This an unplanned essay, but we hope to soon release a booklet on the same topic. More adept analysis has been done by other people, but my focus is on how the general, non-technical person could, and in some times and places does, benefit (or suffer) from modern banking practices.
“Those who shrink from responsibilities keep on shrinking in other ways too.” — a quote from one of those “quote of the day things”.
Banksters (my name for the gang of unethical bankers) shrank away from the responsibility of fostering a fair, sustainable money system.
Instead, there is a usury-based system which prevents equal growth. The rich know how to game the system, and can literally build their own banks, anyhow; but not because they have more money only — rather, because they know that they are different types of money in play.
The money which banks issue as loans is vastly great than that represented by deposits or other assets; in effect, banks create money with the hope that it becomes value. This is the opposite of how money works for any other person or institution, which has to generate value, and hope to receive money in exchange for it.
Most people working within the banking system are not the problem; the problem comes because government treasuries no longer actually issue money. They gave the legal right to do so up almost totally, under pressure from the banking system.
This leads to a situation where we already have an effective one-world government, since money is vital to all human trade, and the world financial system is centralized within the banking system (IMF, World Bank).
The existing banking system can be used to issue “rolling” loans. That is, companies which take out the loans, use them for expansion and ambition, but there is an understanding that the company is meant to be sustained or grown, rather than threatened by the bank. The bank knows that by keeping their clients solvent, they can rely on more business.
However, it is often used to kill businesses, in an impatient drive to create the shell of business, when their actual effect is to collapse the sustainability of their clients, and ultimately, society overall.
Thus, the actual intentions of the banking system, as implemented by their policy and activity, is what matters.
One part of the solution (if we want to remove the majority of modern human suffering caused indirectly in this way) is to counterbalance the charging of usury with an issue of script into the public good. Whether this is basic income, tax refunds, or some other form of pulse, it would need to be done on the local level, in order to facilitate a stable society where humans can act as full beings, rather than make sensible but difficult compromises for the sake of fiscal survival.
The other part of the solution is to recognize the source of suffering and stagnation is not a momentary recession, but rather, an intentional agenda to consolidate power and wealth, which has no counter-balance, and thus, has become the actual main cause of the destruction of the positive aspects of humanity.
However, for most, if not all, of those who currently make policy, the power of the banks is under stated, and their importance to fostering a sustainable human society is ignored.
Although I haven’t read all of the relevant literature, there are some fixed (but incorrect) ideas which keep recurring, such as “return to a gold standard” or “social services are a drain on wealth”.
In fact, the main drain on wealth now is the banking system, and the usury it imposes, without any balance. This creates immediate inflation and causes slow but steady bankruptcy of everyone.
This is made worse because they banksters pretend to need governments, or pretend to have problems, but they never do… they already have full control of the money supply, and more importantly, they do know, at the highest levels, that they will cause terrible harms in this way. Since they are not the ones suffering, they won’t change it; but they would make even more money if the system was balanced, because there would be enough money supplied in general that loans would not go bad in 90%+ of the cases, or need rolling loans to support them in the other 10%.
More importantly, prices of important things, such as higher education, plants, housing, and other important things to making utility (for trade is about making life more worth living), and other forms of value, would be stabilized.
The current system, however, is sustainable in the long term. Rather than collapsing, it will simply create a vast, impassable gulf between the rich and the poor, with employed people being serfs of the rich, whether pawns or knights, but never free to live life, enjoy what they have worked for, or engage in personal development.
They will accept this program, especially since it is not well explained, even in “counter-culture” documentaries and such. In fact, only one documentary that I am aware of even mentioned the usury-correction tweak, which is all that would be needed to stabilize the system in the long term.
History has show that suffering caused by an indirect source is quite tolerable in the long run, over at least 200 years. This system was used successfully to depress many nations who sought freedom, and will most likely continue to be used in this way.
The Way Forwards
Once you understand that developmental loans are not personal debts, and are able to set up a company which can assume them and support your work, then you can employ those who support your ideals, and quietly be of service to the world, without becoming involved in religion, politics, or pseudo-science.
However, it takes a lot of preparation to comprehend the system, and a bit of amorality to ignore the fact that it is, indeed, causing harm, and for no real reason. Unlike a war, who can really become a conscientious objector to the monetary system?
No matter how much money or cash flow one has, the system is pervasive. Even in remote jungles, the bulldozers looking to deforest, and the squads preventing farming, are driven by the same system. There is no real escape within the current “global era”.
So, my hope is to take both paths: both build companies which use the existing system, and also, advocate for the reform of the system to one which is balanced, and promote using the system as is to develop whatever one would like.
In cases where people lack direct access to capital, they are many institutions which already exist, to help persons to gain access to it. However, it needs to become more widely known, and thus, more widely utilized, the specific system of “rolling loans“, and banking systems need to support it until (or especially unless) they want to alter the system.
If banks continue to act as if the fiscal success of a business is due solely to the person who takes out a loan, and thus pressure business people into bankruptcy in 90%+ of the cases, then alternative means of finance will eventually replace the banking system. More importantly, however, in the medium term, the suffering of everyone, including the employees of the banking system, will increase.
Crimes against banks may not be successful, but the crime against humanity is inhibition of balanced growth. Like inhibition of education, it seems to be an invisible problem. The current problem is that those who stand ready and willing to give grants and loans, do not speak the same language as those who need them the most. Nor do they go the extra mile to search for those who would grow the most.
Rather, they seek those who have decided to gamble on building a business, but they never inform them of the nuances of expansion, nor of the importance of an internal tiered team. Thus, those people often put themselves at risk, and resort to informal methods, proving that the formal system is against the common man.
It is not stated this way, however.
“We” often assume that poor people stay poor because “they” have a problem, rather than that they (we) choose not to engage in a system which seeks primarily to exploit them (us), and is actually somewhat disappointed when they are successful on the first go.
This falsehood is commonly repeated in a number of ways, and it allows the banksters to continue to exploit every nation. This habit, of “blaming the victims”, serves to quiet attempts to reform their banking system, which we have now all been placed within. Without voting for it, we already have a single controlling force which governs the lives of all members of society, no matter how far “off the grid” you might try to be.
More later, but meanwhile, you can check out the booklets on the support page, or the rest of the blog. It is difficult, but slowly shaping up.
1. in “Ghostbusters” (not the 2016 movie, haven’t seen that yet), the “key master” was seeking the “gate keeper”. Human rebels worked to prevent this union.
However, in The Matrix Trilogy (actually the disappointed sequel, Reloaded/Revelations), the “key master” was helping the rebel humans, against the wishes of the Frenchmen, who acted as the “gate keeper”.
What relevance it has to the rest of the essay, I leave for you to decide.
2. This article, which defines and explains “convertible debt“, explains a bit about how this is done with small teams of people, currently. Realistically, you need a team to run a company anyhow, even if most people are part-time or acting with mixed interests as an employee or attachment to some other company or household.
3. We are in the process of developing the third note. Please patiently await this revelation for mutual gain.