The Secret of Oz
Author L Robert Baum author of the Wonderful Wizard of Oz, wasn't simply penning an entertaining children's story, he also authored a political allegory to highlight the biggest scam perpetrated upon the American nation.
The characters of the book were representations of political forces and players involved. Dorothy's shoes in the original story were silver, but were change to ruby in he movie to take advantage of the new Technicolor process, but the change also lost much of the symbolism of Baum's work. The brainless scarecrow represented the American farmers, who without college degrees understood the basics of economics. The tin woodsman represented the American worker who has been dumped into unemployment because of a lack of capital in industry. The cowardly lion represented William Jennings Bryan who railed against perpetrators of the biggest fraud ever seen but after two failed presidential runs withdrew from the movement that was trying to reign in the den of vipers.
The phrase “den of vipers” may seem strong, hardly even presidential. However it was the language of President Andrew Jackson, before one of the vipers assassinated him. But may not have been the only time this den of vipers struck at the power of the people to undo their ruse. Abraham Lincoln created the Greenback to return prosperity to the economy for which he as paid back with assassination at the hands of John Wilkes Booth.
The great fraud lies in the notion that private banks are the best institutions to control the money supply. This despite the “business cycle” tanking economies and destroying lives. How do they consider regular working people? Their language should tell us something, “inferior social strata”, so perhaps like a child looking down on ants and pointing the focal point of a magnifying glass in the sun at them.
You can no more borrow your way out of debt than can governments. Yet to “save” the “too big to fail” banks the US Government borrowed nearly one trillion dollars to give back to the same banks to “prevent collapse”. Indeed, while Republican scoffed at the idea of minting a trillion dollar coin to avoid the sequester, it may actually be the best way out of the untenable position of the rocky need for monetary injection in to the US economy and the hard place of having to pay back with interest any money borrowed from banksters.
The most pervasive part of the fraud is that government cannot be allowed to control the money supply, and yet history is replete with examples of governments successfully managing the money supply. To perpetrate this fraud there is the knee jerk reaction “governments can't print money because that would drive inflation.” And yet every few years the banks triple the money supply through mortgages and other lending.
North Dakota has a bank that is a bit different, it offers low interest loans, backed dollar for dollar by monetary reserves it actually holds. This bank has contributed hugely to the stability and prosperity of the state. And they've been doing this for over 90 years.
Ron Paul is a shill
Ron Paul's calls for a return to the gold standard simply plays into the agenda of the banksters, The gold standard, is simply a means to controlling the money supply favour by the banksters. It is a mechanism that has been used to promote the wealth of the money lenders / banksters and in the process has destroyed governments and civilisations.
It gets worse, it has been reveal that the libertarian movement was started by business interests as a pro-business fake grass roots movement in the 1970's and David Koch even ran as a presidential candidate on the libertarian ticket in 1979.
There has to be a better way.
Well yes there is. Nationalising reserve banks and keeping control of the money supply at arms length from politics and private banking interests in order to provide a moderated supply of money allowing for economic grow to a level of prosperity. At the same time requiring banks to have the assets to back the loans it issues.
Managing the transition is important, the first thing governments can do is create money to pay off the debts it owes. As they do this over time they increase the required level assets backing lending. Thus, you and I would not notice very much in banks operates towards us. But we would over time notice that business were hiring, new business were starting up and hiring, our pay checks would grow, poverty would shrink, to levels not seen in forty years.
The fact is no government is really in danger of running out of money. All they have to do to get out of banksters cuffs is grease them with cash they create. The very definition of sovereign goes back to the notional of governmental authority to control the money supply. In this sense the governments of the United States is no longer a sovereign state it is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street.
It has been done before.
I've already mentioned the Greenback, there are many other examples including tally sticks created by an English king to Scrip created in collonial America. In New Zealand, during the 1930's the 1st Labour government created the state house building programme, this program was funded by debt free money created by the government. The injection of money into the economy led to a great period of prosperity not seen since.
I can almost hear the off key whine buy tories/GOP pudits say “but they failed”. Technically they are correct, but these things did not fail before they met and unnatural sticky end. Successive National governments watered down the state house build programme and reverted to bankster borrowing and whinged about how it was so expensive, and eventually started selling off the state house stock. Government issued currency in the US got killed along with two of its presidents.
In Adams Smith's time, their was a quaint way dealing with speculators, the had them executed. Smith himself had little time for banksters, writings make it clear that banks must be strongly regulated.
“Though the principles of the banking trade may appear somewhat abstruse, the practice is capable of being reduced to strict rules. To depart upon any occasion from those rules, in consequence of some flattering speculation of extraordinary gain, is almost always extremely dangerous and frequently fatal to the banking company which attempts it.” - Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, PART III. Of the Expense of public Works and public Institutions, ARTICLE I.—Of the public Works and Institutions for facilitating the Commerce of the Society.
When banksters and their shills say such method failed, what they really mean is these methods didn't create the socio-economic separation they feel they need to feel superior to everyone else. Or the point to economic collapses started by policy changes friendly to their interests, such as recalling the Greenback or repealing Glass-Stiegal, they never blame these collapses on these changes of course. They even call the 2008 collapse “natural” but indeed there is nothing natural about it. A steady supply of money from government would ensure a steady economy, indeed economies are struggling today under austerity precisely because money is being vacuumed out of economies through taxes to pay back loans that governments can never pay in a system where money only comes from borrowing from the lenders they are paying.
See also
Libertarian party history
