Tag Archives: silver

The cost of a home under the ruse of banking

05 Wednesday Jul 2017

Posted by in The cost of a home under the ruse of banking, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This home more than likely cost around 20K when it was built brand new sometime in the 1960s.

Contrary to what we are irrationally led to believe that suggest homes can only ever go up in value – homes are in fact depreciating in value. Logic tells anyone a home will fall down in 100 years if left neglected.

Furthermore due to the added cost of interest a home is artificially inflated in price by however much interest you pay above the sum of principal, which is in effect devaluing the home far beyond its otherwise remaining consumption or deprecation value by simply a theft of value, because banks who purport to loan all new money into circulation in the first place neither risk or give up consideration of commensurable value from the banks otherwise prior legitimate possession, making the purported loan a monumental crime of theft &  the unwarranted imposition of interest a further crime of theft yet again, which is artificially sustained by further falsified debts that perpetually reflates a forever deficient circulation with irreversible sums of falsified indebtedness.

In this example you are paying the value of 37.5 homes to a thieving bank for only receiving one home with a true value of 20K minus consumption, & if you purportedly borrowed the 750K to purchase this home today you are basically paying another 37.5 homes again to a thieving bank in unwarranted interest tomorrow. Totaling 75 homes (750%) or 1.5 million for a home worth less than 20K ($20,000 X 75 = 1.5 million).

Essentially the true value of this home has depreciated 750% below or beyond  its otherwise remaining consumption value due to banks robbing everyone blind when they purchase homes, because any price inflation caused by the added cost of  interest — irreversibly multiplied by however much interest you pay out of circulation above the sum of principal — can only ever be stealing all that much further from us when we just spend money today.

Of course this artificial increase in price caused by the added cost of interest is giving most if not all people the illusion of increasing value when its instead the complete polar opposite due to a monumental crime of theft of that value (eg: $20,000 X 75) — that can only be irreversibly multiplied by unwarranted interest yet again — stealing all that much further from us again & again & again.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : July 04, 2017, last edit July 09, 2017)

 

Is buying local beneficial to anyone under the ruse of banking

03 Monday Jul 2017

Posted by in Is buying local beneficial to anyone under the ruse of banking

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Regardlesslocal buisnessss where you spend money the value of our production we give up to each other, that all money records, evidences & represents is stolen by banks in  private debt, predominantly in the form of  purported loans that dont ethically or even rationally transpire in the first place, simply because banks neither risk or give up consideration of commensurable value from the banks otherwise prior legitimate possession.

If anyone wants further evidence of this monumental crime of theft  look no further than the added cost of interest passed onto the consumer in the resulting price of goods & services, which steals all that much further from each & everyone of us in artificial price inflation just spending money today, whether its purchasing from a small business, big business, foreign or local. Either way industry & commerce is passing the added cost of interest above the cost of principal inclusive onto you the consumer.

Logically earned Profit for any business is what you the consumer pays above the principal & interest purchasing whatever which is servicing someone else’s purported loan. Therefore you the consumer are subsequently paying principal + interest out of circulation spending money, plus the earned profit of course when the business purchases whatever with that earned profit, only to service someone else’s purported loan once again.

So regardless who you are or where you spend money, whether its expanding business, purchasing a third holiday home or just putting food on the table & buying clothes for your children — its ALWAYS YOU the consumer who is servicing that falsified debt to a thieving bank just spending money today.

Of course the small business proprietor who wrote that message on the blackboard above is blinded by greed & desire to a point he cant even see he is passing  the added cost of a monumental crime of theft onto his customers, making him no different to the CEO thats buying his third holiday home.

If anything the CEO is paying more out of circulation, but this does not change the fact that all small business is doing the exact same thing, only to have any or all profit stolen when its further spent into circulation.

So the question remains is buying local beneficial for anyone?

Well,,, if you have read & understood what I have already written above you would have to be a village idiot to believe buying local ever could under the ruse of banking.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : July 03, 2017, last edit July 09, 2017)

How do banks launder money?

02 Sunday Jul 2017

Posted by in How banks launder money, Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s quite simple really, because what peripheral banks (eg: ANZ Bank) steal from you in phony loans & every time you spend money today is laundered into the hands of a central bank via what we are led to believe is inter-bank lending, where the central banks subsequently use this stolen money to purchase treasury bonds not only in your nation, but in other nations abroad that perpetually reflates any given nations deficient circulation with already stolen money.

One could say the practice of banking is a monumental crime of theft & with the help of treasonous political betrayers its one big money laundering racket, essentially moving stolen money all over the world generally through central banks to reflate a nations circulation with irreversible multiplications of national debt.

Of course central banks are not the only purchasers of national debt. Peripheral banks, banking corporations such as insurance & investment companies also purchase treasury bonds, & a small percentage of pension funds also that banks pilfer anyway when markets periodically drop or crash due to the volumetric impropriety of interest anyhow.

So what is a “Bank Bill Swap Rate” (BBSR)?

Simply putting it its the rate of interest on what we are led to believe is inter-bank lending, which is of course a process that launders stolen money, formerly stolen in all private debt to subsequently reflate any given nations circulation as irreversible multiplications of falsified debt.

Often when you hear other nations purchasing your nations national debt it means the banks in those other nations are stealing money from the people in that other nation via their private debt to perpetually reflate your nations circulation via your national debt & visa versa.

As a result a portion of your taxation is paid to the banks in those other nations & visa versa, only to service but never pay down any given nations falsified debt. Concluding all banking or the practice of purported banking in itself is an inherent international money laundering racket, even your little ole bank down the corner plays its part robbing you with a smile.

Of course some of you might question if BBSR is referring to the inter-banking interest rates how can we be paying the banks interest?

Well, Its all quite simple really because we are all servicing or paying the banks inter-banking debts via our own personal falsified debts, which are purported loans that do not ethically or rationally even transpire in the first place, simply because the banks (all banks including central banks) are neither risking or giving up commensurable consideration of value themselves.

Furthermore we can deduce now the difference in interest rates we pay any peripheral bank in all private debt which is at a higher rate of interest — comparative to what banks pay each other in interest or ultimately to a central bank which is at a lower rate of interest — is the peripheral banks unearned gain or unjust reward for stealing & laundering the principal & the remainder of interest out of circulation & into the possession of central banks (after the peripheral bank takes its cut out of the interest you pay them), only to have political betrayers play their part in laundering this already stolen money (principal & interest) back into circulation, again & again, over & over as ever greater escalations of falsified debt in government expenditure, which is of course mathematically impossible to pay down due to the volumetric impropriety of interest (perpetual deflation) we all formerly pay out of a forever deficient circulation in artificial price inflation in our private falsified debts, that subsequently steals all that much further from us just spending money today.

This tells anyone of sound mind banks have no reserves, not even a central bank has reserves, not even deposits in the bank are the banks reserves when the principal & the remainder of the interest is entirely dedicated to perpetually reflate any given nations circulation.

To even remotely suggest banks are spending or paying what they formerly steal back into circulation is ignoring the cycles of perpetual reflation by every increase in government debt, which we have already proven is the sum of principal & interest the people formerly pay out of circulation in private debt.

If anything what banks spend & or pay in interest on bank deposits amounts to a mere fraction of 1% out of the principal & interest they formerly steal in private debt, where logic tells anyone of sound mind the remaining 99.99% in principal & interest is perpetually laundered out of circulation just servicing our private falsified debts, which is perpetually, then, laundered  back into circulation again as every increase in government debt.

The pseudoscience of today’s false economy is telling everyone the higher the interest rate the less people purport to borrow or spend on a whole, & the lower the interest rate the more people purport to borrow or spend on a whole.

This of course is a false assumption once it dawns on the individual — that any sum of interest we pay out of circulation in all private debt is neither created or issued into circulation above the sum of principal — which sets off these terminal cycles of perpetual deflation & reflation, irreversibly multiplying the overall sum of falsified debt on each & every subsequent cycle of reflation as every new sum of debt, which can only at best service the former sum of falsified debt but never ever pay down any new sum of debt — stealing all that much further from each & everyone of us by however much, or any rate of interest you pay above the sum of principal when we simply spend money.

What this simply means — regardless of the rate of interest — we have to collectively borrow (allegedly borrow) more & more, thus spending more & more just to service the old debt but never the new.

Pure observation & logic alone tells us the reduction of interest rates after a former increase does not reduce the overall price of goods & services already inflated by interest, so its utter folly to ever suggest reducing the rate of interest reduces the overall cost or price of anything when any rate of interest  that  inflates prices is compound regardless, much less does reducing interest rates reduce the overall spending to service the ever greater escalations of falsified debt caused by interest. This in effect refutes the mere unsubstantiated assumption that suggests different rates of interest  determines why people borrow more or less, when the determining factor is instead any rate of interest requires us to borrow (allegedly) even more regardless.

Of course under the present but final terminal cycles of reflation — irreversibly multiplied by interest — most of us can no longer afford higher rates of interest, so interest rates are kept low to temporally sustain purported borrowing for a brief period of time, only as a means to artificially sustain today’s lie of economy for that brief period of time, which can only at best prolong or temper ultimate monetary destruction that little bit longer.

Logically we can further determine higher rates of interest, such as double digits seen in the 80’s can only bring about monetary destruction all that much faster. This is exactly why you will see no substantial increase in interest rates between now & the coming second greater depression, simply due to the sheer enormity of today’s falsified indebtedness irreversibly multiplied by any rate of interest.

In all seriousness you would have to have a brain the size of a pea to ever believe inflation (circulatory), much less growth is even remotely possible so long as we are all paying principal & interest out of a volume of circulation only ever comprised of some remaining principal. The primary school mathematics & rudimentary logic of a kindergarten child essentially tells anyone of sound mind all present & future production, which even includes any increase in our production, whether its any increase in sales, salaries, taxation or phony loans is entirely dedicated to service, but never ever pay down an ever greater escalation of falsified debt, due to any rate of interest purportedly owed to these thieving banks.

“The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous we cannot believe it exists.”
~J. Edgar Hoover

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : July 02, 2017, last edit July 27, 2017)

 

Can mathematics predict peoples actions?

02 Sunday Jul 2017

Posted by in Can mathematics predict peoples actions

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Absolutely not, HOWEVER mathematics can be logically applied to determine certain outcomes from peoples actions.

DETERMINE : 1.cause (something) to occur in a particular way or to have a particular nature. 2.ascertain or establish exactly by research or calculation

PREDICT: say or *estimate* (roughly calculate) that a specified thing will happen in the future or will be a consequence of something.

DETERMINE EXAMPLE : If people are paying *principal + interest* out of a forever deficient circulation comprised of only *some remaining principal at most* in all all their personal falsified debts one can then logically determine (NOT PREDICT) by applying primary school mathematics & rudimentary logic that so long as people are paying the added cost of interest above the sum of principal its mathematically impossible to ever have inflation. Determining further that the added cost of unwarranted interest is in fact deflationary or a decrease in value by however much interest you pay above the sum of principal in artificial price inflation that steals even further from us when we spend money, merely artificially sustained by further borrowing (alleged) or purported loans that dont ethically or rationally transpire if the purported lender is neither risking or giving up commensurable consideration of value.

PREDICT EXAMPLE: Banks create & loan money regardless if they risk or give up commensurable consideration & regardless if the sum of interest is neither created or issued into circulation above the sum of principal the interest is nonetheless a surplus of value, therefore price inflation is just the result of printing too much money.

CONCLUSION
Therefore we are not predicting, estimating or roughly calculating anything in Mathematically Perfected Economy, much less are we basing any calculation on mere unsubstantiated assumptions bereft of any formal proof. We are instead logically applying rudimentary principles (IE: 1.1.1 ratio) in extending the mathematics from one point to another to determine, establish, or exactly ascertain a particular occurrence or event if those principles are strictly adhered to.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : June 02, 2017, last edit October 20, 2017)

 

FOI request to the Bank of England

01 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by in FOI request to the Bank of England

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This is the Freedom Of Information request we put to the Bank of England back in 2011 at asking 4 simple questions

1) What lawful consideration do you claim the BoE gives up when it creates money ?
2) How then does the bank (or does the bank) claim there is a debt to the bank ?
3) What is the claim to interest then, when the bank can do no more than absorb the costs of merely publishing evidence of our promissory obligations *to each other* ?
4) How is it possible even to maintain a vital circulation without accumulating inevitably terminal sums of debt ?

Note: The end result was of course as usual “EVASION”.

You can put these questions to any bank, even peripheral banks . Try it & you will basically get the same response . They will evade answering these questions particularly the first knowing all too well if they do it will be self incriminating or admitting to theft.

Think about it — If they’re not stealing in the form of pretend loans they would simply answer the damn questions wouldn’t they? but their pathetic excuse for not answering them is that these questions are unintelligible. In the end the BoE claimed the expense they would have to forgo finding the answers to these simple questions would be too costly for them. Too costly for them alright because if they answered the questions it would end their crime of theft & they damn well know it.

All they have to do is answer the first question really, because if they can prove they give up consideration of commensurable value in the creation or any loan of money the following questions are made redundant, except question 4 of course, simply due the current escalations of debt, which they then have to explain how & why is not terminal, which we already know they cant answer, because no one on this planet can prove or demonstrate how the sum of interest is created & issued into circulation above the sum of principal that takes us back to question 1 again. In retrospect questions 2, 3 & 4 take you back to question 1, which is why its the first question, that’s hardly unintelligible.

Its really a YES or NO answer to the first question. Do you give up consideration of value in the creation of money? . Is your answer YES or NO?. If your answer is YES what consideration are you then giving up in the creation of money ? but they refuse to even do that. Unintelligible my arse — The question couldn’t be any more simpler.

We are only asking the bank the same question we would otherwise ask ourselves to identify who exactly is creating money, determining then if any loan transpires or not. So If anyone of us was asked if we give up consideration of value in the creation of money the answer would be logically YES, & if asked what consideration are we giving up — pure observation alone tells anyone with a half a brain that we are giving up our labour & production that has the only lawful consideration of commensurable value.

So if it is we who create all new money, which we have already proven to be the case for nearly 50 years already, predominately by the purchaser who issues a promissory obligation/note before publication, before any subsequent deposit — so how is it even ethically or rationally possible for the “obligor” (creator of money) to borrow what has not yet been paid & or deposited from the resulting sale?

The simple answer its not possible. To suggest we loan or borrow money from each other defies all logic & reason — putting the cart before the horse. Indicating further we are not even loaning or borrowing money from each other either, much less from a thieving bank. When the unadulterated debt is merely an obligation by the *obligor* to “pay & retire” the principal, free from exploitation or unjust intervention.

Make no mistake MPE is NOT claiming there is no debt,  simply because the only debt that transpires is the true debt we have  to each other. Therefore the argument is not to somehow get out of paying the debt altogether, but instead the intent to restore today’s falsified debts (phony loans) to their original unadulterated state where there never is any loan or borrowing.

For detailed correspondence regarding this FOI request please visit WhatDoTheyKnow. OR HERE.

Please note “whatdotheyknow” have since taken down the detailed correspondence which can only be perceived as further EVASION of the facts.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

 

(Published : July 01, 2017, last edit January 19, 2019)

 

Buffoonery of Pretended Economists

01 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by in Buffoonery of Pretended Economists, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The purported economist (Richard Werner) in the video below is contradicting himself every which way to justify the lie banks create & loan money, & in all insanity this buffoon is suggesting this money is created out of nothing or thin air, which could not be any further from the truth.

Its all quite simple if you stick to the verifiable facts without contradicting or compromising those facts.

Lets be very clear banks do not 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 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 the taking of 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 any purchase between you & the bank 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 economist Richard Werner & associates (phony experts in economy) & usury media alike are throwing the baby out with the bathwater to irrationally justify an oxymoron (ie: banks create money out of nothing) & a myriad of other barefaced LIES thereafter as a result.

Do not be fooled by these 11th hour pretenders folks. To irrationally suggest banks create money from nothing is to likewise suggest banks are stealing nothing, which is denying a 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 legitimate sale ever transpires between the bank or anyone because the business of banking is not commerce but piracy. Whichever way you look at this however distorted by pretend economists the bank gives up no commensurable consideration of value from its otherwise prior legitimate possession in any debt, trade, sale or transaction. Therefore the purported loan is a monumental crime of theft, subsequently stealing the value WE THE PEOPLE give to all money & property that is hardly nothing or thin air.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : July 01, 2017, last edit July 27, 2017)

The Growth Paradox under the ruse of banking

01 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by in The Growth Paradox under the ruse of banking

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

QLD finacial minister

Queensland Treasurer predicts the State will have the strongest growing economy in Australia.

How is it even rationally possible to have growth if any increase in production is entirely dedicated to service but never pay down an irreversible multiplication of artificial debt caused by the volumetric impropriety of interest?

I mean you would have to be a blithering idiot to even remotely suggest growth is attainable so long we are all paying interest.

Sure the QLD treasure (Curtis Pitt) is predicting otherwise growth because this sociopath knows all too well he is artificiality sustaining this lie of economy in Queensland by playing his part in laundering already stolen money (formerly stolen in private debt) back into circulation as an increase in state debt (public debt) to pay for the commonwealth games commencing in 2018.

Of course anyone with half a brain can see production is increasing in preparation for the commonwealth games, however what most people refuse to see including treasure Curtis Pitt who clearly failed primary school maths is nonetheless the consequential increase in state debt that is not only paying for this but its mathematically impossible to pay down regardless of any surplus , yet I ask how can this increase in production be any remote indication of growth if the value of all production including any increase in production is owed to a thief (bank) at further interest again?

Concluding you would have to village idiot to ever suggest growth is even remotely attainable under the ruse of banking. Its simply mathematically impossible so long as we are all paying the added cost of interest not only on all our personal falsified debts, but as a consequence when each & everyone of us spends money.

And where will this sociopath be in 2022-24 when this growth paradox or LIE of economy falls flat on its face in the coming second greater world wide depression when industry & commerce can no longer service the very thing he & every political betrayer omits in their unfounded preposterous assertions?

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : July 01, 2017, last edit July 09, 2017)

 

The share market paradox

01 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by in The share market paradox

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share markets are only ever artificially sustained by further borrowing (alleged loans) which is mathematically impossible to pay down due to the volumetric impropriety of interest (PERPETUAL DEFLATION) .

Therefore any AAA rating is entirely artificial based on any nations ability to maintain or service the ever greater escalations of falsified debt in perpetual cycles of reflation, yet never ever paying it down.

Point blank regardless of any increase in production under the ruse of banking you have no growth so long as you are all paying principal & interest out of a volume of a circulation thats only ever comprised of some remaining principal at most, not only on all your personal falsified debts (phony loans), regardless if its to purchase a home, shares or whatever, but as consequence its stealing however much interest we pay above the sum of principal inclusive, which is stealing all that much further from each & everyone of us in just spending money today.

Whats so difficult to comprehend HERE folks?

So long as you are all paying the added cost of interest in “artificial price inflation” the primary school mathematics is clearly telling us you have DEFLATION or a DECREASE IN VALUE per goods & services (per representation) by however much interest you pay out of a general circulation above the sum of principal, which is a circulation that only ever consists of some remaining principal at the very most, even upon further cycles of reflation in any increase in debt, whether its public or private, which never ever increases the remaining circulation above the sum of principal that it initially was intended to represent.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : July 01, 2017, last edit July 09, 2017)

 

Good Debt vs Bad Debt

01 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The following is the basic difference between Good debt & Bad debt, without the bullshit from some halfwit politician, pretend economist or news reporter who clearly failed primary school mathematics.

GOOD DEBT
Is when we logically eradicate the need for perpetual reflation by simply eradicating the unwarranted imposition of interest on falsified debts (phony loans) & therefore eradicating the ruse of banking altogether that neither ethically or rationally lends us money in the first place, where any increase in circulation can otherwise instead 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.

BAD DEBT
Is when purported banks only ever pretend to loan us the sum of principal, where the bank is neither risking or giving up commensurable consideration of value from the banks otherwise prior legitimate possession that might justify any loan to one of us, which is nonetheless charging us a further sum of principal again in unwarranted interest for the privilege of being robbed of the former sum of principal in a purported loan that in truth never transpires, that subsequently as a result sets of these terminal cycles of deflation & reflation. Primarily due to the volumetric impropriety of interest (perpetual deflation) we all formerly pay out of circulation in all private debt, which not only irreversibly multiplies both government & private debt in perpetual cycles of reflation, but the very process reflation can only ever be artificially sustained with further falsified debt.

Therefore the process of perpetual deflation by interest & perpetual reflation with new debt that never increases the remaining circulation above the sum of principal can only ever at best service the former debt, BUT NEVER THE NEW due to the added cost of interest banks clearly steal above the sum of principal inclusive in purported loans, which is stealing all that much further from us in artificial price inflation when each & everyone of us just spends money today.

IN SHORT FOR THE DUMMIES.
Bad debt: Is a so called loan that in truth never transpires, making the purported loan a monumental crime of theft instead.

Good debt: Is merely an obligation by the debtor (obligor/creator of money/one of us) to *pay & retire* principal — free from unjust intervention or exploitation — where there never was or ever is any loan or borrowing.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)

(Published : July 01, 2017, last edit October 09, 2017)

 

Is Quantitative Easing another slight of hand of the thief?

30 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by in Quantitative Easing, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

To begin lets  study the bullshit in this article below that would have you irrationally believing the lie Quantitative easing (QE) creates new money, which is just a further attempt to justify non-existent inflation as inflation. If I may quote from the usury media article below.

“Policymakers also push the button on a quantitative easing programme – which will pump tens of billions of pounds of newly created money into Britain’s troubled economy.”

Article

How do we know this is bullshit, well firstly all you have to do is look at the official data in the UK (see below) regarding its money supply (M0) from March to December 2009 & you will clearly see there was no increase of £125bn in the money supply at that time, which would have otherwise near tripled the nations (M0) cash & coin monetary supply.

All that transpired in 2009 was instead a increase of 2 billion (M0) in new cash & coin that we the people create anyhow because it further represents a percentage or fraction of ledger money (M2) that includes bank deposits in circulation anyhow, plus an increase of an additional 1.1 trillion in (M2) ledger bank deposit money we create in purported loans in private debt. Keeping in mind a portion of that 1.1 trillion is money likewise earned or unearned from overseas that is nonetheless money we create in private debt in any nation.

So in ether graph (M0) & (M2) you see the increase in the UK money supply remains steady as the years pass primarily due to perpetual reflation as every increase in government debt, which  irreversibly multiplies all this falsified debt into terminal debt due to the volumetric impropriety of interest (perpetual deflation) in all private debt, hence the need for perpetual reflation in government debt that is mathematically impossible to pay down, which is a process of perpetual deflation & reflation that cant ever increase the remaining circulation above or beyond the sum of principal initially created in private debt.

UK Graph data

Secondly logic alone should tell you banks do not ever create money, much less ever loan money if they neither risk or give up consideration of value, concluding its we the people who create all new money (principal only) in private debt because we give up the only commensurable consideration of value in the only true debt, trade or transaction, however due to peoples irresponsibility they allow banks to purposely misrepresented our debts to each other in alleged loans from a thieving bank, which is a falsified debt to a thieving bank who gives up squat.

WHAT THEN IS QUANTITATIVE EASING EXACTLY?

Well, its similar in respects to a bailout. That is both of which are only ever servicing inter-banking debt or in house debt between banks, which is ultimately between banks & the central bank of any nation.

Try to Imagine a big fat central banker pouring already stolen money out of the left pocket & into the right pocket, because this is whats essentially happening where qualitative easing (QE) is bypassing the direct purchase of government debt where a bailout otherwise would not.

The only difference then is the bailout increases government debt as the money travels from one pocket to another, & QE bypasses the direct purchase of any new government debt in the sense its indirectly purchasing formerly purchased government debt from banks or other banking corporations, so the process of QE is not increasing government debt by purchasing new bonds, but instead previously purchased bonds from other banks before their maturity date, so in effect the central bank gets that money back from the taxpayer plus interest when those bonds mature.

Whichever the process BAILOUTS or QE its only ever temporally solving any outstanding inter-banking debt between banks, simply because the people can no longer service this inter-banking debt via their own personal falsified debts anymore due to interest of course, which is all owed (allegedly owed) to the central bank (mere publisher) anyhow.

Whether its a bailout or QE its never reaching industry & commerce or never reaching the people in this lie of economy today in the entire process of both.

We could almost debate if the central bank even parts with any sum of QE because its ultimately owed (allegedly) to the central bank anyway, hence the QE is just another sleight of hand of a thief, which is just a thief taking already stolen money out of one pocket & just quietly slipping it back in the other pocket, & hey presto the bankers fool see’s the big fat central banker create all this new money out of thin air (NOT),, & apparently its somehow magically increasing a monetary circulation to justify inflation that is clearly non-existent..

So the reader might ask now whats ultimately transpiring with that stolen money in the big fat central bankers pocket?

Well, with the assistance of political betrayers its perpetually laundered back into the monetary circulation as every increase in government debt or federal expenditure, perpetually reflating circulation as we the people consecutively pay principal & interest out of circulation in all private debt .

This is why the graph above shows a steady increase in the money supply (principal only) that we people initially create in private debt regardless, apposed to any dramatic jump in the money supply that possibly might otherwise justify qualitative easing pumping all this new money into circulation to further justify inflation which  is clearly non-existent, much like any phony loan to us in private debt, where a thieving bank is pretending to create new money yet again & would have you irrationally believe just by increasing the circulation by principal alone is inflationary. Which is false assumption so long as were all paying *principal+interest* out of a general circulation only ever comprised of some remaining *principal* at most.

No one on the face of this planet can prove or demonstrate how any sum of interest is created or issued into circulation above the some of principal.

Hypothetically even if QE creates new money above the sum of principal we initially create in all private debt — that 125 billion is nothing compared to the trillions (M2) we create & pay out of circulation in all private debt — stolen many, many, many times over in  perpetual cycles of deflation due to interest.

Therefore regardless if a mere 125 billion somehow magically appears in the monetary circulation as new money, WHICH IT DID NOT, not without any sale, trade or transaction to otherwise pump it into any lie of economy it cant possibly justify inflation regardless, not so long as we are all paying billions if not trillions in principal + interest out of circulation.

If any of you want more evidence look no further than the current UK national debt (perpetual reflation).

Here again I’m using logic alone & primary school mathematics to prove banks do not ever create money, not even by quantitative easing, much less can QE stimulate non-existent growth or justify non-existent inflation, not that inflation can be any rational indicator of true sustainable growth.

David Ardron.
Advocate / mentor, Co-founder, Co-director – Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (au)


(Published : June 30, 2017, last edit July 09, 2017)