The crux of this crime here is that there was no consent given.
People were deceived into thinking that banks actually protected their money, that it was insured properly etc.
The truth is, that banks have deceptively used the money that the courts say is not even your money, once it is in the bank, to make wildly speculative "investments".
When we don't prosecute criminals we have crimes.
And we almost never prosecute white collar financial crime.
Joe, Rehypothecation is the devil in the details of most Bank account agreements agreed to by the implied consent, i.e. signature of customers. No body is safe.
At this point the Fed should be pressured to intervene when there's a "safe harbor" stampede for collateral and then let the matter play out in court all the way up to the Supremes. Isn't it time for the Federalist Society to decide whose side they're on? As the Fed most recently demonstrated in 2019 the repo market can be stabilized. Let the OTC derivatives junkies twist in the wind. That's a better solution than anything North Dakota can deliver.
Bush jr. as I recall, allowed the M3 money supply information to go unreported thus bringing the system collapse ever closer and the timing would be known only to few.
The removal of Glass-Stegall was the harbinger of financial system collapse. Permitting credit default swaps and bargaining of mortgage debt, was basically switching on the fan to hasten the collapse of the house of cards. The system cannot now be saved, which is what the WEF is waiting for. However, the Resistance Movement will create its own currencies and barter systems and reconstruct genuine social credit, which is exactly what Hitler did when he took Germany from hyper-inflation and 45% unemployment, to making Germany the industrial powerhouse of Europe. I think we are about to see the aftermath of that episode of history repeated. However, having been force-fed faux-history, most people will not recognise it. Fail to learn from history and we are forced to repeat it.
I don't buy your analysis. Hitler got going through our US Investment banksters who also were supporters of eugenics. Hitler got rid of over 300,000 of his own before the war and his atracks on Poles and Jews.
Clearly, Stephen, you mistake propaganda for history, and so you get fixated. We were not discussing eugenics but economics. And, yes, I have written chapters on the US investments, but banker investments NEVER CREATE EGALITARIAN PROSPERITY, which is what happened under Hitler. This is relevant because Hitler applied social credit, that is, the workers of Germany became his colleteral, but today the WEF is being labeled as purveyors of social credit when in fact they are doing the very opposite... devaluing the human compoent. Apologies for the upper case but some people can't read unless you turn the volume up... so to speak. LOL.
I encourage you to read "The History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind". It was written by former central banker of Jewish origins. He dedicated a chapter to Hitler and how he stood ground against the bankers. It's time to move away from the propaganda and false history written by the banking mafia.
an interesting thing that was done in 1920 Germany after the "Weimar" collapse, where the currency became worthless, was this: every chamber of commerce printed paper notes that where serialized and good for one month, typically. they were used in that small region that the various chambers had, and was accepted by the businesses and banks. The exact mechanics of issuance are still unknown to me, and I imagine at the expiration date they were exchanged for "fresh" notes. Ths enabled the everyday people to buy bread etc for their families, as back then every village was pretty much self sufficient
Fascinating, Rob. Philadelphia did likewise, calling the currency Scrips, as I recall. I completely forget the details. These enabled them to trade without sending tax to George III. I hope I have not confused this. But, anyway, we could do likewise in the US and Australia if they close down cash. I have a whole serios of plans for trade, ranging from growing tobacco, moonshine, alcohol car fuel, biodiesel from shark livers, casava and sweet potato.
I apologize for the length if this post (about a 5 minute read), but I'm assuming that the only force able to resist what's happening is the market, as we may be seeing now. But as a long-time admirer of Ellen Brown and I'd add the following to work on finance, money and debt. It's based on remarks at a pro-democracy rally last weekend in Keene Valley, NY.
Address at Keene Valley Rally
Don’t be fooled by Donald Trump’s theatrics about DEI, Russia, Greenland and Panama. His focus is what it’s always been—your money. And don’t be taken in by Elon Musk’s chainsaw; they don’t want to destroy your government—they want to own it.
And they are very afraid.
To better understand that, let me tell you a little story about a gang of investment advisors at Citigroup bank and a series of letters they sent to their clients back in 2006 on how to invest their money. The letters, which became known as the plutonomy memos, because, taking off on plutocracy—a country governed by the rich-- they declared that the world investors should focus on buying stocks in companies that cater to the wealthy. “We think the balance sheets of the rich are in great shape, and are likely to continue to improve,” they said. And so they have.
The number of billionaires in the world have grown since the memos from approximately 700 billionaires globally, with a combined net worth of 2.2 trillion dollars, to 1,011 by 2010 with a combined net worth of $3.6 trillion, the number of billionaires had increased to 2700 billionaires by 2024 with a combined net worth of over $15 trillion dollars with their wealth growing by $5.7 billion a day.
Then the memos concluded:
“Beyond war, inflation, the end of the technology/productivity wave, and financial collapse, we think the most potent and short-term threat [to investors] would be societies demanding a more‘ equitable’ share of wealth.”
Of course the memos left out something else that great wealth buys. It is not just “bling,” as they called it--yachts, jewelry, fine wines and mansions. It also buys overwhelming political power, as we’re seeing now.
Ask yourself: why are they afraid of “woke”? Woke is an attack on the idea that had guided us for decades—the striving for economic and social equality. The original meaning of “woke” was “staying aware and vigilant against injustice.”
How can we respond?
Certainly protests, such as this, bring together people who resist, which is why dictatorial regimes ban or limit public assemblies. But protests can be crushed.
Voting, but, of course, but votes can be bought as can the representatives we vote for.
But we have other resources, primarily our money!
Here’s a simple fact about our country’s wealth.
All wealth goes through households in the form on income, spending, saving, investment, taxation and debt repayment. 30% of that goes through the households of 1% of the country, more than half of that to the top 1/10th of 1%. The rest goes through the households of the remaining 99%. And all capital originates in savings.
Simply put, the future wealth of the 1% lies in the pockets and households of the other 99%. It lies in our money in banks; it lies in our money in pension funds, it lies in the interest we pay on our debts.
Presently our financial system is defying gravity; the monetary streams are continuously moving upwards.
But that means that threats to remove or withhold that money is the greatest power you have.
I like to says that debt is to finance what labor is to capital. It was only with threats to withhold their labor that workers were granted a seat at the table and create from 1945 to 1975 the greatest period of the equality of wealth redistribution in our history.
Threaten to withhold your savings and investments. Threaten to withhold your spending, and your debt repayments. At the very least, threaten to withhold the interest on your debt. Debt is an illegal tax on money granted to banks as some 90 percent of it is created out of thin air.
I suggest that threats to withhold money is the only thing to stop the continued assault on our staying aware and vigilant against injustice.,
Finally two cautionary notes:
First, this should not a campaign against finance: the goal for workers in withholding their labor was not to destroy their companies, but to address abuse and exploitation. We need finance: it’s our pension funds, our insurance policies, our payment systems and so on. What we don’t need is a financial system controlled by 1% of the population and then turned against us.
And second, don’t take the safety of your money for granted. If you fear that withholding money will invite retribution, then think of DOGE rummaging through our once secure data and payment systems. If they continue unchallenged, they have the power to simply take your money before you have a chance to protest their takeover.
Ellen, I recently saw an episode of the Corbett report talking about the financial collapse of 08, and whether reinstating Glass Stegal would have prevented it. Turns out that it would not have as it was just a part of a bigger financial regulation bill. The collapse was not due to the division of the banking system being undivided, it was the government mandating the loans from fanny and Freddie. The derivative's being sold off as gold standard with no regulation had nothing to do with what Glass-Stegal prevented. Is this a correct assessment? I trust your knowledge in this area, Jack.
Agreed that restoring Glass Steagall would not have prevented the banking crisis. It was triggered by the collapse of Bear Stearns, AIG and Lehman Brothers, which were not depository banks. However, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 did contribute to the explosion of derivatives, and it was the mortgage derivatives (CDS etc.) that mainly brought down the system, not the subprime mortgages themselves.
Hello Ellen, I remember Borne screaming about these unregulated instruments in the 1990s! Her urging went unheeded. I also hear people state that it was people buying houses they could not afford, but this is ludicrous. I ask them if they are familiar with due diligence and get a blank stare! I then explain it like they were a lender, and if they would make a loan for a home worth $500,000 to a carpenter who makes $60,000 a year, well you know right? Unless you did not have to worry about collecting the monthly payment, get your money up front and then pass the paper on to wall street, who cuts thousands of them into tranches, pays the rating agencies big money to lie and rate them as AAA so that pension funds can buy them as gold, when they are Dog S>+t betting on them failing as they must, and then getting paid. SCAM with the government's blessings. Am I close? Jack.
Sounds right! And at least the MBS actually had something in them. The synthetic credit default swaps were bets on bets, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act let them get away with that. A pure casino without collateral.
Correction, it was actually the Commodities Futures Act of 2000 that freed up derivatives, allowing their explosion. See Investopedia: "CFMA largely followed the recommendations made in 1999 by the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, a roundtable of regulators that included SEC, CFTC, the Federal Reserve, and the U.S. Treasury. The SEC and CFTC had set aside past jurisdictional disputes, agreeing to exempt non-commodity OTC derivatives traded by financial institutions from regulation by CFTC, and to share oversight of single-stock futures.4" https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cfma.asp
Exactly right. There was collateral as in the entire world. Retired people by the millions without incomes. If I was a bank robber who knew in advance that I could get billions from the robbery and get a thousand dollar fine only. Nice work if you can get it.
"collapse" is a scary image - financial collapse does not precipitate a physical collapse - all buildings bridges tunnels roads remain 'pristine' - which is the reason financial collapses are 'arranged' by financiers - thing is - the collapse allows the bankers to reorganize the financial economy more to their liking which under 'stable' conditions they could not do - a financial system more favourable to 'the people' could also not be arranged when the financial system is 'stable' - rather than the bankers nudging the system in a 'new' direction the people can nudge the system - in canada the people own the central bank - however since 1967 when the Bank of Canada act was amended to allow interest bearing deposits from the BIS other central banks and international financial organizations - our public utility central bank is operated 'as if' it was a private for profit central bank - the people of canada (100% of the shareholders) need only to force the Bank of Canada to close all deposit accounts and recall the Governor of the BoC from the managing board of the BIS to create a stable national economy capable of providing an open trading system through the 'collapse' which is actually just the banks loosing on their 'side bets' at the black jack table
The crux of this crime here is that there was no consent given.
People were deceived into thinking that banks actually protected their money, that it was insured properly etc.
The truth is, that banks have deceptively used the money that the courts say is not even your money, once it is in the bank, to make wildly speculative "investments".
When we don't prosecute criminals we have crimes.
And we almost never prosecute white collar financial crime.
Joe, Rehypothecation is the devil in the details of most Bank account agreements agreed to by the implied consent, i.e. signature of customers. No body is safe.
(Except the investor class, of course).
FYI you need a MS account to read that document.
Why would you put a document in such a place?
At this point the Fed should be pressured to intervene when there's a "safe harbor" stampede for collateral and then let the matter play out in court all the way up to the Supremes. Isn't it time for the Federalist Society to decide whose side they're on? As the Fed most recently demonstrated in 2019 the repo market can be stabilized. Let the OTC derivatives junkies twist in the wind. That's a better solution than anything North Dakota can deliver.
Bush jr. as I recall, allowed the M3 money supply information to go unreported thus bringing the system collapse ever closer and the timing would be known only to few.
The removal of Glass-Stegall was the harbinger of financial system collapse. Permitting credit default swaps and bargaining of mortgage debt, was basically switching on the fan to hasten the collapse of the house of cards. The system cannot now be saved, which is what the WEF is waiting for. However, the Resistance Movement will create its own currencies and barter systems and reconstruct genuine social credit, which is exactly what Hitler did when he took Germany from hyper-inflation and 45% unemployment, to making Germany the industrial powerhouse of Europe. I think we are about to see the aftermath of that episode of history repeated. However, having been force-fed faux-history, most people will not recognise it. Fail to learn from history and we are forced to repeat it.
I don't buy your analysis. Hitler got going through our US Investment banksters who also were supporters of eugenics. Hitler got rid of over 300,000 of his own before the war and his atracks on Poles and Jews.
Clearly, Stephen, you mistake propaganda for history, and so you get fixated. We were not discussing eugenics but economics. And, yes, I have written chapters on the US investments, but banker investments NEVER CREATE EGALITARIAN PROSPERITY, which is what happened under Hitler. This is relevant because Hitler applied social credit, that is, the workers of Germany became his colleteral, but today the WEF is being labeled as purveyors of social credit when in fact they are doing the very opposite... devaluing the human compoent. Apologies for the upper case but some people can't read unless you turn the volume up... so to speak. LOL.
I encourage you to read "The History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind". It was written by former central banker of Jewish origins. He dedicated a chapter to Hitler and how he stood ground against the bankers. It's time to move away from the propaganda and false history written by the banking mafia.
Just another parroted talking point Tony.
The root issue here, is that of fractional reserve banking.
We have basically "legalized" counterfeiting, by politically connected white collar criminals that we euphemistically call 'bankers".
They are dong nothing any different than Mafia counterfeiting of money.
The two are indistinguishable yet one is "legal" and other other a serious crime.
(Chuckle) we are reading from the same hymm card.
an interesting thing that was done in 1920 Germany after the "Weimar" collapse, where the currency became worthless, was this: every chamber of commerce printed paper notes that where serialized and good for one month, typically. they were used in that small region that the various chambers had, and was accepted by the businesses and banks. The exact mechanics of issuance are still unknown to me, and I imagine at the expiration date they were exchanged for "fresh" notes. Ths enabled the everyday people to buy bread etc for their families, as back then every village was pretty much self sufficient
Fascinating, Rob. Philadelphia did likewise, calling the currency Scrips, as I recall. I completely forget the details. These enabled them to trade without sending tax to George III. I hope I have not confused this. But, anyway, we could do likewise in the US and Australia if they close down cash. I have a whole serios of plans for trade, ranging from growing tobacco, moonshine, alcohol car fuel, biodiesel from shark livers, casava and sweet potato.
The 13 colonies printed "colonial script" and were very prosperous under this system.
What upset the colonists was being forced to use the inflated British fiat currency.
That was one factor in their leaving Britain.
It comes back to me.
This led to the US' first civil war against the Bank of England.
Roll on Civil War #2. The City of London needs to be wiped out, along with the LOX, NYMEX, Switzerland's BIS and New York's Wall Street.
I apologize for the length if this post (about a 5 minute read), but I'm assuming that the only force able to resist what's happening is the market, as we may be seeing now. But as a long-time admirer of Ellen Brown and I'd add the following to work on finance, money and debt. It's based on remarks at a pro-democracy rally last weekend in Keene Valley, NY.
Address at Keene Valley Rally
Don’t be fooled by Donald Trump’s theatrics about DEI, Russia, Greenland and Panama. His focus is what it’s always been—your money. And don’t be taken in by Elon Musk’s chainsaw; they don’t want to destroy your government—they want to own it.
And they are very afraid.
To better understand that, let me tell you a little story about a gang of investment advisors at Citigroup bank and a series of letters they sent to their clients back in 2006 on how to invest their money. The letters, which became known as the plutonomy memos, because, taking off on plutocracy—a country governed by the rich-- they declared that the world investors should focus on buying stocks in companies that cater to the wealthy. “We think the balance sheets of the rich are in great shape, and are likely to continue to improve,” they said. And so they have.
The number of billionaires in the world have grown since the memos from approximately 700 billionaires globally, with a combined net worth of 2.2 trillion dollars, to 1,011 by 2010 with a combined net worth of $3.6 trillion, the number of billionaires had increased to 2700 billionaires by 2024 with a combined net worth of over $15 trillion dollars with their wealth growing by $5.7 billion a day.
Then the memos concluded:
“Beyond war, inflation, the end of the technology/productivity wave, and financial collapse, we think the most potent and short-term threat [to investors] would be societies demanding a more‘ equitable’ share of wealth.”
Of course the memos left out something else that great wealth buys. It is not just “bling,” as they called it--yachts, jewelry, fine wines and mansions. It also buys overwhelming political power, as we’re seeing now.
Ask yourself: why are they afraid of “woke”? Woke is an attack on the idea that had guided us for decades—the striving for economic and social equality. The original meaning of “woke” was “staying aware and vigilant against injustice.”
How can we respond?
Certainly protests, such as this, bring together people who resist, which is why dictatorial regimes ban or limit public assemblies. But protests can be crushed.
Voting, but, of course, but votes can be bought as can the representatives we vote for.
But we have other resources, primarily our money!
Here’s a simple fact about our country’s wealth.
All wealth goes through households in the form on income, spending, saving, investment, taxation and debt repayment. 30% of that goes through the households of 1% of the country, more than half of that to the top 1/10th of 1%. The rest goes through the households of the remaining 99%. And all capital originates in savings.
Simply put, the future wealth of the 1% lies in the pockets and households of the other 99%. It lies in our money in banks; it lies in our money in pension funds, it lies in the interest we pay on our debts.
Presently our financial system is defying gravity; the monetary streams are continuously moving upwards.
But that means that threats to remove or withhold that money is the greatest power you have.
I like to says that debt is to finance what labor is to capital. It was only with threats to withhold their labor that workers were granted a seat at the table and create from 1945 to 1975 the greatest period of the equality of wealth redistribution in our history.
Threaten to withhold your savings and investments. Threaten to withhold your spending, and your debt repayments. At the very least, threaten to withhold the interest on your debt. Debt is an illegal tax on money granted to banks as some 90 percent of it is created out of thin air.
I suggest that threats to withhold money is the only thing to stop the continued assault on our staying aware and vigilant against injustice.,
Finally two cautionary notes:
First, this should not a campaign against finance: the goal for workers in withholding their labor was not to destroy their companies, but to address abuse and exploitation. We need finance: it’s our pension funds, our insurance policies, our payment systems and so on. What we don’t need is a financial system controlled by 1% of the population and then turned against us.
And second, don’t take the safety of your money for granted. If you fear that withholding money will invite retribution, then think of DOGE rummaging through our once secure data and payment systems. If they continue unchallenged, they have the power to simply take your money before you have a chance to protest their takeover.
Ellen, I recently saw an episode of the Corbett report talking about the financial collapse of 08, and whether reinstating Glass Stegal would have prevented it. Turns out that it would not have as it was just a part of a bigger financial regulation bill. The collapse was not due to the division of the banking system being undivided, it was the government mandating the loans from fanny and Freddie. The derivative's being sold off as gold standard with no regulation had nothing to do with what Glass-Stegal prevented. Is this a correct assessment? I trust your knowledge in this area, Jack.
Agreed that restoring Glass Steagall would not have prevented the banking crisis. It was triggered by the collapse of Bear Stearns, AIG and Lehman Brothers, which were not depository banks. However, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 did contribute to the explosion of derivatives, and it was the mortgage derivatives (CDS etc.) that mainly brought down the system, not the subprime mortgages themselves.
Hello Ellen, I remember Borne screaming about these unregulated instruments in the 1990s! Her urging went unheeded. I also hear people state that it was people buying houses they could not afford, but this is ludicrous. I ask them if they are familiar with due diligence and get a blank stare! I then explain it like they were a lender, and if they would make a loan for a home worth $500,000 to a carpenter who makes $60,000 a year, well you know right? Unless you did not have to worry about collecting the monthly payment, get your money up front and then pass the paper on to wall street, who cuts thousands of them into tranches, pays the rating agencies big money to lie and rate them as AAA so that pension funds can buy them as gold, when they are Dog S>+t betting on them failing as they must, and then getting paid. SCAM with the government's blessings. Am I close? Jack.
Sounds right! And at least the MBS actually had something in them. The synthetic credit default swaps were bets on bets, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act let them get away with that. A pure casino without collateral.
Correction, it was actually the Commodities Futures Act of 2000 that freed up derivatives, allowing their explosion. See Investopedia: "CFMA largely followed the recommendations made in 1999 by the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, a roundtable of regulators that included SEC, CFTC, the Federal Reserve, and the U.S. Treasury. The SEC and CFTC had set aside past jurisdictional disputes, agreeing to exempt non-commodity OTC derivatives traded by financial institutions from regulation by CFTC, and to share oversight of single-stock futures.4" https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cfma.asp
Exactly right. There was collateral as in the entire world. Retired people by the millions without incomes. If I was a bank robber who knew in advance that I could get billions from the robbery and get a thousand dollar fine only. Nice work if you can get it.
"collapse" is a scary image - financial collapse does not precipitate a physical collapse - all buildings bridges tunnels roads remain 'pristine' - which is the reason financial collapses are 'arranged' by financiers - thing is - the collapse allows the bankers to reorganize the financial economy more to their liking which under 'stable' conditions they could not do - a financial system more favourable to 'the people' could also not be arranged when the financial system is 'stable' - rather than the bankers nudging the system in a 'new' direction the people can nudge the system - in canada the people own the central bank - however since 1967 when the Bank of Canada act was amended to allow interest bearing deposits from the BIS other central banks and international financial organizations - our public utility central bank is operated 'as if' it was a private for profit central bank - the people of canada (100% of the shareholders) need only to force the Bank of Canada to close all deposit accounts and recall the Governor of the BoC from the managing board of the BIS to create a stable national economy capable of providing an open trading system through the 'collapse' which is actually just the banks loosing on their 'side bets' at the black jack table
thanks
Thank you Ellen. I love the public bank option as a sound, people-friendly and long-term solution!!