Tags
911, Australian banks, bank of England, banks, Bill Still, central bank, coins, Constitution, contract, contractual obligation, credit, criminals, debt, deflation, Dennis Kucinich, freedom, gold, gold standard, illuminati, inflation, interest, mathematically perfected economy, plagiarist, recession, Rothschild, silver, tax, the great depression, The Secret of Oz, truth, usury, war
Before we begin we must identify what a debt security actually is . The debt security is often referred to as debt instruments. According to mainstream academia a debt instrument is a paper or electronic *obligation* that enables the issuing party to raise funds by *promising* to repay [allegedly repay] a lender [purported lender] in accordance with terms of a contract.
Now we have established a debt instrument is a *promissory obligation* which is a *contractual obligation* we can now ask ourselves do banks create or issue a debt security & or any further representation of a debt security such as a treasury bond by asking one simple question relating to the *Contract Essentials* (contract law), which can either validate or invalidate a debt precipitates to the bank or mere publisher of money (central bank) .
The question is what consideration of commensurable value does the bank risk or give up to otherwise evidence a bank (ANY BANK) is actually creating or issuing money from these debt securities ( ie: promissory obligations).
Of course one cant just irrationally assume the bank creates money from a debt security if the bank cant prove or even demonstrate what consideration of value the bank risks or gives up from its otherwise prior legitimate possession. Logically all banks can ever do is publish a further representation (misrepresentation) of the money the real issuer is creating. Evident by who is giving up consideration of commensurable value equal to the debt to determine who the real issuer of a debt security (promissory obligation) actually is.
I ask a simple question of logic to the reader. If the bank or mere publisher can not prove or even demonstrate what consideration they either risk or give up who else can prove they give up lawful consideration of value if not ourselves the real creators of money, because its already apparent the obligor makes (creates) a promissory note by signing & therefore issuing that promissory obligation (ie: money)?
Is it not the obligor who owes an obligation to another, therefore the obligor is one who must pay on a promissory note or obligation that is legally or contractually obliged to provide a benefit or payment to another?
I ask again if a bank or mere publisher neither risks or gives up consideration of value & WE THE PEOPLE DO, predominantly the obligor & it is the obligor who actually signs the contractual obligation in a purported loan how is it even rationally or ethically possible for any bank to create money, much less loan us money if the bank neither risks or gives up consideration & does not even sign the contractual obligation?
As for security deeds, such as deed to a home is not what actually creates money & its a barefaced LIE to suggest it ever is.
The deed is not a promissory obligation or debt security that creates new money, so just because this debt security or promissory obligation is collateralized by the property it purchases does not make that promissory obligation or money itself a deed to a home. Only a bankers fool would suggest something so moronic.
Therefore the deed of a home is the rightful possession of the real creditor who gives up prior ownership of *property itself*, which is property that has *consideration of value* representing what the seller is giving up in any sale such as a home itself. Until such time that home is sold to the debtor or obligor, thus transferring deed title to the debtor or obligor for paying the real creditor in full from the outset of creating the money or issuing a promissory obligation.
Regardless if the bank is taking unlawful possession of deed resulting from any purported loan this is not to just blindly assume the money representing the debtors or obligors own present & or future production is what value the seller is giving up, much less the non-existent value any bank is purportedly giving up — absolutely not — simply because although both CREDIT & MONEY have consideration of value that value is logically separate each to their own in respect to what value the buyer & seller is giving up in that sale .
Property being the value the real creditor is giving up & the money being the value the debtor gives up. Either by actually earning money to pay the debt & or what value the obligor is formerly giving up by signing & issuing a promissory obligation that issues new money (principal only) into circulation by promising their own future production. Otherwise the thief (ie:bank) would not be even stealing the value we give to all money & property in phony loans, “X2″ due to unwarranted interest.
Moreover the security deed is not the banks rightful possession or title of ownership to begin with. If the bank cant even prove or demonstrate what consideration of value the bank is actually risking or giving up in any purported loan to otherwise evidence the banks rightful possession, repossession of title the deed is not the banks rightful possession.
Trading currencies or the practice of taking unearned gain (interest) on ” Bank Bill Swap Rates” (BBSR) isn’t creating money either, NOT EVEN CLOSE, & a barefaced LIE to ever suggest it is.
SOCIAL CONDITIONING
Society has become so conditioned people don’t think when they casually use the term “I have to go out to make some more money“,when it is really “I have to go out to earn some more money “ . Logically earning more money is not making any more new money.
This conditioning leads to a further misconception within industry & commerce with another common term “spending money makes money“ which is another false assumption, simply because its not the act of spending old money that makes new money, but instead when someone signs & issues a *promissory obligation* when a bank only ever pretends to loan that someone new money in private debt, BEFORE that new money is even spent or subsequently deposited resulting from any sale.
Often the proponents of banking will play on this common social conditioning that would have people irrationally believe when a bank spends or trades money (stolen money) the bank creates new money, which could not be any further from the truth but a barefaced lie instead, only to disguise the fact the practice of banking first steals & then launders money, either by purportedly lending, spending or trading money with the intent & means to steal even further from each & everyone of us.
CONCLUSION: Banks never have or ever will create or loan money. NOT from a security deed . NOT even from a debt security. Simply because WE DO by giving up commensurable consideration in the only debt security (promissory obligation/ contractual obligation) in private debt that actually creates all new money (principal only), regardless if the bank purposely misrepresents that debt or contract by falsifying the debt we have to each other instead to the bank itself — in a purported loan– that neither ethically or rationally transpires in the first place. Regardless if the bank has possession of the security deed or deeds to your home, which if anything can only further prove the bank is a thief.
PS: I have no problem calling all the proponents of banking liars because they cant even substantiate their barefaced lies, which is the very thing that preserves a monumental crime of theft today because no one ever questions those lies. You sociopath proponents of banking think you are all so smug pushing the lies of economy only as if its fact, but the hard fact remains none of you can actually prove or demonstrate what you are actually talking about by not only evading the consideration question, but throwing bullshit assumptions at the wall in the hope it sticks, only as if you are answering the consideration question.
David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)
(Published : May 30, 2017, last edit July 09, 2017)
Australia for Mathematically Perfected Economy™ 
Hi David,
Can you please give your input; How the MPE model can be implemented in decentralized societies in local markets. As my understanding is it has to be from Top to Bottom. If a small group of people decides that we can’t to have MPE in our local community; how that would work out as all other neighbouring socities will not accept their money? Thanks
Hey Anna.
Firstly I suggest you read the mandate. Yes, top to bottom on a national level. Although you could have small community implement MPE amongst themselves, however the nations legal allegiance to banks will more than likely land you in all sorts of legal battles, much like a small group of people declaring a republic within any country..
Ultimately the MPE dollar will be worth considerably more than bank money due to the fact its not subject to interest or any artificial manipulation otherwise caused by the current obfuscation of bank money.
For example If MPE was up and running on a national level — for every 1 MPE dollar the exchange rate might be 5 BANK dollars. Could go as high as $1000 bank dollars for every 1 MPE dollar, considering every nation on this planet is bankrupt. Logic may tell you now this will force a global transition to MPE if any nation wanted to compete with a MPE nation.
Its all quite simple really, but it needs to begin on a national level so its set in stone. The first nation who adopts MPE will transition the rest of the world in a blink of the eye.
I dedicated this post to a recent conversation I had with some kook who claimed to have once worked in a bank that tried to tell me banks create new money by buying & selling securities (debt securities) on the world market & the deed to a home (security deed) evidences the consideration of value the banks risk or give up when they lend you money to purchase a home, only “as if” the bank is the true creditor giving up the home from the banks otherwise prior legitimate possession.
This individual was evading the consideration question all along, only as if they answered the question, & smugly laughing at me as if I’m the moron for saying banks don’t create or loan money, even though this individual was talking about two different securities believing they are one & the same. One being a deed to a home (security deed) & the other a promissory obligation (debt security), whichever the case this individual couldn’t actually tell me what consideration of value a bank risks or gives up in either, that would otherwise precipitate a debt to the bank.
This individual just kept on laughing at me as if a deed to a home (security deed) evidences the consideration the bank risks or gives up & that “security” however obscure she was presenting her argument is how banks create new money by simply trading currencies in the world market, which only instead allows banks to take further unearned gains in unwarranted interest on that already stolen money. In the end I called her a liar to her face, which didn’t go down well at all, but just deserved for attempting to preserve a monumental crime of theft with barefaced lies. 🙂
David Ardron.
Now, can you imagine the power of banking in the hands of we, the people? The ability to create money out of thin air? Let’s make it happen; in peace;
“The issuing power of money should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.” – Thomas Jefferson
If you truly understood the article above you would naturally conclude its a barefaced lie to ever suggest banks create money simply because they dont, never have or ever will, not even from thin air.
Its all quite simple if you stick to the verifiable facts without contradicting or compromising those facts.
Lets be very clear banks don’t create money, NOT EVER, not just because banks or mere publishers give up no consideration of commensurable value, but because we the people are creating this money all along instead by giving up the only consideration of commensurable value, so what can those of us who are sound mind logically conclude from this simple observation of verifiable fact?
1) Banks are logically not creating money because the bank is neither risking or giving up the consideration of value you give up, which is hardly thin air, nothing or fictitious.
2) Banks are logically not loaning you *YOUR* money because the bank neither risks or gives up consideration of value from its otherwise prior legitimate possession to even rationally justify any loan from the bank to you, much less interest.
3) Banks are logically not purchasing or borrowing your promissory note / security / money because the bank neither risks or gives up consideration of value to otherwise rationally justify a legitimate purchase ever took place, much less any loan from you to the bank.
4) Banks are logically stealing the value of our production we give up to each other in any trade or transaction , ”X2″ due to unwarranted interest by simply pretending to loan all the money WE CREATE (principal only) into circulation in the first place. In other words the purported loan is not a loan at all, neither ethically or rationally, but instead a monumental crime of theft.
5) Logically those who propagate the lie banks create money from nothing are throwing the baby out with the bathwater to irrationally justify an oxymoron. that preserves a monumental crime of theft.
Notes: Don’t be fooled by all 11th hour pretenders out there who are proponents of the crime of theft. To irrationally suggest banks create money from nothing is to likewise suggest banks are stealing nothing, which is denying that monumental crime of theft.
So no matter how these buffoons obscure the facts the purported loan never transpires anyway, not from the bank to one of us, nor from one of us to the bank, no sale ever transpires between the bank or anyone.
Make no mistake “The business of banking is not commerce but piracy”, simply because whichever way you look at this, however distorted by pretend economists today the bank gives up no commensurable consideration of value in any debt, trade, sale or transaction, making the purported loan a monumental crime of theft, that’s subsequently stealing the value WE THE PEOPLE give to all money & property, which is hardly nothing or thin air.
If anything the bank issues a further representation of our promissory obligations we really have to each other , however you dont need to be a genius to see the bank is purposely misrepresenting our promissory obligations in the form of pretend loans. Where the bank is falsifying the real debt we have to each other INSTEAD to the bank itself in a purported loan that neither ethically or even rationally transpires . simply because no one on the face of this planet can actually prove or demonstrate what consideration of value a bank or mere publisher risks or gives up.
Just because the banks nether risk or give up consideration of value doesn’t mean they create money. How can they? They give up no consideration of value. If anything the fact they dont risk or give up consideration proves banks are in fact not creating money , not even from thin air, simply because that so called thin air is value we the people give up, which represents our hard earned blood, sweat & tears is hardly nothing or thin air.
Point blank If money had no representation of value the banks wouldn’t be stealing it in phony loans. Yet no loan ever transpires, not from the bank , not even from each other, simply because WE ARE THE REAL CREATORS OF ALL NEW MONEY.
Banks only have the power of the issuer so long as you all keep believing banks create & loan money. Its really that simple. We already have the power of issuance because we do in fact issue a promissory obligation (money creation) that always comes before publication, before any deposit or sale, but we ignorantly give all that power away to a thief instead dont we? Based on one simple lie that keeps telling everyone banks either create or loan us money. Think about it.
We do get what you mean; the question is, what is the remedy? Because A4V and promissory notes get people in trouble;
You’re kidding right? I honestly dont think you do get what I mean. Everything you have written here so far tells me you dont, because the remedy is ” Mathematically Perfected Economy” that proves & demonstrates the inherent faults in today’s LIE of economy & prescribes the one & only solution that solves those faults.
If you know MPE you should know already that misrepresenting your own promissory note to get something for nothing is not a remedy, much less a solution, nor will it ever stand up in court.
The MPE remedy is quite simple because we are not saying there is no debt. We are not throwing the baby out with the bath water using pro-banking oxymoron’s such as “debt free money” or “money is created from nothing or thin air” because the only true debt that transpires is the debt we have to each other in any sale, trade or transaction of our production, which is hardly nothing or thin air, nor is there any loan, but instead an act of GIVING up our production to each other.
The argument is although there is no debt to the bank there is a debt we have to each other, which is to return the current falsified debt to what a true debt ought to rightly be & that is to simply *pay & retire* the principal free from unjust intervention or exploitation (ie:banking), where there never is or ever was any loan or borrowing anyway, however its MPE that actually goes that step further with the 1.1.1 equal ratio by retiring the principal equal to the remaining debt & equal to the represented property value.
Its a remedy no one on this planet can disprove, not even in the courts, simply because there is one & only one solution. The sooner people get this into their impenetrable heads the sooner they shall have heaven on earth, or alternatively they can keep financing their very own destruction & quite literately create a living hell on earth, not just for you, but for me & all the children in this world.
Can you even comprehend the fact we are currently robbing each other on every sale, trade or transaction, only to give it all away to an even bigger thief (ie: bank)? Because this is what MPE proves & demonstrates. If you can’t bring yourself to at least admit some guilt how can you ever take any self responsibility to make a wrong a right? How can you even hold others accountable? not just banks & politicians but all those around you if you cant even hold yourself first & foremost accountable. In short you can’t & anything you do or say is in all hypocrisy.
Thank- you for sending this to (or on to) me. It’s very interesting. Now, on the cause of inflation… Which I now believe is un-retired principle. Made up of a number of components 1: unpaid unsecured loans. E.g. bad farm loans, small to large business loans,credit card default, personal bankruptcies etc. 2: governmental loans; because government bonds are only ever ‘rolled over’ so to say (never paid off in full without ‘re-borrowing’), they represent a constant component of the overall inflation rate. Question: does anyone know what proportion it (unpaid government bonds) represents in the rate of inflation ? Kind-regards, Matthew.
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Australia for Mathematically Perfected Economy™ wrote:
> australia4mpe posted: “Before we begin we must identify what a debt > security actually is . The debt security is often referred to as debt > instruments. According to mainstream academia a debt instrument is a paper > or electronic *obligation” that enables the issuing party to rais” >
Gday Mathew
Firstly you must comprehend there never is any loan or borrowing, not even from each other, simply because we are the creators of all new money which is quite easy to prove, apposed to the banks who cant, simply because they dont, never have or ever will , much less do banks loan us money, nor for that matter do we loan or borrow money from each other, simply because we create all new money (principal only) by giving consideration of value not only to property, but money itself that represents the value the obligor gives up, which is nothing but an obligation by the obligor to *pay & retire* the principal free from unjust intervention or exploitation.
Secondly you must comprehend there is no circulatory inflation under banking, simply because we’re all paying principal & interest out of a volume of circulation comprised of only principal.
Price Inflation, HOWEVER, is therefore NOT caused by circulatory inflation as most would assume, never has since the conception of banking, but instead caused by the added cost of interest (perpetual deflation) we all pay out of circulation above the sum of principal, not only in all your personal phony loans in private debt, but subsequently as a result stealing however much interest we pay above the sum of principal — stealing even further from each & everyone of us in artificial price inflation when we just spend money today.
See Its the *principal & interest* (perpetual deflation) we all formerly pay out of circulation in all our personal phony loans in all private debt thats subsequently laundered back into circulation again as every increase in government debt (perpetual reflation), so the remaining circulation is only ever comprised of the principal we originally create in private debt to begin with. This in effect only allows us to service the former sum of falsified debt, but never the new sum of falsified debt thats dedicated to service the former sum of falsified debt again — irreversibly multiplying both private debt & government debt, until such time interest artificially inflates prices to a point where industry & commerce can no longer service the former sum of falsified debt anymore, much less pay down any new sum of falsified when its been mathematically impossible to pay down all along, due to the interest we pay out of circulation in all private debt.
SO WHAT EXACTLY IS INFLATION?
The following quote is what mainstream economics teaches in schools & universities about inflation, where the consensus view is that a long sustained period of inflation is caused by money supply growing faster than the rate of economic demand or purported growth.
Quote;
“inflation occurs—that is, the purchasing power of the dollar shrinks—to the extent that the nominal supply of dollars grows faster than the real demand to hold dollars”
End quote:
Source
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Inflation.html
The question begs to be asked is how can the supply of dollars grow faster than the demand to hold dollars if the real demand requires you to pay *principal + interest* out of a volume of circulation (nominal supply) only ever comprised of some remaining *principal* at most.?
In other words how can inflation rationally occur if that nominal supply of money never grows any further than to the extent of principal only & any demand to hold dollars requires you to pay *principal + interest* out of a supply of dollars only ever comprised of principal?
*Nominal* by definition is *very small* or *very least*, so nominal supply of money means very small or the least supply of money.
In this light the mainstream definition of any occurrence of inflation is an oxymoron & a contradiction in itself, simply because it suggests an already deficient money supply is growing faster than the demand, yet any possible growth of the money supply faster than demand is clearly a rational impossibility, considering the demand to hold dollars requires you to pay *principal + interest* out of a remaining volume of circulation comprised of some remaining *principal* at most, which is logically DEFLATION & the very reason why the purchasing power or value of the dollar shrinks, where the overall money supply or circulation is devalued primarily due to an unsustainable terminal escalation of falsified debt caused by the volumetric impropriety of interest (perpetual deflation) in all our personal falsified debts.
Moreover its just assumed by mainstream economics central banks create new money to purchase government bonds which purportedly increases the money supply in relation to any increase in federal debt or subsequent federal expenditure, however this is clearly unfounded & simply not true, firstly because like all other banks “central banks” neither risk or give up consideration of value to otherwise justify its pretended creation of money, much less any purported loan, & secondly as a result the central bank is instead either directly or indirectly purchasing government bonds with already stolen money, formerly created as every new sum of principal in our own personal falsified debts (private debt), only to be stolen in purported loans plus a further sum of principal again in unwarranted interest & subsequently laundered out of circulation, via what we’re led to believe is inter-bank lending & ultimately into the possession of central bank, which can only then purchase government bonds, NOT with new money, but instead already stolen money.
Bottom line government bonds are a further misrepresentation of the money we initially create in private debt. So to answer your question its not unpaid government bonds that causes or represents inflation. If anything when a government cant extort any more money from the people to pay back the purchasers of government bonds such as banks, that is when reflation stops via government debt & a nation succumbs to mass deflation, not inflation or hyperinflation remember because its mathematically impossible due to interest. Government bonds are nothing more than a vehicle or means to launder already stolen money — formerly stolen in private debt — back into a circulation over & over as every increase in government debt, that allows us (not all of us) to physically pay principal & interest out of circulation in all our personal phony loans, that in turn allows thieving banks to keep on stealing even further from us every time we spend money, until such time of course when we can no longer service the ever greater escalations of falsified debt both “public & private” due to unwarranted interest (DEFLATION) imposed on all private debt.
UNDERSTANDING INFLATION & DEFLATION UNDER BANKING.
Deflation : Is where any new rate of reflation is either less than or equal to the former rate of deflation, which either way irreversibly multiplies falsified debt into terminal debt .
Inflation : Is where any new rate of reflation exceeds the former rate of deflation, which is mathematically impossible so long as you’re paying *principal + interest* out of a volume of circulation comprised of only some remaining *principal* at most.
UNDERSTANDING MATHEMATICALLY PERFECTED ECONOMY.
How to solve inflation & deflation is to simply eradicate the need for reflation by eradicating interest on falsified debts & therefore the ruse of banking, where any increase in circulation can actually equal the remaining debt & equal the related property value by *rightfully retiring principal* (NOT STEALING & LAUNDERING) at the rate of depreciation or consumption of the related property value equal to the remaining debt & remaining circulation.