G20: Toronto in Flames

[Bownesian]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

It has very little to do with the political leaders and alot more to do with international central banking practices of these nations. The bankers flat out own most if not all of the G20 nations.

If the "leaders" want to make a real difference they should stay home and change their domestic banking laws to make it so we don't have to create money through private banking cartels, putting us in debt with compound interest.

Institutions like the IMF/World Bank, and WTO should be disbanded forever. They favor nothing but banks and corporations.

The planet as a whole is about 52 trillion dollars in debt to the banks of this world.......and it doesnt have to be this way.

Bankers, especially central bankers are subordinate to their respective governments' laws. Evidence of this is found in how several of the G-20 governments are planning on changing bank regulations and are planning to or are raising taxes against that industry.

There isn't some grand conspiracy here. People elect governments whose platforms support the economic status quo and do not elect parties who propose radical change such as the NDP. If you want things to be different, you have to start by convincing a lot of people who disagree with your position.

As for waving a wand and abolishing government and personal debt, I have yet to hear a proposal for how anything would get done without access to capital. I could not afford my house when I bought it so I borrowed capital, paying a price to do so. Government revenues are hugely variable from year to year and thus they need access to capital to operate in lean years, lest they create worse inefficiencies by slashing spending when incomes aren't good.

If banks (and through them shareholders) don't have something to gain by lending capital then none will be lent.

I'm keen to hear how you think that economies would operate without compound interest.

[kirant]

I honestly wonder if letting the group run amok was a part of the Police strategy. I wonder if they let everybody see the violent protesters go nuts so there would be no questions to full enforcement today.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

As for waving a wand and abolishing government and personal debt, I have yet to hear a proposal for how anything would get done without access to capital. I could not afford my house when I bought it so I borrowed capital, paying a price to do so. Government revenues are hugely variable from year to year and thus they need access to capital to operate in lean years, lest they create worse inefficiencies by slashing spending when incomes aren't good.

If banks (and through them shareholders) don't have something to gain by lending capital then none will be lent.

Banks are not providing "capital" to anyone. They are lending out a piece of paper and nothing more. They lend out mass sums of money that they do not have, and charge interest for it. They are the root cause of inflation...

Nations can lend themselves money. That's what we all used to do, you know way back when we weren't in massive debt to international bankers.

"Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes that nations laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility, all talks of the sovereignty of Parliament and of democracy is idle and futile."
William Lyon Mackenzie King, 10th Prime Minister of Canada.

[FlamesAddiction]

More accounts of police brutality and a CTV news producer was arrested:

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loc...TorontoNewHome

[mikey_the_redneck]

"The government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of government, but it is the government's greatest creative opportunity. The financing of all public enterprise, and the conduct of the treasury will become matters of practical administration. Money will cease to be master and will then become servant of humanity."

Abraham Lincoln.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

Bankers, especially central bankers are subordinate to their respective governments' laws. Evidence of this is found in how several of the G-20 governments are planning on changing bank regulations and are planning to or are raising taxes against that industry.

There isn't some grand conspiracy here. People elect governments whose platforms support the economic status quo and do not elect parties who propose radical change such as the NDP. If you want things to be different, you have to start by convincing a lot of people who disagree with your position.

Yes, the goverment needs to change the banking act. Our debt is privatized, and needs to be under our control again.
Bank taxes, unfortunately will not really accomplish anything. They will most likely be pushed onto the consumer anyways...

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

More accounts of police brutality and a CTV news producer was arrested:

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loc...TorontoNewHome

You mean jail is uncomfortable? Cold, dark, small, cells? You don't say!

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

You mean jail is uncomfortable? Cold, dark, small, cells? You don't say!

Indeed - they expect a TV, sofa, beer fridge and a shoe shine?

Hmmm let me make a call . . . for the whaaaaaaaaaaaambulance!

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

More accounts of police brutality and a CTV news producer was arrested:

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loc...TorontoNewHome

poor babies

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

As for waving a wand and abolishing government and personal debt, I have yet to hear a proposal for how anything would get done without access to capital. I could not afford my house when I bought it so I borrowed capital, paying a price to do so. Government revenues are hugely variable from year to year and thus they need access to capital to operate in lean years, lest they create worse inefficiencies by slashing spending when incomes aren't good.

If banks (and through them shareholders) don't have something to gain by lending capital then none will be lent.

I'm keen to hear how you think that economies would operate without compound interest.

I think the issue is that under capitalism, someone first needs to accumulate capital (savings) so someone else can borrow it (credit).

In the giant mess we have today, no one is actually saving (I've read somewhere that savings of the american middle class is at all-time-low) and banks are creating money out of thin air to create "much needed liquidity."

It's a house of cards.

As for this summit, apparently the US and China want to spend spend spend their way out of the trouble whereas Europeans have some sense left in them and propose cuts in spending.

[Bownesian]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Banks are not providing "capital" to anyone. They are lending out a piece of paper and nothing more. They lend out mass sums of money that they do not have, and charge interest for it. They are the root cause of inflation...

Nations can lend themselves money. That's what we all used to do, you know way back when we weren't in massive debt.

"Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes that nations laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility, all talks of the sovereignty of Parliament and of democracy is idle and futile."
William Lyon Mackenzie King, 10th Prime Minister of Canada.

That quote helped Mackenzie King win the 1935 election. He then formally nationalized the Bank of Canada (that had been created in the previous year), setting up our current economic system as a result. I'm not sure how that makes your point that our government isn't in control of its own currency and debt, just that our governments over the years have decided that private debt is a better option than what you propose.

If our government was to "lend itself money" (i.e. increase debt owed to the Bank of Canada to pay its bills) and either renounce our international debt or pay our debt off with Bank of Canada printed dollars, the result would be an immediate proportional devaluation of our currency on international markets, which would lead to inflation in the costs to purchase all those things that we do not produce ourselves and a cessation of international trade with Canada (in Canadian dollars at least).

This has been done before with results that I wouldn't consider to be positive. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe

[Beerfest]

Spending a billion dollars on security to protect a bunch of corrupt leaders, what a waste.

[amorak]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

I'd rather this group than yet another anti-Israel resolution out of the broken, corrupt and useless United Nations General Assembly.

The member states (and meta-states, in the case of the EU), represent the most powerful world economies. In a world where I have no choice but to buy stuff that is made half a world away in China and where bad mortgage regulation in the United States can lead to state bankruptcies in Europe, it is the height of foolishness to think that the leaders of these economies shouldn't get together from time to time to talk about what works, what doesn't and make macro-economic decisions to help everyone.

New World Order theories aside, Canada has a choice -
1) Participate in international trade discussions (including having a voice on social justice and environmental issues, if that's your thing) and participate in international trade.
2) Don't participate in those discussions but participate in international trade and hope that the decisions made by others aren't too damaging to our economy.
3) Don't participate in international trade and get used to being poor like all the other non-trading nations.

I am in favour of our government having a voice in international trade issues but I understand the point of view that says we should keep our money to ourselves. I have no time for anti-scientific, anti-trade groups who would have us stop using oil, stop trading and return to the 19th century.

[Beerfest]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

You mean jail is uncomfortable? Cold, dark, small, cells? You don't say!

I guess you didnt read the article...?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Banks are not providing "capital" to anyone. They are lending out a piece of paper and nothing more. They lend out mass sums of money that they do not have, and charge interest for it. They are the root cause of inflation...

What do you mean "money that they do not have"?

He said in plain English that the bank was involved in getting him the actual bricks and mortar house he's living in.

How do you account for that if they don't actually have any money?

The person who used to own the house got paid actual money when he sold the house, and that money he got paid was provided by the bank, and now Bownesian is paying the bank back that money.

It's not a myth or some sort of magic. The house exists and someone got paid for it.

And if they don't really have any money, why do people keep paying them back?

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

That quote helped Mackenzie King win the 1935 election. He then formally nationalized the Bank of Canada (that had been created in the previous year), setting up our current economic system as a result. I'm not sure how that makes your point that our government isn't in control of its own currency and debt, just that our governments over the years have decided that private debt is a better option than what you propose.

If our government was to "lend itself money" (i.e. increase debt owed to the Bank of Canada to pay its bills) and either renounce our international debt or pay our debt off with Bank of Canada printed dollars, the result would be an immediate proportional devaluation of our currency on international markets, which would lead to inflation in the costs to purchase all those things that we do not produce ourselves and a cessation of international trade with Canada (in Canadian dollars at least).

This has been done before with results that I wouldn't consider to be positive. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe

How our government officials came to the conclusion that it is better to privatize debt is beyond me.....maybe the right people were handing them some cash under the table to change legislation and turn a blind eye.

If our government lends itself money, interest payments would not be necessary.
Zimbabwe is a poor example imo. The same German company that prints their dollars prints ours by the way, and dont forget that Zimbabwe has very little oversight, as it is under the control of a dictator who is not accountable to anyone, so severe abuse of the system takes place.

Most founding political figures spoke heavily of the importance of the issuance of currency, including Lincoln, Washington, Franklin, Jackson and a host of others....and if you let it get into private hands things are bound to go bad...but those guys couldn't possibly more wise than our current leaders could they.......

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What do you mean "money that they do not have"?

Our labor legitimizes the banks fake money....as we take their fake loans and turn around and labor to make it into something. After we do that we pay back the principal (which the banks created out of thin air in the first place) and whole lot more to the banks..
Banks actually have very little reserve compared to how much they lend out at interest. Remember our money is "legal tender" and not backed by anything of value. It is a big scheme that lines their pockets and puts nations in big time debt. They print as much as they want, and it is the leading cause of inflation.

We throw about 160 million dollars away every single day in compound interest payments on our national debt (which is about 800 billion). It is plain and simple not necessary.

Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiBSdBDeucU

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

poor babies

How can you condemn unnecessary acts of violence from one side, but then brush it off so quickly for the other?

I hope the trouble making protestors get some serious jail time, but I also hope a few cops get fired for the crap they are doing. Police brutality and attacks on press freedom is not acceptable behaviour any more than destroying property is.

It's not as one-sided as you think.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Our labor legitimizes the banks fake money....as we take their fake loans and turn around and labor to make it into something.

Fake?

A bank lent me money when I was going to school. I used that money to pay for rent and food and books and booze. Now I pay it back to them every month.

What is "fake" about this arrangement? Did I not eat that food? Buy those books? Drink that booze? Trust me, I did all three. There was nothing fake about it. In actual tangible reality, I used the bank's money to purchase real things.

[TRIX]

Originally Posted by Puxlut

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamont_Free_Concert

YUP, reaserched it, every source does state that the deceased was holding/waving/had a gun in the air in hand near the stage.

Justified? no hardly, I don't think so at all, but I get why he was jumped.

Also researched that The Grateful Dead and The Rolling Stones (previous concert) had both used the HA for security purposes previous to this event, without such incidents.