and, in fact, simply created it out of thin
air?
So how does the bank
loan actually work?
- You want a loan for
your home.
- The bank advertises
that they loan money.
- You "apply" for a
"loan."
- They put you through
the ringer and make you glad and relieved that you were able to be
approved for a loan. (You know, like they are doing you
a really big favor.)
- They have you sign a
promissory note.
And here's the part
you're never supposed to know
- Since your
promissory note can be sold for money, it's an asset.
- The bank deposits
the asset into an account for approximately the amount of the
note.
- The bank cuts you a
check from the deposit you never knew about (or transfers the
money to those who should be receiving it).
- And you think you
owe money back on a loan, when in fact all that was made was an
exchange.
If the promissory note is an
asset, what funded the bank's ownership of the note?" Answer: They
still don't really own it. They made an exchange - Your promissory
note (asset to the bank) was exchanged for approximately the amount
of the loan. You gave the bank an asset worth $100,000 and the bank
returned $100,000 to you. Where was the loan? There wasn't one. But
you really do have to admit, it's brilliant.
As an honest, ethical person who
believes that all loans should be repaid, do you agree that the bank
should repay your loan to them? After all, they deposited your
promissory note. Your promissory note is an asset that they
exchanged for a check. Where's the loan?
Factually, there isn't one. And
since all lenders should be repaid, shouldn't the bank repay your
loan to them? If so, you wouldn't have the "debt" and would live
better.
Quickly, when you deposit money in
your checking account, does the bank now owe you that money when you
want it? Yes. The bank has a new asset, the $100 you deposited into
your checking account. The bank also has a new matching liability
that says the bank owes you $100. Assets = Liabilities.
The bookkeeping entries are nearly
identical for a deposit into your checking account and for a new
loan. By lending, the banks now have more assets and liabilities. If
you were to lend me $500, your "pool of money" would be smaller.
When a bank "loans" money, their "pool of money" increases.
<back>
Page
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5... of
5
Secrets of the Federal Reserve
by Eustace Mullins
Your Country at War -
Lindbergh
Congressman Charles Lindbergh, Sr. had
the Federal Reserve pegged 90 years ago and tried to warn us then. He
noted how the wars led to economic disaster for the plain folks who did
the work while the financial parasites enjoyed obscene profits on the
blood of American troops and the poor.

The world gets crazier and crazier everyday, doesn't it? The world that many
of us thought was there, isn't. The bottom has dropped out of everything. The
illusions have been revealed, we have found out who has been pulling the strings
behind the scenes. Millions have lost their jobs, have mortgage
problems, and
foreclosure. What can be done? Amazingly, we have been mislead. We have been
taught that we can control government by voting. The founder of the Rothschild
dynasty, Mayer Amschel Bauer, told the secret of controlling the government
of a nation over 200 years ago. He said, "Permit
me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its
laws." Get
the picture? Your freedom hinges first on the nation's banks and money system.
It's all about 'commerce'. Freedom is connected with Debt Elimination for
each individual. Not only does this end
personal debt, it places the people first in line
as creditors to the National Debt ahead of the banks. They don't wish for
you to know this. It has to do with recognizing WHO you really are in A
New Beginning: A Practical Course in Miracles, an informational study. Is
your credit rating bad for reasons that seem out of your control? There are
ways of credit repair,
so you can men those broken fences too. Do you want to keep your children protected
from outside forces, there are ways of protecting
your children. Do you want
to keep your sons and daughters free from 'the draft'? Check this out.
Disclaimer - The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The myriad of facts, conjecture, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses,
and information in the articles, stories and commentaries posted on this site
range from cutting edge hard news and comment to extreme and unusual perspectives.
We choose not to sweep uncomfortable material under the rug - where it can
grow and fester. We choose not to censor skewed logic and uncomfortable rhetoric.
These things reflect the world as it now is - for better and worse. We present
multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information. If
you have more information on a certain subject that verifies it, challenges
it or make a comment on it, please e.mail
us.
Journalism is (or used to be) the profession of gathering and presenting a broad panorama of news about the events of our times and presenting it to readers for their own consideration. We believe in the intelligence, judgment and wisdom of our readers to discern for themselves among the data which appears on this site that which is valid and worthy...or otherwise. See full legal disclaimer
|
|

