I Want The Earth (plus 5%)

I Want The Earth (plus 5%)

2011, Economics  -   117 Comments
Ratings: 8.05/10 from 95 users.

I Want The Earth (plus 5%)The sole purpose of this story is to explain the simple maths of reality and the current Banking System – that is - 100 plus NOTHING does NOT equal 105 – and that charging interest on something that is created out of nothing, makes it impossible to repay, giving great power to those who do create money out of nothing - ie the Banks. This story was written by Larry Hannigan in 1971 and uses a fictional character (Fabian) in the narrative.

Money is NOT a commodity, it is a system of debit-credit bookkeeping - nothing more. Banks create credit. It is a mistake to suppose that bank credit is created to any extent by the payment of money into the banks. A loan made by a bank is a clear addition to the amount of money in the community.

The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the People v. The Banks.

None of our problems will disappear until we correct the creation, supply and circulation of money. Once the money problem is solved, everything else will fall into place.

More great documentaries

117 Comments / User Reviews

  1. please tell me about the character of the fabian in this doc?

  2. In my opinion, as some of you cite, it is all about capitalism which is equal to capital + interest (+/-) + system (+/-) + market (+/-); +/- on both hands.

  3. So you quote fake religion to challenge fake money. Nice.

  4. all money is created as loans. the principle will always be less than th principle plus interest. p<p+I The principle is our TOTAL money supply. Yes, one can get out of debt, but collectively we can not. Don't listen to the comments about reserve requirements and savings and taxes. That's all stupid econ 101 stuff. Where do savings and bank reserves come from? They come from someone's loan principle. This documentary is accurate. It is that simple. If we all paid back all our loans. we would have no money, and we would still owe the interest. When a loan is repaid, that principle (money supply) disappears. We have to keep borrowing or we won't have any money. Governments can create money and spend it into circulation. Section 8 of the constitution: can coin money, regulate the value........ Now before you say anything, read that sentence again. Coin is a verb not a noun. Coin:meaning to create.

    1. It's possible to have a monetary system that isn't dependent on debt. Ideally, money is the value of your time and effort. (I sold [x] number of glasses of lemonade for [y] dollars.)

      Introducing a bank into the mix so that they can take a cut is antithetical to the entire reason for money.

    2. I think the crypto currency is the true derivative of goods and services , created by public and regulated by public

  5. This documentary has been brought up in the scope of money and credit system in a country. The story quote explains well but the summary is not worth it, it should have had more clear examples and detailed perspectives. That is what is lacking everything else is stated well.

  6. Like posts from Gobgob and Esco. I know that something doesnt hold in the story. First if economy is growing and population is growing i see no problem in repaying extra interest. Because new added value is being created. In other case, if it after many buy-sell rounds ends up as only paper value, where the markets have pumped the price beyond the fundamentals - every 7-10 years we have an economic colldown where non existant value is erased. Another story is inflation - goverment throws money at rate od 10% increase per year, and suddenly you make profit just by being in debt. And, as was said, banks have many costs also, as paying interest to people who deposited money, paying operational costs - and most critical - default by nonpaying debtors. This money is simply destroyed and banks have losses on their balance sheet. In this documentary everything is oversimplified.

  7. No one is powerless to reduce this problem.
    Start by barter .. no need to barter everything just do a little bartering.
    As times get tougher : increase barter and deal only with those that you trust to barter back in kind fairly with no intent to force the use of money into the trade.
    The more people barter the less goods and services the banks have to control with their "money" soon you will note taxes trying to collect by looking at barter trading history .. this is of course easy enough to deal with by under value of the trade and or loss of the historical records of transactions or by merely appeasement by using a small amount to partake in the "money" .

    Small as these actions seem the more people that move into sheltered trade systems will help diversify and protect more rights then marching into parliament demanding action will ever do.

  8. in capitalism the value of a commodity is measured by the socially necessary labour time it takes to produce it. All efficiencies lower the value of commodities and a profitability crisis arises. Profit or surplus value is extracted at the point of production when the owner of the means of production pays for the commodity labour power a wage that is less than the value that his labour power is able to produce. That is the inherent exploitative nature of capitalist social relations and where pithy sayings such as "time is money" derive from. So the system is both "immoral" and irrational and points to the need to socialize ownership on either ground.

  9. Everyone living where the soil has clay content needs to learn to build a combination of cob home and earth ship home. This is really critical.

    Even people with existing homes should learn to do this and make themselves a new place to live. Cob homes are supposed to be some of the hottest selling real estate in Scotland. The best part is that they do not need to be heated or cooled. They are comparatively cheap to build, resistant to earthquakes, require little maintenance, etc.

  10. An aristocratic affliction here is that some want to laboratory work words, instead of interpreting the overall picture. Waste not your time to explain to those who have decided to not understand. Knowing the cause is often half the solution. The craving has enslaved our intellect and for far too long.

  11. Very very good. It makes it simple to learn why the whole world and its people are slaves to the banks.

  12. great great doc. why most of what is been mentioned are true. not everything is.. for me i think the number 1 problem with the whole money economics thing, is greed and more fu*k*ing greed. from the bankers right down the the poor man sitting at the street corner...

  13. Great doco. Sadly blemished with too many biblical references. Still well worth watching.

    When will we the people finally say enough is enough? People have been conditioned to ridicule anyone who speaks out against the system. This is not a conspiracy theory. The info is all out there and it has all been documented. We are all being screwed over and it does not have to be this way.

    With the debt crisis in the USA, more trouble is only over the horizon and with no plan to solve the issue the inevitable will occur. What will it take to start a revolution?

  14. Why not just call Fabian Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild and just call this a biographical documentary, this documentary basically chronicle's Mayer's rise to power, Fabian is Mayer Rothschild.

  15. Marvelous Documentary!

    Should be shown in elementary and high schools and colleges for that matter in the U.S. and around the rest of the world. Even and especially in 3rd world countries in all languages.

    Education or better yet, knowledge is the greatest threat to this and any other satanic system. Just as light kills the vampire. Knowledge destroys the most hideous in our world.

  16. I do not intend to offense anyone, in contrary, I want to motivate all to boycott all banks just as Muslims do (the only community that is still complying to what has been asked in Bible and Qur'an!). This video should be shared (it is a great video!) as not even 1 percent of the wide population knows the world they live on and reasons of religions existence!

  17. Beware for opinions like of this one by gobgod...
    Sounds like the prime minister of my country. Very articulated to perpetuate the "status quo". Are you an economist? I guess you're an Hayek fan, aren't you? Well, go back to your library and read all the books you didn't and then comeback and watch this movie again. Or, once you're on the banking/finance "world" you're one of those whose job is profiting from pressing buttons and watching numbers rolling down a screen? Where's the added-value on that, mister economist?
    Make no mistake, the International Monetary System has a parasite of the capitalism itself is the Root Of All Evil! And yes. It is in private hands! Just a few of them... Or who do you think those nice institutions like IMF, IBRD, ECB, FEDRESERV, BIS, BOV, and so on, really are? Filantropic institutions democraticly rulled by the people?!
    If we want to excell has a species and stay in this planet for a few more years we must TAKE control of our destiny.

  18. If you believe this, you should start a bank. Sounds like it's a guaranteed way to get rich.
    As an economist who works in banking/finance, I'd like to say that this story is not an account of the real world. The premise that wealth is a zero-sum game is nonsense. Say there is money but no bank: if it costs me $5 to make a widget and I sell it to you for $10, have I reduced your wealth? No, not if it was worth $15 to you! According to this video, any labor surcharge would reduce GDP. How, in such a model, could GDP ever grow? GDP growth would require more money to be printed. Therein lies the problem. The author has no understanding of the difference between real and nominal GDP, nor an understanding of value added.
    Liquidity vs solvency is another big problem for the video, as is an understanding of how the money multiplier actually works. Sure, banks can turn $100 into $900, but they have a cost for liquidity at each step of the process. You pay 3% to the original $100 depositor, and then loan someone $90 from that $100. Then another bank pays 3% on the $90 deposit that allows an $81 loan, etc, etc. The money is paying 3% at each step, so banks that earn 45% on all their loans pay 27% to depositors. The banks then pay employees to process all those loans, other employees and advertising agencies to bring those loans to the door, etc. Traditional banks end up making the same long-run average return on equity as most every other competitive industry.

    1. January 2013 numbers from the Federal Reserve:
      Monetary base (currency): $2.9 Trillion
      M2 (currency, deposits, CDs, MMMFs: basically the amount of money in circulation): $10.4 Trillion
      GDP: $15.1 Trillion
      Household income (wages only. No stocks, interest, etc): $11.0 Trillion
      Total household and nonprofit net worth (2011): $60.3 Trillion
      US net worth (2011, households and businesses, excluding government): $86.4 Trillion
      Total bank loans (total bank assets less bank's premises & other property not accruing interest): $23.1 Trillion
      GDP is not dependent on currency. Wages are not dependent on currency. Wealth is not dependent on currency. We have enough wealth to pay back all banks' loans many (4.7) times over. This video's premise is bunk.

    2. I feel bad for you. Brainwashed and all by your career/college education. There's more than enough proof that something isn't working right, and it's because greedy bankers only caring for themselves. Yet you believe things are all rosy and well? You're the problem, the pet/dog that only listens to a master and doesn't have intellectual capabilities/competency to think on their own two feet.

    3. your in banker/finance and you work with widget's?

  19. True to a certain extend, but seriously exaggerated in certain parts; esp in minute 32,38,39 and 43~

  20. That was incredibly entertaining. And very likely an accurate depiction of what really is going on up there. Definitely recommended for all ages!

  21. Well, I only made it through the first half. Not the worst doc, but it is a topic that has already been beaten to death time and time again on this and other sites. Also, as I saw someone already mention on here, mortgage doesn't at all mean "deathgrip", it kind of hurts a film's credibility when they alter facts. As the person mentioned, it means pledge, kind of like a collateral.

    1. Mortgage, in common parlance, does mean pledge or collateral. But in strictly literal terms it also means death-pledge. Mort from the latin (mortis) means death, and gage from old German means pledge. Wiki it.

    2. Actually it doesn't mean death pledge, but close. It means *dead* pledge.

      mortgage (n.)
      late 14c., morgage, "conveyance of property as security for a loan or agreement," from O.Fr. morgage (13c.), mort gaige, lit. "dead pledge" (replaced in modern Frech by hypothèque), from mort "dead" (see mortal (adj.)) + gage "pledge" (see wage (n.)). **So called because the deal dies either when the debt is paid or when payment fails.**

      My emphasis on the last sentence. So it really doesn't mean they have you in a death-grip or that it's a deadly pledge or like that. It just means, the pledge eventually dies. In the 14th century, when the term arose, these deals emerged as an alternative to feudal tenure as a way to acquire land to farm. Feudal tenure was permanent - not just life-long, but heritable. The deal never died (in theory, but then things like the Enclosures and Highland Clearances changed all that); the peasant, and his descendants, had rights to the plot forever and paid to the lord forever. Mortgages were quite different because they were transient. Eventually, the deal would die, one way or the other, and payments would stop.

      So ... when this idea was new and people weren't accustomed to it ... this is the word they came up with to describe this new practice. They zeroed in on the thing that, to them, was different from normal practices, and that was its transient nature.

      Pedantic, I know, but I think the etymology is being badly abused for rhetorical purposes here. Not that I support the finance regime we currently slave under, but I won't stoop to their level and support misinformation and deception.

    3. Thanks for your explanation Devon.

  22. again facts are infront of you...
    i am CIMA and CIMA Islamic Finance qualified...
    its upto you to keep up with the same system or wake up....

  23. Sadly this documentary is nonsence! Interest rates are not a big deal. Substract taxes and the inflation and you will see that the interests aren't the true problem. Unfair tax systems are and the imbalance of money truely is!

    1. this doc has some sense, in fact every sense if you look beyond the taxation system....

      why you're being heavily taxed is because of the government's borrowing from the interest/profit makers, the bankers....they need the money to reduce the national deficit....

    2. Well you are right. Let us say the government borrows the money directly from the central bank. That means: Zero interest rates and less costs. I agree here. But the documentry tells us that interests rates are bad in general and always leed to too much debt etc. That is not true. Thus the documentry tells us one or two true facts and is wrong about 10 others.
      The scandinavian countries are the proof that this documentry is wrong. Their capitalist system is stable, with less inequality. The US free market system though creates one crisis after the other. But both systems are capitalist systems with the use of interest rates. Thus interest rates aren't the problem.

    3. Norway survives on oil. Take away the oil, and we have a bigger deficit per GDP than the US. And it's really not a capitalist system. It's a social democracy, where the government intrusions know no limits.

    4. How can you compare an economical system (Capitalism) with a form of government (social democracy)? lol
      Of course Norway is Capitalist. China is, too. And except of Belarus every country in Europe, too.
      Norway was only one of many other examples. How about Sweden or Finland? Why is Singapur doing so well? Why is China growing so much?
      Interest rates aren't the problem!!!

    5. Ok, you're one of those american neo-socialists who keep claiming china isn't socialist enough to prove that socialism doesn't work. In other words, whatever I say, you will ignore completely, even though I have first hand experience with it, and you've read about it on some blog or forum.

      Let me ATTACK YOU on another argument you made, which proves you have NO KNOWLEDGE of economic systems what so ever.

      "Substract taxes and the inflation and you will see that the interests are very low and thus aren't the true problem. "

      DO YOU KNOW WHAT INFLATION IS? The increase of the amount of money in circulation. If you have 1000 dollars in circulation one year, and next year you create a loan to someone of 20 dollars, then there are 1020 dollars in circulation. Inflation of 2%.

      And why would you have to keep making loans (even for people who obviously cannot pay them)? Because there's the question of interest, which has to be paid by money from other loans than your own (because your loan only covers the actual loan, not the interest).

      And excuse me, but what the f*** has taxes to do with the interest rates? It's so utterly unrelated that you're proving your stupidity time and time again for every post you make.

    6. WHAT? LOOL!

      Sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about. Inflation is the rise of prices of goods and services.

      What you mean is the money suply. OMG. I can't believe what you try to "explain" me, lol.

      If you have an capital income through mortgages you have to pay tax. That decreases the effect of "bad" interest rates which are allegedly the root of everything bad on this planet. Same with Inflation.

      I give you an example:
      The goverment needs 100 € from a bank as loan. Interest rates are 5%. The government has to pay in one year 105 € back.
      BUT the bank has to pay tax on the 5% due to capital income. Further the inflation was this year 3%. So the bank earned only less than 2€. The effect of compount intert rates was decreased. A Monetary reform would even kill that effect completly.

  24. The "death grip" is not created by the bankers, realtors, interest rates, loans, commisions. These are all just different vehicles chasing wealth. The "death grip" is the very human trait of greed. Anything beyond "3 squares and a cot" is greed which pretty much includes all of us.

  25. Something is missing here: velocity of money. Otherwise we can use the same logic for profit. Profit or margin is the same concept as interest. For example, I bought a good for 10 EUR and then sold it but with 5 EUR profit (15 EUR). But I let in the system only 10, so how is it possible to have back 15? Amount of money + velocity.

  26. I want the text of the video here.where to find them? thanks.

  27. The last third of the movie is pretty good though. (Except the bible stuff :))

  28. It's funny to see, how the filmmakers think about taxes and forget, that taxes pay roads, schools, universities, hospitals a.s.o. Overall, there is lots of half wisdom, mixed with conspiracy theories.

    1. its funny that you would defend such a system

    2. It' true some taxes (road tax, fuel duty, council tax, inheritance tax, VAT, Licence fees, water rates, capital gains tax, fuel duty, NI....the list goes on) pay for roads, schools etc. But what about income tax? What's that used for? Watch 'Freedom to Facism' Aaron Russo. Great doc which explains this in great detail.

    3. income tax pays for defense...bond holders?

    4. hmmmm, your missing the point. I would fix the road if it was ****** or teach people what I know and did it out of willing for others... but the other half of the problem is we are educated not to care or do anything unless we directly benefit from it or get compensated.

  29. What a joke. Let me borrow your car for a couple years no interest. I'll give you what the car cost and you give the same amount back when I'm done. Are you people so stupid not to understand depreciation on capital goods, and the opportunity cost and time value of money, or are these concepts lost on you? And to the couple of Islamists talking about no interest, look at Sharia compliant countries' economies and tell me how great your inept concept of economics is.

    1. If it's borrowed, there's no pay. By definition. Otherwise, it's renting. Can't see the connection.

      If given is the car cost, taken back when car is returned, fine, it's pledge, by definition in interest of both sides, without paying "interest". It could have been any good instead of car cost expressed in money. Of course, you can construct thesis that "interest" is "paid" in missed gain on that good, but it cuts both ways, for the good (which is not money) and for the car. And that's not interest. It is not "money working for them instead of them". It demands their work.

      Everything else is the same old tautological, self-defining thing all over again: people are yelling "you can't put out the fire with gasoline", and you start to make fun of them 'cause "they don't understand the Fire Extinguishing Theory of Gasoline"?! Well, maybe they don't know the solution yet, but it's obvious that the problem is not in them.

      And, at the end: so-called "Sharia compliant countries" and their economies are not the same thing as Islamic banking. Oh, not at all. Do your own research.

    2. I think everybody understands the depreciation on capitol goods. The problem is how you see this problem. If I lend it to you with trust and love, I would hope that you could make it's way back to me in reasonable condition. Maybe you did some work to take care of the car as I would have. Your thinking is too, may I say, logical. It's a difficult concept to explain if you're keen on your job, but without getting into the bible quotes, the values taught in there are profound to society. I think that's the thinking that's being suggested here.

    3. I agree with all that but there's a flip side; in order to sustain a system based on profit and interest, the economy must expand ... infinitely. It can never stop. Because you're generating money out of nothing and you have to cover it by increasing the amount of value you're producing, sailing ahead of the storm, or everything collapses. Which is ok most of the time, as it accelerates the development of production - it counteracts the problems Thomas Malthus described. But obviously, its only a temporary solution, it can't go on forever, because resources remain limited, no matter how far you can drive the productive capacity. And when we hit those boundaries, the whole thing unravels and you're worse off than if you'd never attempted this system. So far ... we haven't hit that point. The Depression wasn't that, it was just productive capacity overshooting itself (another, but much lesser, flaw with the system; boom and bust would almost be tolerable relative to the problem of finite resources).

      Eventually, we must slam into the brick wall. When diminished resources force permanent negative growth on our economies, the system will not just scale down some percentage equal to the decline in growth - by nature, it can't do that. It will collapse completely, because there will be nothing to supply the profits and interest demanded, no excess value to cover them. These mechanisms are the "brain" of the system, and when they fold, things can't just slow down, they grind to a complete halt. There is no such thing as frugal capitalism, it is a system that was created in a time when there were always more resources over the horizon and all that was needed was to develop the productive capacity to exploit them. It was a revolutionary, elegant solution to problems that must have seemed as complex and impossible as the ones we face today, the problems the feudal system eventually ran into as the population stretched it to the breaking point.

      But here we are again. The thing about progress is that it doesn't like stagnation very much; change is the only constant. Adapt, or die. Nothing lasts forever, nothing works forever. Capitalism is not an exception; in a thousand years they won't even be able to imagine that we thought it was, just as we have difficulty imagining that the medievals believed their system was the final product of history.

      The alternative? Hell if I know. But the problem really doesn't care whether we have a solution or not. It's still there, solution or no solution. Necessity will be the mother of invention I suppose. I doubt that anyone alive has the answer, or ever will, any more than any single person or group of people knew how to solve feudalism's problems in a single stroke. Capitalism wasn't designed by some guy with a bright idea - it emerged, gradually and slowly, painfully. Historical forces shaped it into being. There were people who had some vague glimpse of where things were headed, what should be encouraged, but they were like blind men feeling out a dead elephant with their bare hands and trying to decide what they have found. One, holding the tail, says a rope, one holding the ears says its like great sails of leather, one touching the legs says it resembles fallen pillars, none of them can imagine what the thing actually is.

      Two things are certain: the past is not the future, and capitalism is now a centuries-old paradigm that must eventually pass, whether we want it to or not, as all things pass. It will do so in its own time, not by design. Declarations of allegiance or opposition to it are wasted breath. And one cannot complain about its duration; if it ends tommorow, it will still have outlasted mercantalism, colonialism, fascism, and state communism many times over.

      How much more do you dare to ask of it?

    4. Jeff! When a wo/man has earned money and saved then decides to loan some of that money s/heis quite within their rights to charge a little interest on that money, simply because they have lost the use of it while it is loaned out.

      Money loaned from the current banking cartel [Fractional reserve banking system] has not been worked for and saved, it comes into existence with the stroke of a pen and they ask for interest on that newly created money. However they never create the interest with which to pay back it simply does not exist and it is mathematically impossible to pay back that which does not exist!

      Almost ALL income tax goes to pay interest on the national debt. See the "Grace Commission Report January 1984.

    5. Jeff, there is a difference in the analogy you present first you most likely worked and saved for your car and you lose the use of it when you loaned it to whomever!.

      When a wo/man earns money and saves money, if they decide to lend all, or some of that money, then they are quite entitled to charge a little interest to compensate for the loss of use of that money while it is loaned out.

      Loans from the current banking cartel under the [Fractional reserve system] are completely different since:
      1) They are not lending their own money, also they are not lending depositors money as we are led to believe.

      2) When they advance a loan they simply create money on a ledger, or computer with the stroke of a pen, or a keystroke that money only exist's within that ledger as a book entry it has no physical character what so ever. this is one reason you will never see the word money in a banking contract they will refer to it as " funds".

      3) When they create the alleged loan they do NOT create the interest with which to pay back ,it is therefore a mathematical impossibility to pay back that which does not exist

      4) Both the bank and the conveyancing lawyer commit fraud during this process as they "obligate" the mortgagee to sign over a house /property they do NOT yet own, as collateral in case the mortgagee defaults on paying back the loan which technically doesn't exist and the interest which definitely does NOT exist!

      All income tax goes to pay down the interest on the national debt! In fact the actual quote from the 1984 Grace Commission Report is as follows:
      "100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the federal debt and by federal government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services [that] taxpayers expect from their government."

  30. The idea that money arose out of a need created by a short coming in barter is not historically verifiable. This documentary relies on way too much economic myth.

    1. Well, history is stuffed with "myths", a.k.a. nothing else but plausible hypotheses, created based on circumstantial evidences, considering the fact that much of the history happened not only before Library of Congress was established, :) but also before humans' ability of event documenting developed.

      But, of course, it might be that the very same circumstantial evidences used to support the "myth" of barter could be used to support the "myth" of gift economy. :)

      Which is definitely plausible "myth" - for example, if you go anywhere in the Balkans (south-east Europe) and someone does you some favor, and you tell them "I owe you", and they respond: "Oh, no, you don't" - just know, the very moment, they do expect some favor in return in the future, not specified by its kind, value or date, but it is the expectation definitely implied by the statement with diametrically opposite meaning. :)

      It's a part of mentality. And mentality is not the thing that can be developed in a week or two. :)

    2. It is a fictional story intended to convey to the masses, a BASIC understanding of how our money creation system really works, I believe it does an excellent job in that respect

  31. Right off the bat I can say tell that this is either not entirely honest or not well researched. Two minutes of looking in books and online tells me that mortgage simply doesn't mean death grip, especially in the sense we understand the phrase. It comes from old french and translates to "dead pledge". "Dead" in this phrase originally referred to the conditions of the death of the contract, not any person involved.

    And that's why I'm not going to bother watching the film.

    1. "And that's why I'm not going to bother watching the film."

      "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance"...Einstein

  32. good movie

  33. Everytime the narrator mentions 'welfare SCHEMES' I am made aware that there is an agenda being put forward here. They could be called 'welfare PROGRAMS' as their effect on a certain stratum of society is a very positive one, but they are termed 'SCHEMES'. I see Ron Pauls face and here his heartless brand of INDIVIDUALISM being promoted here. And behind his face, Ayn Rand and that whole wonderfull shit soup she cooked up. Think for yourself, especially when others are thinking a bit too fast for you to keep up. There is an agenda here.

  34. No wonder Islam prohibited Interest 1400 year ago..

  35. They forgot to mention that past attempts to make an interest-free economic system were all thwarted in nefarious ways by the agents of the banking cartel.

  36. can anyone say Federal Reserve System....and "they" will say "let them eat cake"......the question to follow is...do we have enough baskets to hold their severed heads. the masses WILL eventually make right the wrong. and it wont be soon enough.

  37. Very interesting documentary, thanks for linking it to your site. I was quite surprised that despite the dire nature of the topic, the documentary has a few black humour gems that ought to be seen.

  38. The religious references are probably due to when the doc was actually made. I only listened to it and didn't find them too distracting. Great doc. I agree, it should be played in Economics 101.

  39. I am Afghan Canadian interest is also forbidden in Islam but in Afghanistan
    there is no interest banking system .
    to be honest 95% Afghan people have their own houses.

    1. Move back to Afghanistan.

    2. Nonsense! You forbit interest rates but you still have to pay more back than the original price. It is nothing else than hidden interest rates. It is not very differnt than our system.

  40. Excellent.

  41. I look after dogs. I have bartered for most my furniture. I barter with a beautician, a seamstress, i have bartered for olive oil, fish, cakes you name it i,ll barter it. I have worked the bog for three years and bartered my turf for work done to my house Cut out the middle men, cut out the money and get what you can locally. Money only makes money for banks. I have never taken a loan out as it never made sence to me to borrow money i dont have and it never made sence for me that the banks can make more money for themselves off my money.

  42. Thank you from Buzz Knapp-Fisher getting off TOXIC. There is a connection with dirty banking & energy

  43. The religious quotes may just be there to draw the attention of some people more effectively. However it may be noted that in Islam also are interest rates supposed to be forbidden apparently so the author could have added other religious examples too, if he didn't.
    I don't particularly believe in the divine and exclusive character of religious texts but it is interesting to see that this money supply issue is as old as that and has been warned of, in one way or another, long before most people even carried bags full of coins or held virtual accounts at the bank... in any case it seems that the prophets were from wealthy families, part of a small elite who were already acquainted with such financial and political issues...

    1. The whole reference to religion does seem kind of sloppy. But usury stuff has it's origin in traditional Judeo-Christian-Islam practices. The film maker might be trying to capture a particular audience, or perhaps it is his own belief. Regardless, the motivation to re-make the banking system is widespread and more importantly, it is long overdue.

    2. None of the abrahamic religious texts are very old, the idea of money is much older than Christianity, Judaism, or Islam. The idea of not charging interest is also older than these religions. To put it in perspective, they would have been bartering for at least 100,000 years, abrahamic religions are perhaps 4,000 years old at the most.

  44. Economics are really complicated. It is impossible to grasp all the dynamics of the system and all agree on the best way to increase people's well being today and the long run...

    One thing to remember from this documentary:

    - gradual taxation allows a system to reach higher value equilibrium. Poorer people should more easily pay back a loan than richer people. Otherwise, it becomes more difficult for the poorer and easier for the richer = divide increases. This increase in inequality happens because, in the current context, the richer you are the easier it is to make more money (many inequalities: education, parental situation, asymmetry of information). If this abnormal dynamic is not polished in one way or another, it is against Man's interest (a few manage to own and decide over the masses). Well here too some people would disagree (some find it more effective to rely on a few.. blabla, those shall only speak in their names and keep their mathematical ethics for leisure games only)

    Don't forget the theory of free competition, of the market economy that is so valued by the western world is based on many assumptions which are not present in our world. It is against the concentration of power and decision for a start. Thus any free economic system and model should find the most efficient ways to perfect those assumptions or prevent their absence from precluding the theoretical gains of free competition. As result, if birth and information inequalities (some people are born rich and live in a rich making micro society where money and information allows unfair comparative advantages over all others) are not and cannot be addressed, there remain many economic state tools such as (gradual) taxation on top of all the anti-trust laws and other state instruments used... and gradual interest rates based on the size of loan and one's wealth?

    1. Once upon a time, the astronomy was extremely complicated and It was impossible to grasp all the dynamics of all those stars and planets circulating around the unmovable Earth in the center of the Universe. Astronomers had been calculating and recalculating declination of stars' and planets' routes for couple of millenniums, in order to adjust the "science" to comply with unquestionable Dogma, and Inquisition would burn anyone who would think differently...

      Today, there's no need for a bonfire. Labels like "financial illiterate", "conspiracy theorist", "tinfoil hatter", etc. are quite enough to "burn" anyone who questions "bankcentric" paradigm.

      Money is the ultimate public service. The idea to privatize it for profit and to make it "industry" did cost, is costing and will cost human race the stagnation in its development much more significant than any other dogma of religious, ideological, political or any other kind.

    2. Quite right, like religion money is holding back natural progress so that every last drop of profit can be extracted from people who can barely afford such. Think of electricity, why are we not all solar by now, which is totally workable and low cost (installation/maintenance). Why isn't farming being revolutionized to grow better quality crops without the need for petrochemicals? Every aspect of our lives is dictated by money, by the greed for profit.

  45. i agree that the religious quotes seemed of out of place. but in a highly religious society, i can understand how it helps allow people to grasp/accept the concept with a familiar principle in the overall view. to some, morality and ethics don't come intrinsically and to others, religious views are held above all else.
    aside from that, this was amazingly informative. hopefully more people can take something from this than those who get hung up on personal perspectives.

  46. The banking stuff is great, however... Although I'm personally a big fan of the big Jesus, the biblical stuff in this video makes it useless for sharing with others who need the important education on banking, but who may be turned off by biblical quotes.

    WTF? Whoever made this video severely castrated its usefulness as a teaching tool by making it only suitable for Christian Sunday school classes.

    1. Precisely my opinion as well. As an atheist, I truly don't mind seeing others quoting the Bible. After all, there are a few pieces of wisdom in it and its poetry is very nourishing. However, I'm sure some of my other atheist colleagues would be turned off by such quotation. It's a sign that the people making the documentary are attempting to thump the Bible into a film about financial matters.

    2. The biblical references contained no mythology. It was an academic reference of human wisdom that seems to have been lost to hedonistic endeavors. Aristotle could have been just as valid a reference.

    3. Touche! Some people will still, however, be turned off by the fact it was referenced by that book in particular, which seems to be a bit superficial.

  47. The old testament prohibits Jews charging interest to Jews. Non Jews were fair game for interest. Typical christian selective reading.

  48. Really well done documentary. Just the bible and jesus stuff confused the hell out of me... how does that fit into this? :/

  49. Short, simple and straight to the point.

  50. Nice documentary. The Government can easily run the banking system and get rid of usury and this would solve many of the problems of boom and bust. There is also a new idea called the Equal Money system... and there are other ideas floating around out there. We need vigorous debate but more importantly we need to sack the privatized centralized banking system(s).

    1. The government Can institute a Banking system the problem is that both the Banking cartel and the governments of the world enjoy a MUTUALLY beneficial interest in keeping this system . It allows government to raise money through the central banking system and the Federal reserve in the USA with out having to tell the people they have to tax them more, it offers the government the opportunity to levy a hidden tax in the form of "INFLATION" on the banking cartel side it provides the central bank's, the federal reserve and member commercial banks the opportunity to make trillions in profits from interest on money they don't have, the general public lose out because they are on the hook for payments of principle and interest on national, provincial /state debts, as well as their personal debts.

      Under this system ALL money in circulation is BORROWED into existence and then interest is charged on that borrowed money, lets say a million dollars is borrowed by a nation (any nation) then a million dollars is in circulation) Lets assume a low interest rate of 2%. that means the interest amount is $20,000 the first year Yet interest is Never created (It doesn't exist ) to pay off the one million dollars at the end of the year there would have to be $1,020,000 but since the interest is never created there is only $1,000,000 available to pay off both principle and interest, how do they solve this problem? they borrow more for another year and use tax money to make payments , which now because of COMPOUNDING interest doesn't go toward the principle it mostly goes to ever growing interest.
      When you take out a mortgage or a loan lets say $300,000 for a new home they don't also provide the amount of interest you are obliged to pay, some will be lucky enough to pay both principle and interest from the collective amount of money in circulation but there will millions around the globe who cannot because the well is dry those people will go into bankruptcy and all their assets will be seized by the banking cartel and sold!

    2. American but equally applies to ALL countries with a central banking/fractional reserve system.

  51. To many quotes from holy books.
    "Interest to be totally outlawed to conform with Bible principles" (44:52) The idea may be good but the motives are wrong.

    1. Well Jesus did go a little rambo on the lenders in the market.
      But yeah, the examples that were quoted from scripture weren't necessary for the story, was a little surprised to see them. Out of my own pervasive curiosity however,they were kinda interesting to search.

  52. Obvious stuff, very well explained and analogized. More people should see this, since its simple, and doesn't launch into a dozen different conspiracies. This is something school children should watch in an economic's class.

  53. Yep, pretty good. Sadly it's easier to throw up your arms and surrender to this system. Unfortunately this surrender is ultimate.

  54. I thought it achieved it's objective very well, to clearly and simply explain how our system works to those who don't have a good grasp or understanding of economics and local government. It's simplistic delivery free of jargon gets the tumbs up from me at least, though it appears I'm very much in the minority here on this one.

  55. I don't know why the comments are so lame on this documentary. It happens to be amazingly ahead of it's time, made in 1971 and reflecting exactly what is so obvious now 41 years later.

    It isn't flashy but it explains in simple terms how the money system is a ponzi scheme, how private secret corporations have taken Con-trol of the world, and why it cannot possibly continue.

    Great documentary, I wish I would have seen it in 1971, but I was only 14 then and still believed in the American Dream....little did I know that the deck was stacked long before I was born.

    Time to have open season on the elite crooked Banking cartel who have created a mess of humanity, profiting off the poorest, funding all wars and making trillions off of the blood of wars. NOBODY SHOULD PROFIT FROM WAR

    1. Sadly this documentary is nonsence! Interest rates are not the big big problem. Substract taxes and the inflation and you will see that the interests are very low and thus aren't the true problem. Unfair tax systems are and the imbalance of money (that means that 10 % of the people own 90% of the wealth) truely is!

      In fact documentries like these are dangerous. They make people believe that you have to change the system you live in instead of changing the rules of how to play. It makes the people believe that every other usefull solution is useless, because you have to get rid off the system first.

    2. Banks can lend out money that they do not have, and then have the nerve to charge interest on it. The government has approved this system. Originally the loans were allowed to be twice that of the bank's own value. Guess what it is today? 10x.

      Yeah, the system needs to go. I'm expecting a complete collapse within decades. Combine this system with the fact that the world economy is exponentially growing, even you have to see that it cannot be sustained.

      The sooner, the better.

    3. Banks need to have the reserve requirement. So they can't just create as much money as they want and do with it what they want. Further banks in some countries have regulations what they can do with the money. In some countries they have almost no regulations and there you see the biggest problems.

      Interest rates are one of the most important things in Capitalism.
      Would you lend somebody money for a risky project without benefiting from it? Interest rates are reward for risk and thus essential!!!

      But as I said, interet rates aren't the problem. The system is, but only in some countries. Regulations and taxes are a big problem when they are unfair and thus creating inequality, like in almost every western country.

      I give you an example. Incomes from capital like stocks, bond and dividends are either tax free or have a very low tax rate while people who have a real job have to pay way more tax.

      Thus people who don't work anymore and just buy bonds earn alot of money through the governments and pay far less than a regular worker. The problem is that the economies of the western world are moving more and more towards capital income because factories go to China and other poorer countries.

      So less workers have to pay in the government pension pot and other social programm pots. Because the number of worker decline money is missing. But instead of taxing capital income they tell us, the government has to cut social programms. Further, workers earn less and less money (Germanys haven't seen a rise in nominal wages since 15 years). At the same time the rich people have so much money that they start to gamble with it. Due to lose regulations banks can almost do what they want and if a bubble burts the regular tax payers have to pay for it. Thus inequality and poverty in the US, UK and Germany has increased during the last 20 years.

      Is that a problem because of interest rates? Clearly not!

    4. You shall check Islamic Banking for solutions to your raised problems!

    5. It seems that you did not get the point at all. The government taxes are again distributed to people in form of different wage and other schemes, however, the other majority of the money left goes to banks as governments since created have had to increasingly borrow from the known banks due to the corrupted financial system !!!

    6. Interest is the problem when in the real world the bankers are making money out of digits and thin air and then charge interest when they are offering nothing and creating debt.

      The animation may seem simplistic, well enough, but that's because reality is far more diabolical.

  56. so misleading

    1. could you clarify ?

    2. Yes that is exactly how you appear to be!

  57. I am the free hand. skeet skeet.

  58. Mildly interesting.

  59. I tried to watch but Postman Pat was on :)

    1. ......& he's darn 'black & white cat ' !

  60. Zietgiest is the way Peter Joseph is spot on !!

  61. Owl der schmaht people've come up wid dis. Sooie mush jus EXCEPT dis iz de wey de world iz an move awn.


    1. In English please? ;)

    2. there you are!... How've you been?

    3. Pretty good. Man, I didn't realize its been 4 MONTHS for you... Welcome back. :)

  62. "everythng else will fall into place" when the "money problem is solved" LOL

    1. fabian is who?

    2. Watch @ 32:50 for the answer.

    3. when you lower the interest rate on housing, the sales price just goes up instead, the people still pay the same monthly mortgage. the realtor will ask, how much can you afford monthly, and sets about finding you the biggest house you can afford. If you did away with the interest, the lenders would be out of a job, but the price of housing would go up again, the realtor would get a bigger commision, but their would be no monthly savings. i am assuming that there are still loans, but no interest, so the loan would be between the buyer and the seller, with no middle man banker taking his share. the seller would get all the money (monthly mortgage payments) without sharing with the bankers and his staff.