As we head into 2016, the global financial system continues to teeter all around us. Years of virtually zero-percent interest rates in the US, along with stagnant rates the world over(accompanied by chronic unemployment), have made many do a complete rethink of what money and currency is, what it should be, and how it should be created.
These questions must be considered by any populace longing to be free, and who wish to determine their own destiny. For too long, the oligarchs in our world have called the shots, and determined those things for us, without ever asking us if that’s what we wanted. That’s why when I recently read this headline about how a European country is attempting some very serious banking & monetary reforms, I was very encouraged.
“Switzerland to vote on banning banks from creating money“
If you think that this headline sounds like a big deal, it would be in some ways. Here’s what it would do.
Swiss Sovereign Money Initiative
The proposal that the Swiss people will be voting on(at a time yet to be determined) would seek to wrest the disastrous control that commercial banks have over creating currency, and put 100% of it in the hands of the Swiss National Bank.
The Swiss Sovereign Money Initiative’s(SSMI) reasoning for this referendum can be found at the link here, and I do encourage shield brothers to go and read it. The SSMI’s main goals would be to:
1) End fractional reserve banking, by requiring all the private banks to keep 100% of deposits in reserve.
2) Give the Swiss National Bank total control over the creation/issuance of debt-free currency instead.
As many shield brothers know, in the modern, fractional-reserve banking system, the private banks largely control the issuance of new currency. These banks create new credit/currency out of thin air as they draw upon the customer loans in their vaults, to back new bank loans with. They’re able to do this because they’re only required to keep a small percentage of customer deposits in their vaults, to satisfy depositor demands. Sometimes banks carry as little as 10% of their cash deposits on hand(or even less) to backstop all their loans. In other words, this means they often loan(and thus, create) 10 times as much capital as they have in the vaults…from nothing!
It’s an utter scam, that creates a parasitical merchant class, which drains the rest of society, by causing booms and busts. It also means the banking sector ends up being the receiver of very lopsided subsidies from the government, in order to keep it paid and propped up.
Subsidizing private banks, at the expense of a nation’s people, is one of the most wicked social ills in our world today. It is this subsidy, this monopoly, which causes the speculative lending, the market rigging, the wars, the economic booms and crashes….and most importantly…has led to the rampant globalism(and erosion of freedom and sovereignty) we now see.
This problem has led to an extremely powerful banking class in Switzerland, where, according to the SSMI, roughly 90% of Swiss currency(which is digital), is created by those commercial Swiss banks.
90%! This gives ridiculous power to the UBS’s, and the Credit Suisses across their landscape, to dominate everything.
This SSMI voter initiative would strip much of that power away from those private banks, by requiring them to maintain 100% deposit reserve ratios. In other words, commercial banks could not create “deposits/credit” from thin air, but would be restricted to the deposits they have on hand from savers, or from other banks.
Forcing banks back to a 1 to 1 ratio would certainly take the bite out of predatory lending practices, it would do much to reign in the boom/bust cycles in their economy, and it would reduce the banking class back to a manageable power and influence within their society. Those would be huge positives.
I like the ideas of eliminating fractional reserve banking. At the very least, commercial banks should be able to discover what the market’s tolerance of reserve ratios would be without central banks to backstop them(as Scotland’s banking system once did). However, in order to prevent a new banking cartel from emerging, a 100% reserve ratio would likely work best.
However, though there’s alot to like about this voter initiative,there’s just one big problem with the entire proposal, and you may have guessed what it is…
Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire
The Swiss National Bank, whom the Swiss people are now trying to give 100% control over their nation’s currency issuance to…is also a private bank!
If you remember nothing else I ever tell you, please remember that one of the greatest illusions/lies in our world today, is that:
Central banks are non-profit organizations with deep hearts, who only care about charity and the ‘greater good’ of their constituencies.
Believe me, nothing could be further from the truth!
For instance, the Federal Reserve in the United States is as “Federal” as the Federal Express(FedEx)! It is a private, for profit bank, which loans currency into existence to the US Government(who borrows it, with interest attached). This means the Federal Reserve ends up owning the government, owning the economy, owning the labor of the citizens(as collateral to repay the loans), and owning the entire political system itself.
For crying out loud…the Federal Reserve has shareholders(as does the SNB)! Most of those shareholders are….you guessed it….the largest private, commercial banks in the world!
The Federal Reserve exists to backstop and rubberstamp whatever loathsome, criminal activities its primary banks are engaged in, and those commercial banks(in return) exist to help steer economic & monetary policy, as well as rig markets, in order to keep the monopoly power of issuing US dollars(as a public debt) firmly in the Federal Reserve’s control.
It’s a symbiotic relationship of utter toxicity, only made possible through government-enforced monopoly, war, and a massive crime spree.
The exact same is true of the Swiss National Bank(SNB)! The SNB only came into a limited existence around 1907, but(just like the Fed) didn’t receive its first mandate to create small-denominated currency notes in a serious way until roughly 1914.
Why 1914?
Because World War I was being fought, and wars of that size cannot be fought without massive debts! No government had the capital to pay for such wars up front, with cash on the barrel-head.
Thusly, the banking class stepped in to accommodate rival governments in their bid to blow up as much as possible for as long as possible.
The “Great War” was made possible by “public banks” like the Fed(created in 1913) and the SNB. Ron Paul once correctly noted:
“It is no coincidence that the century of total war coincided with the century of central banking”.
Truer words are seldom spoken. Think about it:
These central banks made the carnage possible.
They amplified the scale in which wars could be fought.
They indebted the besieged peoples of those wars to the very same powers that enabled those wars in the first place.
If the problem of monetary issuance is a lack of ‘moral authority’, believe me, central banks have the least moral authority on earth! They’re all neck-deep in criminality and only serve the most demonic individuals in our world.
Don’t get me wrong. I want to say up front, that there’s alot to like about the SSMI plan:
I do think banks should be reigned in.
I do think that they should be literally tied to the earth, with realistic monetary restrictions, based in reality.
I do think commercial banks should be stripped of money-creating powers.
All those problems are addressed in this proposal. That’s good!
What’s not good is that the well-meaning folks at SSMI are about to strip one financial demon of currency creation powers, and hand it to another demon which is just as bad! Of all the institutions that might be given this power, the Swiss National Bank is one of the worst you could pick!
For those who don’t believe me, lemme refresh your memory as to the recent criminal shenanigans the SNB was involved with!
Who Calls the Monetary Shots
That picture above was advertising for the recent Swiss gold initiative that the Swiss people voted on in 2014. It was called “Save Our Swiss Gold”(SOSG). It was meant to address the people’s concerns over the Swiss National Bank selling Swiss gold onto the open market for years.
Until the year 2000, the Swiss Franc was partially backed by gold, roughly 20% or so, at least on paper. That all began to change afterward though, as the Swiss National Bank began unloading quantities of gold which it considered to be “superfluous”, reducing the gold reserves behind the Swiss Franc from 20% down to 7%!
The initiative would’ve forced the gold sales by the SNB(which were only conducted to help the banking cabal suppress the price of gold) to stop, and would’ve reversed the process. It would’ve forced the SNB to go onto the open market to buy up sufficient gold tonnage to replace the lost tonnage needed, in order to raise the gold reserve ratio back to 20%. It would’ve also repatriated any Swiss gold held abroad by other central banks.
What’s not to like, right? Who wouldn’t want that?
The Swiss National Bank, that’s who!
The Swiss National Bank literally went nuclear on the proposal. They bought up TV advertising against the initiative, they trotted out all the bankers, all the writers, all the pundits, who all condemned SOSG…saying it would literally mean the end of “adaptive” monetary policy in Switzerland if the people voted yes.
The propaganda blitz worked, as the Swiss people were scared into rejecting it, with roughly 78% voting no.
In other words, the greatest opponent of returning Swiss gold to the Swiss people, and of returning Swiss monetary sovereignty to Switzerland…was the Swiss National Bank! The SNB was directly using its money-power, and its influence to overturn or sway the will of the Swiss electorate!
That in itself is highly problematic, but WHY the SNB did it is absolutely beyond the pale…
It’s now been reported that the reason why the SNB staunchly stood against the referendum, is that the SNB had a huge short position against gold in the futures market! They established that short position the moment they announced that the Swiss Franc would be “capped” or fixed to the Euro! Controlling gold was necessary if the “safe haven” Swiss Franc was going to be fixed to the much larger Euro currency pool.
The SNB knew that if they had to go out and directly buy thousands of tonnes of gold on the open market, and repatriate other gold held by other central banks(to help rig the gold price lower), its short position(it was using to RIG a world commodity market) would’ve shortly gone underwater!
It would’ve blown up their short gold position.
It would’ve severely, and instantly damaged their balance sheet.
It would’ve jeapordized the international banking scheme to rig gold(and silver), thusly jeapordizing the global debt-based ponzi lending scheme(that the SNB fully supports and participates in).
And these are the folks the Swiss people are seeking to entrust with 100%, monopoly powers, to create and control Swiss currency?
I don’t think so.
Conclusion
The problematic scenario for the SSMI voter referendum(in a nutshell) is that it’s trying to solve the problem of “a morally/fiscally bankrupt class of private bankers having total control over currency creation” by handing that power to another morally/fiscally bankrupt, private, criminal banking institution.
Here’s what I suggest the Swiss do. If they insist on giving any institution the sole power to create currency:
1) Utterly abolish the SNB. It is a tainted institution, which has no moral authority to lead, even if it were totally reorganized.
2) Create a new institution for the task, which would truly be a government entity, having the power to create debt-free currency.
3) Ensure all commercial banks have ZERO shareholder ownership of that institution, and instead make EVERY Swiss citizen each an equal shareholder!(Radical, I know, right?)
4) Ensure that any and all surpluses in profit were either, a)kept in a fund for the purpose of loaning to Swiss citizens in times of need, or b) paid to Swiss citizens in a regular cash distribution.
Now THAT would be a truly revolutionary solution, akin to something like the “Bank of North Dakota” solution! While still flawed, it would be unbelievable improvement to what they’re pursuing, and what exists in Switzerland now.
It’s good for a nation to debate who should create currency. It’s good that they have the power to vote and decide such things. It’s good to ensure that any future currency is created debt-free.
But, in the name of God, do not give the unbelievable power of sole currency-creation to privately-controlled central banks:
No one on earth has more blood on their hands than these people…
“Will The New Swiss Referendum Reign in the Banking Beast, or Create a New Monster?”
He answers his own question with this statement:
“The Swiss National Bank, whom the Swiss people are now trying to give 100% control over their nation’s currency issuance to…is also a private bank!”
We’ll need banks, but they should NOT be privately owned. It should be merely an office of government in charge of spending government-created money into the economy, and “regulating the value thereof”. (as stated in the Constitution). You “regulate the value thereof” by limiting or increasing the quantity of money that’s available.
Today your “government” prints a bond (a promise to repay a debt) and borrows money against it. All they have to do to fix our economy is print the money instead of printing the bond, and spend it into the economy by doing some government-sponsored projects. (rebuilding infrastructure, bounty on wetbacks, etc.) Then money will exists as a tool to facilitate trade, and “grease the wheels” of a growing economy rather than existing to fleece the nation of it’s wealth, as it presently does. That’s because it’s owed to the Federal Reserve, instead of being the property of the American people.
The important difference is that the money will not be owed to anyone. It will simply remain in circulation to facilitate trades, and growth. The quantity of available money would be determined by congress, and be a function of the size of the population. (more people need more money… if there’s not enough, poverty results. If there’s too much, it loses value).
That’s how Qaddafi was able to achieve great things in his country is so short a period of time, and that’s why he had to be attacked. His example of the power of honest money had to be stopped, or it would have been copied around the world, to the demise of the Rothschild wealth machine. It’s the same reason colonial America had to stopped. Our “colonial scrip” was honest money, and it made Americans too wealthy. There’s more than enough wealth in most countries for everyone to live comfortably. It’s the crooked Jewish monetary system that causes poverty; NOT a lack of wealth.