Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States

Philip K Dickhead's Journal: Banks Destroyed the States 15

Journal by Philip K Dickhead

And it wasn't accidental.

First, they loan ridiculous amounts of money to the public sector, knowing full well these loans can never be repaid, when the lending institutions are connected directly to the manipulation of interest rates. When, in eventuality state bankruptcy looms, the public infrastructure is auctioned to pirates of industry for pennies on the dollar. These corporations are, again, in debt servitude to banking. The octopus of ownership between international banks, major corporations and the Federal Reserve are beyond the scope of examination for this posting.

One result of this is the obliteration of the organizational integrity of the state. California is such an example. So is Illinois. Without access to its resources or ability to exercise meaningful Constitutional powers, states are completely subsumed into mere organizational units for the delegation of Federal Government - which can not really be anymore described as Federal, with any accuracy.

The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Banks Destroyed the States

Comments Filter:
  • Did it ever really exist? Outside our imagination? I mean, I just can't find a point that was significantly better or worse throughout its entire history. Even during Camelot...

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by chill (34294)

      Heh. I've been looking further back than that, I can I can't find a significant period of time in history in the last several thousand years where this wasn't the case. Even before banks, those with money would lend it to those who needed it and would totally own them in the end.

      Shakespeare, in Hamlet (c. 1600 C.E.), writes "Neither a borrower nor a lender be; For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry."

      The Bible says in Proverbs 22:7 "The rich ruleth over the poo

      • I can only find it in small isolated communities- and even then only when replaced by creative fees such as Friegeld (in Worgl, Austria, where the money had a 10%/month tax on savings- the actual currency expired) or bartering communities where commodity-based money was used and no banks were present at all (usually small tribes- though the T'sinook Trading Nation once stretched the entire 1200 mile length of the Columbia Drainage Basin, had a major city at Celilo Falls that dealt in eight different commodi

        • Destruction of property as a display of wealth. Interesting... From the looks of things, it seems to have caught on in a big way. I suppose the person who destroys the world wins.

          • Actually, the Potlatch wasn't *direct* destruction of property. It was the giving away of property rights as a display of wealth- the man who gives away the world wins. In a hunting-gathering-agricultural society, his family starves the next winter though. Which sometimes actually did happen.

            And even the point of freigeld wasn't the outright destruction of wealth- it was the limitation of trading to a point below that which would cause inflation.

            • Actually, the Potlatch wasn't *direct* destruction of property. It was the giving away of property rights as a display of wealth- the man who gives away the world wins.

              That does seem more palatable..

              ...his family starves the next winter though. Which sometimes actually did happen.

              His neighbors would actually watch this happen? Would helping the guy out put the whole village in danger of starvation?

              • His neighbors would actually watch this happen? Would helping the guy out put the whole village in danger of starvation?

                With the way the T'sinook had a tendency to self-segregate during winter, his family WAS the whole village- and quite often, it was 5-10 miles between villages (a village in this case being a cluster of 2-3 cedar plank longhouses). In the days before roads of any sort, that was a long way. The big equalizer, was the rivers- which is why Celilo became such a large trading city, a

  • California and Illinois issue their own $1,000,000 coins in payment [wikipedia.org]:

    No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

    So as long as there's "some" gold or silver, it's a gold or silver coin, and "legal tender" - even if it's 99.9

    • Um.. what?

      No State shall... coin Money...

      FTL: Only Congress (see Section 8) has the authority to coin this money that should be used by the States.

      How did you get to California and Illinois issue their own $1,000,000 coins in payment...

      • by tomhudson (43916)
        "but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts" - and NO coin in history has ever been 100% pure gold or silver - it would wear too quickly. The US mint gold coins are currently only a bit more than 91% gold (22 karat) - and previous ones (Liberty gold coins) were 90%. Ditto for British Sovereigns, Krugerrands, etc. - 22 karat max. None of them come near the Canadian Maple, at 99.99% gold (24 karat) and 99.999% (special mint). (btw - the Canadian mint makes a $1,000,000 100kg gold coin - it's worth
        • They can mint the coins, but they are not legal tender. Nobody is obligated to accept them as such.

          • by tomhudson (43916)
            Section 10 says the states cannot coin money - it doesn't say they can't have it minted elsewhere and imported:

            No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

            So, they contract with the Canadian mint to coin "Callies" with 0.0

        • by Qzukk (229616)

          I think both have to be taken together.

          Part 1 is "States can't make their own coins" part 2 is "and they can't get around this by printing paper bills and declaring it legal tender".

          • by tomhudson (43916)
            Section 10 says that the states can't "coin money" - not that they can't have it coined (minted) somewhere else.

            No State shall ... coin Money ... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt ...

            So they have coins with 0.0001% silver in them minted elsewhere, and they issues them as legal tender, as is their right under "make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt".

            It's all fiat currency anyway ... (just nowadays "fiat currency" means "Fix It Again Tony", ju

Testing can show the presense of bugs, but not their absence. -- Dijkstra

Working...