The Secret of Oz

The Secret of Oz

2009, Economics  -   151 Comments
5.91
12345678910
Ratings: 5.91/10 from 163 users.

The Secret of OzIn 1996, in a documentary called The Money Masters, we asked the question why is America going broke. It wasn’t clear then that we were, but it is today. Now the question is how can we get out of this mess. Foreclosures are everywhere, unemployment is skyrocketing – and this is only the beginning. America’s economy is on a long, slippery slope from here on. The bubble ride of debt has come to an end.

What can government do? The sad answer is – under the current monetary system – nothing. It’s not going to get better until the root of the problem is understood and addressed. There isn’t enough stimulus money in the entire world to get us out of this hole. Why? Debt. The national debt is just like our consumer debt – it’s the interest that’s killing us.

Though most people don’t realize it the government can’t just issue it’s own money anymore. It used to be that way. The King could just issue stuff called money. Abraham Lincoln did it to win the Civil War. No, today, in our crazy money system, the government has to borrow our money into existence and then pay interest on it. That’s why they call it the National Debt. All our money is created out of debt. Politicians who focus on reducing the National Debt as an answer probably don’t know what the National Debt really is. To reduce the National Debt would be to reduce our money – and there’s already too little of that.

The economy of the U.S. is in a deflationary spiral. Nothing can stop it -- except monetary reform.

1. No more national debt. Nations should not be allowed to borrow. If they want to spend, they have to take the political heat right away by taxing.

2. No more fractional reserve lending. Banks can only lend money they actually have.

3. Gold money is NOT the answer. Historically gold ALWAYS works against a thriving middle class and ALWAYS works to create a plutocracy.

4. The total quantity of money + credit in a national system must be fixed, varying only with the population.

More great documentaries

guest

151 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
VeeVendetta
VeeVendetta
7 months ago

" Gold money is NOT the answer. Historically gold ALWAYS works against a thriving middle class and ALWAYS works to create a plutocracy."
Read- Google, what L. Frank Baum wrote the Wizard of Oz about.. What, is silver only an industrial metal ?

Phillip Ray Holmes
Phillip Ray Holmes
4 years ago

Left-wing communist bullshit.

Robert Francis
Robert Francis
4 years ago

They don't explain what a government bond is, a bond is a legal entity with a NAME attached. Our legal NAMES are bonded into the system as incorporated DEBTORS through social contracts that bind our NAMES to the money masters who own them.

DustUp
DustUp
8 years ago

In summary, all that is necessary is correcting a few mistakes that WE allowed to happen. And to be better electors and monitors of those we elect so that WE don't allow it to happen again. Will that seem like a big change in things monetary to most, probably. That is a result of a socialist education, another problem which needs fixing.

DustUp
DustUp
8 years ago

From the Intro:
The economy of the U.S. is in a deflationary spiral. Nothing can stop it -- except monetary reform.
1. No more national debt. Nations should not be allowed to borrow. If they want to spend, they have to take the political heat right away by taxing.
2. No more fractional reserve lending. Banks can only lend money they actually have.
3. Gold money is NOT the answer. Historically gold ALWAYS works against a thriving middle class and ALWAYS works to create a plutocracy.
4. The total quantity of money + credit in a national system must be fixed, varying only with the population.

I have not watched this yet but assume the above description is accurate. First you have to believe Item 0: "Nothing can stop it except monetary reform."
That all depends on what you consider "reform". What unleashed the tidal wave of malfeasance was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act regulating banks from putting depositors money at risk in the wall street or other casinos, keeping commercial banks separate from "investment" banks. Note: When reading anything you would be much closer to the truth by replacing most instances of the word "investment" with SPECULATION. Not that all speculation is bad, just when you Banksters (like the skeptic darwinian) speculate with depositors money without notifying them that their money would be far safer in their mattress than your bank after repeal of Glass-Steagall. I would consider the re-institution of the Glass-Steagall act a mere correcting of a bought and paid for congress and president (both political parties should be strung up for what they have done to this country) mistake. That would go a long way to correcting the current problem of the banking system.

Did we have a debt problem before Glass-Steagall was repealed, enabling commercial banks to roll the dice with depositors money at the wall street casino, which most all lost, got bailed out with the citizens future tax obligations, and most doubled down again, and will go bankrupt (as they already are technically), when the people say no more trillions to the banks who have committed moral hazard yet again? Yes, for certain we had an ever expanding debt problem prior to the latest craziness. But first another mistake should be corrected. Our wonderful banking oversight also decided to change the accounting rules allowing them to keep their doors open. Previously it was Mark To Market, valuing assets at their current market value. Now it is known as Mark To Fantasy accounting. Reading the accounting statements of banks and corporations is essentially a waste of time unless it is a small straight forward business, unlike the many larger corporations which stuff their big problems into acquired companies or off shore accounts. Accounting rules must be corrected back to the way they were so a rational person can have some level of confidence in what they are reading. Why bother having accounting at all if it is a joke?

So those two corrections would solve the more recent crazy /debt problem. How to solve the prior debt problem? Is it a monetary problem or a political problem? Who put us into debt? Clearly congress cannot be trusted to be financially responsible. And if you get rid of the private bankster Federal Reserve which simply does accounting and as an insane fee gets to charge interest on every dollar rather than being paid a salary. Ok they print the physical dollars as well. I'm sure we are underpaying them for that as well (cough cough) and could not manage that on our own either. That would get rid of a huge debt burden but wouldn't solve currency debasement by congress overspending. One of the methods the banksters have been using to steal your wealth (inflation). Next by deflation when your assets will be devalued when you and many others are competing to sell them to get some money for food, and the banksters will scoop them up at pennies on the dollar. When the dust settles they will start the inflation game again. Unless of course YOU decide to stop all that thievery by kicking all the bought bums out of congress, seeing to it incorruptible decent wise people in numbers from all parties are running for all offices so it doesn't matter who the fools vote for, someone decent will get in to make the necessary corrections and changes. What other changes besides getting rid of the Fed would solve the financial problems? Actually if you go back just prior to the Wilson presidency, getting rid of the Fed would be just another mistake correction.

Credit is just another word for Debt. What have either really done for the world, except unnecessarily accumulate most of the wealth in the hands of the few families that own or control most of the banks and corporations? Does any country really need credit or rather to go into debt? If one looks at every country ensnared into the debt pit of hell by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), some recent prime examples are in South America such as Argentina, where their administrations were tempted into accepting more money than they could pay back in the allotted time frame, thereby defaulting, causing their currency to crash and enabling the banksters to get at their natural resources which they wanted all along. Not to mention extracting a tax on the people in perpetuity, another goal achieved. The bankers did the same thing to farmers in the usa years ago. Take this money and buy new better equipment and land to expand. And when the crops failed or prices fell due to the rapid expansion in an area, they couldn't pay. Did debt help the food supplying farmer? Only the lucky ones or those that didn't take on more than they could afford to lose. Did some farmers do fine growing at a slower pace avoiding banks altogether? The majority did. Is that possible today? Not very since the banksters have cause the inflation in the price of land and equipment. If pay as you go works well for families and farmers in the past. It seems it would work well again for governments as well, if we only could get rid of inflation, which is the theft of the value of your money.

Item 1 and Item 2 seem clear solutions. No national debt and no fractional reserve banking. So what if you cannot have something instantly by going into debt up to your ears. When all the inflation ends, it won't take you near as long to afford it. A much better situation than being saddled and road hard with debt a large portion if not all of your life; the bankster plan to get rich off of you.

If a government wants to spend more it will have to tax more. If a country is poor then it has no business spending unless the people decide they want to pool their money to build a better water system or road, which they certainly don't need govt to do for them. If the road is tougher to prosperity, people will be less likely to give it up to some weasel carpet bagging bankster who wants to put them in debt chains.

What then is to prevent a current administration (govt) from printing more money to buy votes with to stay in power? Or importing poor people who like free stuff too, that would also vote for more of same?

It is interesting that the documentarian is against gold-money (Item 3) but proposes Item 4 that money + credit must be a fixed amount. If money + credit can only increase with the population that means it is a zero sum game. You can only increase your wealth by taking someone else's. Haven't we had enough banksters doing that to prove it to be a lousy system, ideology, or method? There must be some means of allowing the individual to work for what he wants without having to step on others ability to do same. Exactly what the corporate "person" or entity does. If you look close enough, Socialism is all about getting rid of the competition. When you have socialist run schools they don't educate, they brainwash with emotional falsehoods. Govt run schools are socialist by definition. They will never explain that socialism is where govt and its corporate cronies eliminate all competition and then you have to pay what ever they ask. No. They lie saying socialism is the benevolent method taking care of everyone (also a falsehood). They take care of themselves, enslave everyone else, and give just enough to the poor to keep them voting for the same, which is less and less until the money runs out. Takes a LONG time for the money to run out when countries are allowed to borrow, not nearly as long in a pay as you go system, which would demonstrate the evils of socialism in short order ... although it is plain to see at any time for anyone willing to look rather than regurgitate emotional ego protectionism.

I submit that politicians will find a way to circumvent any laws installed to limit their ability to print money to buy votes unless their is a limited supply of the ink, or paper. Since they can always grow more than enough paper and ink or smuggle it in, it seems the founding fathers were correct in stipulating in the US Constitution that the only money shall be gold, which seems to have a limited supply. Why would gold ALWAYS work against a thriving middle class and limiting money + credit to a fixed amount would not? When for most practical purposes they would accomplish the same result, IF the fixed amount of money + credit could actually be accomplished? I disbelieve the premise altogether. Fractional reserve banking began with the gold "storage/bankers" lending out more than they had in deposit. That is what created a plutocracy or rule by the wealthy. Money is just a medium of exchange. If you allow that to be corrupted in one way or another, by the printing press or by fractional reserve banking, wealth will always accumulate to those doing the corrupting. Personally I would be more in favor of Silver as being the only money since it wouldn't be worth the effort to counterfeit silver. Bring back the silver certificates I had when young. They looked like a dollar, they acted like a dollar, and if they didn't you could trade them in for an ounce of silver.

Problem solved.

Brock Graham
Brock Graham
8 years ago

Helpful commentary , I loved the facts . Does anyone know where my business can get ahold of a sample a form form to type on ?

lanita
lanita
8 years ago

skeptic_darwinian who do you think the number one scientist is? Who is the Creator of science?

HOGSTER HUNTER
HOGSTER HUNTER
10 years ago

Well put together Doco, thank you Bill Still. I now have a good tool to work with to try to awaken some sleepers.

Jim Fortner
Jim Fortner
10 years ago

Please explain to this layman how wealth is created if the government issues its own currency, as Lincoln's issuance of "Greenbacks", without a standard like gold backing it up. Does simply having currency in circulation, enough for carrying on commerce, enable the economy to function, value being attached as the currency moves? Just by having currency in motion it assumes worth?

How is the government kept from overproducing currency in order to finance a boondoggle, a wasteful scheme, or an ill-advised invasion of a sovereign nation? Are citizens somehow more alert to fiduciary malfeasance? Do they have their fingers more firmly on the pulse of the nation's budget when our government is in control of the currency rather than self-serving bankers?

Jo McKay
Jo McKay
10 years ago

Well said. As worth the watch a few years ago as now. What has often mystified me is why the creation of debt system is so little understood by so many. (I do realize how much energy goes into keeping people confused and compliant). Today, surely most of us get it that 'corporations' (especially banks) are directly and indirectly responsible for most of the economic problems of our times (and those in the past). This doc (watch more then once if your not quite sure-because all is made very clear) shows the wide distribution of historical context in an entertaining way, yet stays with the key issue and key solutions. Namely, banks (controlled by a very few super rich 'persons') has control of the money system, and through that control has manipulated and controlled governments and the people in order to grow their own wealth - period. Obviously, when the govt. must go hat in hand to those who 'control' then govt. is not going to do a great job in representing the needs of the people. The solutions are simply - bank and corporate control is returned to the 'elected' government, which is then forced to be responsible (as intended) to the people who elect them. We do have local banks who do not run like the corrupt and greed based BIG corps... they are credit unions and coops ... transferring our wealth to these is a good first step, while we find the political will to make the required changes. (millions of people are already doing just that, and while the big banks are laughing at us and saying it is having little effect on them-least that was the cry a year ago - they are not laughing so well now, as branches of their banks are being closed and the numbers of folks walking away keep growing and growing, without rallies or marches, we can also vote with our action). - peace

kenny wally
kenny wally
11 years ago

The simple solution, is first sticking together no matter what the money whores say, and then telling our representatives and the presidents comment line, that we want to use U.S. debt free notes as currency, put the federal reserve on hiatus and convert those buildings to treasury buildings. The debt will slip into darkness. I am not so naive as to think the money-hos will remain idle, as I'm positive they will hatch yet another scheme to confuse the people into being their slaves again. So far this is all quite Biblical [ the killing of the 2 witnesses [ U.S.A. & U.K. ] because our prosperity was killed, and our being revived later on. We have to network with our fellow man and get it done!

manfruss
manfruss
11 years ago

Wipe the slate clean, and start again. Debt forgiveness has always happened throughout history, and we need it now, more than ever.

Arthur Putter
Arthur Putter
11 years ago

Brilliant documentary, thanks mr Stll!!!!!

quest87
quest87
12 years ago

Historically bank reserves have earnt no interest till as recently as 2008 and 0.25% after that. This documentary at the every beginning presents the fractional reserve system as enabling the banks to earn 6% by lending its reserves to the government and then again lending a multiple of those reserves.

What hope does it have of proposing a better system when it cant even present the existing sytem accurately.

marlio
marlio
12 years ago

So what is the solution if we are a consumption based society? The reasons tangible goods have to replaced so often, is so we have a need to purchase goods and services. What is the solution??? Bartering? Equal goods for everyone, which would mean everyone has to work and no handouts?

Jack_Burton
Jack_Burton
12 years ago

Now is the time we really need a Fight Club action.

Jason
Jason
12 years ago

The debt-free system would slow down production and capitalism. Today's US monetary system, though not perfect, has brought about the largest boom in World History. Hard to ignore that while we're all searching for the lesser-of-all-evils-system.

What needs to be done is End the Fed, go back to sound money, free market principles (if you think we have a free market system today you'd be wrong), let capitalism do it's detoxing properly (liquidate malinvestment, let banks fail - if you would let these banks and companies fail when the market calls for it we wouldn't be in predicaments today - and limit governments size and power.

I know the de-regulation argument has been beaten to death - and the one interesting thing about the debate is that half of the Wall Street'ers Ive spoken with say some of the de-regulation caused the crisis and the other half say the free market would do a better job regulating than government. They admitted there would be more violent volatility but you wouldn't have even CLOSE to the bubbles created today (government creates these bubbles with poor politics/policies - E.g. "Everyone should own a home! yay!")

When your government is spending 40% of the GDP you have problems and should probably start right there.

Matt Kukowski
Matt Kukowski
12 years ago

Anyone that thinks THE FED is legal and fair will soon see just how wrong they are.

When the economy crashes, caused by the fed, the fed will come up with plans to get your money and you will be scratching your head as to why.

Ceausu Adrian
Ceausu Adrian
12 years ago

Am I the only one who learned what the "fractional reserve banking system" is from an actual university not from weed and LSD?

This documentary should be under Conspiracy not Economics .

TheJurg71
TheJurg71
12 years ago

REALLY??? 11:30 on for a couple minutes, you really have to attack christianity to get your point across? Wow, stupid!

Billy Bradford
Billy Bradford
12 years ago

Yes, there are plenty of things wrong with the way we (the world, in general) handle currency and we've created a big mess: rising unemployment, food and water shortages, lack of natural resources, exploitation of labor, et cetera.

But what about population control? It seems to me that there are too many human beings on this earth given the limited resources we have. We have created a lifestyle for ourselves, at least, in the Western world, that is unsustainable given the present circumstances, but it seems we could sustain something very comfortable and close to what we have now (perhaps even better) with a lower global population and both current and future achievements in technology. The lack of abundance of cheap labor a lower (and hopefully more educated and intelligent) global population would offer could be overcome by technology; namely, robots, automation, etc. Companies have already begun replacing workers who perform mundane, mechanical tasks with robots that can work 24/7, take no lunch breaks or vacations, make a more consistent product, don't need benefits or a 401K and above all, save them money. I can't blame them; I'd do the same thing. It makes good business-sense.

Granted, there is no way to legislate such a thing, even if it were for the betterment of human civilization at large, without infringing on basic freedoms. I, for one, highly value any and all freedoms I have and resent any infringement that has been placed upon them, though I am aware that some of these restrictions, such as laws against robbery, murder and the like, protect me from people who might otherwise do so (or at least provide a deterrent), whatever the reason. Additionally, doing so would rely heavily on people's ability to reason and think independently and intelligently about the world, since there could not be a just system of law to regulate it, and as far as I can tell, people in general are pretty incompetent when it comes to thinking through things with any sort of thoughtfulness and thoroughness. So am I apparently.

Matt Kukowski
Matt Kukowski
13 years ago

DECENTRALIZE... putting all the power in the hands of the few causes corruption. That is the problem. If you do not get this simple solution then continue to put all your hopes and dreams in someone else's hands.

Steven Trella
Steven Trella
13 years ago

Ugh fixed currency is moronic when you understand economics and government monetary policy. The problem isnt debt its that we fail to pay it off when the economy is good.

Your Name: Marco
Your Name: Marco
13 years ago

congratulation for this job!

Kumamori
Kumamori
13 years ago

Castro was wrong with wondering why they hadn't tried to shoot Obama yet. He's obviously not influenced enough if he's on the public's side.

I take this document with a healthy grain of salt, since Jackson was a freemason and when his precidency was over, USA was in a more depressed monetary situation than before the crisis. My big question is, who was it that made US take loans right after Jackson had gotten the country debt-free?

hailflavour
hailflavour
13 years ago

Brilliant!

Who me? yeah you!
Who me? yeah you!
13 years ago

@skeptic_darwinian.

You suggest we should accept what we have then in the same breath suggest the bankers are wealthy because they are the fittest. You boldly state survival\of the fittest but seem to not have understood the most basic of darwinian principles. that principle is that the survival is or isn't achieved in a struggle to propagate ones genes. In this struggle the lambs do not line themselves up for the wolves and just hope their fatter buddy next to them will provide ample distraction. You accept what you're given, I'll stick to looking out for the best out there.

You are a fool of the highest order.

Who me? yeah you!
Who me? yeah you!
13 years ago

@Swytch

Nice one. Bell definitely Jacked the plans from the patent office in-tray. He had guys at the submission desk on the payroll (allegedly). I wonder if its the repetition of the name Alexander Graham Bell or an unwillingness to change all the educational literature (and thereby reveal the brutal edge of capitalism ) that causes a failure to correctly credit the real inventor. Bell made the first working telephone but with a transmitter suspiciously similar to Grays.

DONNA
DONNA
13 years ago

THIS MESSAGE IS TI SKEPTIC DARWINIAN, YOU SAY LEAVE IT TO THE BANKS THATS WHAT THEY DO IS MANAGE MONEY , THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DOING SO WELL LATELY, I WOULDN'T TRUST THEM WITH A PIGGY BANK LET ALONE ANY MORE THAN THAT, ALL THEY DID WITH THE BAIL OUT MONEY IN MY OPTION WAS A TOTAL WASTE , TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS WENT TO PAYING PEOPLE OFF , YOUR STATEMENT WAS CORRECT IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHEN BANKS FIRST WERE FIRST OPENED, WAY BEFORE ANY OF OUR TIMES, THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSE TO DO,
HOWEVER THEY WOULD RATHER STEAL FROM YOU , THAN HAVE YOU OWE THEM .

Alex
Alex
13 years ago

Oh man ! what a bull***! so what then ?

Austin Battenberg
Austin Battenberg
13 years ago

I agree with a lot of things....but honestly, having the government print the money themselves is no better then the Federal Reserve doing it. If a currency isn't backed by something, what value does it hold other then the number on the paper? I'm not saying it has to be gold or silver, i once heard someone mention a basket of commodities, but it should definitely NOT be fiat.

Honestly, how about we just legalize competition, and let the chips fall where they may. The people choose the currency they want to trade in, whether it be gold, paper money, or whatever commodity they like. We shouldn't give the power to create money to ANY entity, whether it be a private corporation like the Federal Reserve, or a government that has failed in everything it has tried to do. The power to manipulate currency is too much power to wield.

The Scarlet Onion
The Scarlet Onion
13 years ago

@Bill
Thanks for the indepth comentery on the Feds status as governmental instrument or quasi-governmental instrument. To simplify for the laymen / wheel barrow pusher - Government has opted to protect itself from prosecution in financial matters by creating the Fed as a quasi-governmental instrument and promoted global marketing by doing so. The draw back is that none of the Feds elected officials appear to be inditable for their actions / lack of action. The Founding Fathers removed one aristocracy and created another. The Fed. You would have to google for a couple of hours to even find the names of those officials at the height of the economic crisis, circa 2007. There were only 5 sitting Fed officers at that time. Their power is absolute. The media only ever mentions their front man and never addresses the other board members. Al Greenspan and Ben Bernanky? Manipulation of interest rates appears publicaly to be their soul responsability. Their true responsabilitie being the oversite of all banks that are members of the Federal banking system. Who could have imagined that bailing out the banks would actually work? The Fed? Apparently the board members are elected by the President / Obama this time.
So much for a seperation of government branches. Now that most of those banks and other companies have paid most of their debt back in record time no doubt, thanks to the lowest interest rates in recorded history. The American people actually gained from loss. Unfortunatley they may never understand that it was George Bush Junior and the Republican party that elected or re-established Al Greenspan and company. We may never know their actions / inactions behind the sceens. They may never be held accountable for any actions whatsoever. Bernie Madeoff will have to do. One would think that they should be held accountable for their actions regardless of their status of quasi-governmental instrument or not. Their responsability is reflected in CEO. positions of private sector companies who suffered no losses due to their golden parachute clauses. It starts with government officials being held accountable. This sets the tone and policy of the private sector. Unfortunatley the public has never known where the buck stops or who to hold responsible since King George in the revolutionary war of independance.
-----------------------------------------------------------
@All
The last 20 years have demonstrated economic crisses in a global glut situation. Any body who lived through WWII. should remember rationing and the great depression. Today with global marketing and a glut of consumable products we are still haveing economic crisses. This is due inevitably to the one true obstuction to the 'ends of goverment' since time began. The people. Greed unfortunatley is a very humane trait. Untetherd greed is selfdestructive and will implode upon itself. Education is the onlyway to avoid it. Watch the Documentry and make sure every one else does so that they can make more informed decissions as to their next vote. Any easy decisions are just that, easy decisions. It easy to say that this documentry should be a part of all kids education.

WE MUST DISSENT!
WE MUST DISSENT!
13 years ago

THIS IS FACTUAL, HISTORICALLY SOUND a wonderful WONDERFUL movie....and ALL America should revolt & INSIST on taking down the centralized fractional bankers, STOP THE PRIVATELY OWNED money changers, poverty, THE MILITARY Industrial Complex & their murderous PERPETUAL profit making WARS! & OPEN STATE chartered banks NATIONWIDE SPREAD THE NEWS!!!!! Factual until the end...Thomas Edison DID NOT INVENT the electric light bulb or anything economically effective in yesterdays or todays world....NIKOLA TESLA DID! come on Still you know this....why would you perpetuate THE LIE? Teslas technology is suppressed FREE WIRELESS energy for all....this bit about Edison PROMOTES the lies, re-written history of OUR TESLA and gives credit to Edison, Ford etc & their FOR PROFIT system? thats like promoting Rockefeller or Morgan etc?????? YES virtually free energy for ALL the planet THIS WE OWE to Nikola Tesla! BUT we do not have it because the EDISON technology FATTENS THE POCKETS of the Globalist POWERS THAT BE Puppet Masters....JUST LIKE Dorothy WE HAVE THE KEY, find the TRUTH, SPREAD THE WORLD and kill THE BEAST....THE MONEY MASTERS! NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN! CORRUPTION and murder ABOUNDS! ARE WE NEXT! Almighty GOD FORBID IT! VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!!!

ReligionIsntAllBad
ReligionIsntAllBad
13 years ago

One of the main problems in the US is that lending institutions were basically given insurance on their debts. So the private system which is being criticized normally does (arguably) a decent job of weeding out who should get a loan and be good debt, and who will not get a loan because they seem risky.

Then along comes the trusted and helpful government, who says to the financial institutions "Hey, we will guarantee those bad loans you normally wouldn't make ... so go ahead and make them anyway."

So in this scenario, how does turning the privatized part of the system public solve anything? The public part is in many ways what messed up the private part from working properly! Central banks are private for a reason, and it is not necessarily the evil intentions of a global banking elite (although to say there is NO corruption of course is also foolish). The public cannot all of a sudden vote for a "hand out money to everyone" day, which although popular could be disasterous to the capital in the capitalist system.

ReligionIsntAllBad
ReligionIsntAllBad
13 years ago

The documentary presents a lot of great historical facts about the US banking system; however, I think it falls fairly short in properly diagnosing the actual issues of the US (and world) economy. Are there robber barons in a corrupt system? Oh yes ... there certainly are. Are they the cause of the financial crisis of the times, not exactly and not as presented. Economic bubbles eventually burst. If your government is engaged in fiscal policy that promotes bubbles, for instance by backing lending institutions so that they can make poor lending decisions with federally insured funds ... well eventually the market is going to have to correct itself to represent the actual economic situation. As individuals, and as a nation, you cannot sustainably live beyond your means. It seems too simple to be the explanation, right?

As far as proposed solutions. Having your nation NEVER be able to use credit is probably not the best idea. Credit can be incredibly effective at smoothing out economic bumps ... obviously it can also be misused, and so here we are :)

Why not just issue debt-free currency? The government could just start paying all federal employees in newly printed cash, I suppose. Immediate devaluation of the US dollar would be one overwhelming reason not to do that. I am skeptical of the merit of directly devaluing your currency while running a trade deficit ... perhaps if the US declares war on China, paying off our debts with newly minted money would be a great way to say "I dare you to push the red button"

Ozzy
Ozzy
13 years ago

I've been reading widely and trying to sort much of this stuff out for years now. This is the first time I have come across financial issues sorted out so well and in a way that puts so much in realistic perspective so well. This is the message that needs to be spread. Not spread like manure, as is the counter propoganda, but as revelation shining a bit of light on dark, abusive practices.
If you are wishing to understand the financial issues of our times and to understand historically the role of finance on the world stage, then - and I do not hesitate to use the cliche expression - THIS IS A MUST WATCH.
At one hour fifty minutes it might seem a slow watch, but in that time you stand to gain more than I have gained in extensive readings lately in economic theory and through several basic economics courses. In other words playing on a cheap pun, the time spent will earn you compound interest.
watch and think and learn

Swineflu Avenger
Swineflu Avenger
13 years ago

This was one of the most contradictory docs I've ever seen. At once it was both dull & boring, but yet was also informative, interesting and most fascinating of tales. While I could only watch it in 30 minute intervals, it is an amazing piece and is a MUST SEE for anyone interested in our economic crisis. It has made me a convert to the "Money Masters Solutions".

Daniel
Daniel
13 years ago

Really a great documentary.... Very enlightening. Its great to see what Jefferson and Lincoln really wanted for our country. Its also nice to see that there is an alternative to our current broken monetary system.

Bill
Bill
13 years ago

The following pertains to the Federal Reserve Banks and the Federal Reserve Act.

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
1. United States
There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act, but critical factor is existence of federal government control over "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of an entity. . . .

2. United States
Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Tort Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations in light of fact that direct supervision and control of each bank is exercised by board of directors, federal reserve banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks, banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations nor as "mixed ownership" corporations; federal reserve banks receive no appropriated funds from Congress and the banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own names. . . .

In enacting the Federal Tort Claims Act, Congress provided a limited waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States for certain torts of federal employees. . . . Specifically, the Act creates liability for injuries "caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission" of an employee of any federal agency acting within the scope of his office or employment. . . . "Federal agency" is defined as:

the executive departments, the military departments, independent establishments of the United States, and corporations acting primarily as instrumentalities of the United States, but does not include any contractors with the United States.

28 U.S.C. Sect. 2671. The liability of the United States for the negligence of a Federal Reserve Bank employee depends, therefore, on whether the Bank is a federal agency under Sect. 2671.

[1,2] There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within the meaning of the Act, but the critical factor is the existence of federal government control over the "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of that entity. . . . Other factors courts have considered include whether the entity is an independent corporation . . ., whether the government is involved in the entity’s finances. . . ., and whether the mission of the entity furthers the policy of the United States, . . . Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purpose of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.

Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank’s nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. Sect. 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. Sect. 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activites include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. Sub-Sect. 341-361. . . .

It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks

It is proposed that the Government shall retain sufficient power over the reserve banks to enable it to exercise a direct authority when necessary to do so, but that it shall in no way attempt to carry on through its own mechanism the routine operations and banking which require detailed knowledge of local and individual credit and which determine the funds of the community in any given instance. In other words, the reserve-bank plan retains to the Government power over the exercise of the broader banking functions, while it leaves to individuals and privately owned institutions the actual direction of routine. . . .

For these reasons we hold that the Reserve Banks are not federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and we affirm the judgment of the district court. ______________________________________________________________________

I almost forgot to mention the following, which clearly shows how the government has a double standard, which allows private controlled Federal Banks to evade paying State Taxes.

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
“The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston v. Commissioner of Corporations & Taxation, 499 F.2d 60 (1st Cir. 1974). . . .

State taxation has traditionally been viewed as a greater obstacle to an entity's ability to perform federal functions than exposure to judicial process; therefore tax immunity is liberally applied. Federal Land Bank v. Priddy, 295 U.S. 229, 235, 55 S. Ct. 705, 708, 79 L. Ed. 1408 (1955). Federal tort liability, however, is based on traditional agency principles and thus depends upon the principal's ability to control the actions of his agent, and not simply upon whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . .”

It now appears there is two conflicting laws.

1. Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities of the government for
purposes of immunity from State taxation.

2. Reserve Banks are not deemed to be federal instrumentalities of the government, for
purposes of Federal tort Liability.
________________________________________________________________________

The two aforementioned laws make it very clear that Congress can create independent agencies which can be declared as federal instrumentalities of the government, which act as agents on the governments behalf. These said laws also makes it very clear that Congress has granted the government “immunity” from all liability pertaining to actions of the independent agencies, which were created to aid them in the conducting of their business.

The creation of these laws clearly show how Congress can manipulate the laws to mean whatever they want them to mean whenever they deem it necessary to do so. Congress needs to revise these laws. Reserve Banks are either independent agencies which act as agents on the government’s behalf -or- Reserve Banks are not independent agencies which act as agents on the government’s behalf.

In other words, Reserve Banks are either part of the executive branch of government, which has the lawful authority to act on the government’s behalf -or- Reserve Banks are privately owned and locally controlled independent corporations (agencies) acting unconstitutionally on behalf of the government.

Several recent Supreme Court separations of powers decisions have noted that there are three, and only three, distinct branches of government; 'independent' agencies, therefore, either are in one of the three branches or they are unconstitutional. See Symposium on Administrative Law, The Uneasy Constitutional Status of Administrative Agencies, 36 AM. U.L. REV. 276 (forthcoming 1987). . . .

Congress also needs to revise the laws pertaining to quasi-governmental agencies.

The Attorney General has stated:
“Agencies have no inherent lawmaking powers. They are not creatures of the Constitution. . . . .This means we should abandon the idea that there are such things as 'quasi- legislative' or 'quasi-judicial' functions that can be properly delegated to independent agencies or bodies. . . . .[F]ederal agencies performing executive functions are themselves properly agents of the executive. They are not 'quasi' this, or 'independent' that.”

Address by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, Federal Bar Association, Detroit,
Mich. Sept. 13, 1985).

The reason I mentioned quasi-government.
Congress created a quasi-government for one purpose and one purpose only, which is to
allow the government to circumvent the law by the creation of a new harbinger management era where the purported artificial barriers between the governmental and private sectors can be breached as a matter of principle” Rather than by law.

Report for Congress Order Code RL30533
“Time will tell whether the emergence of the quasi government is to be viewed
as a symptom of decline in our democratic government, or a harbinger of a new,
creative management era where the purported artificial barriers between the
governmental and private sectors are breached as a matter of principle”
(Re: summary Section)

In other words when Congress created a quasi-government, they allowed the government to go beyond the Rule of Law and circumvent the very intent and purpose of the Bill Of Rights.

“Our Bill Rights curbs all three branches of government. It subjects all departments of government to a rule of law and sets boundaries beyond which no official may go.”….. Justice William O. Douglas. U.S. Supreme Court.

The framers of our Constitution warned that if legislative power were combined with executive power, or if legislative power were combined with judicial power, our republic would become an oligarchy and the rights of the people would be sacrificed to achieve the selfish ends of those who govern. _______Madison wrote, “(the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judicial, in the same hands, whether of one , few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elected, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Typically of the Federalists who advocated ratification of the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton explained that the separation of powers was “itself, in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, A BILL OF RIGHTS.” It would deny a single department autonomous governance. It would keep abuse of power in check by humbling those in government with the need to satisfy the dictates of competing power centers.

No more logical fallacy
No more logical fallacy
13 years ago

I think anyone watching this movie should temper their assumptions with a broader perspective, including history. This documentary is largely true, but the business about Andrew Jackson is bogus--the National Banks were not private, but National Banks--there was some corruption, as is related about the British flooding the U.S. early on with phony script. There is an excellent article from Ellen Brown that helps to describe the meaning of money as a relationship between buyer and seller. In the second article on her list at Global Research is the article describing how money is merely credit-- not debt.

That is the primary message of this movie--we don't need to pay 1000% interest to the actual private banking consortium (global Central Banking), and can instead issue credit for development of small businesses and industries in an actual free market (not the current British Monetary financial terrorism we see now).

While there are plenty of provocateurs that spew typically toxic poison "opinion" (worth nothing), the truth is that Lyndon LaRouche's superior historical understanding of the American System, the REAL American System, not the John Locke, Adam Smith mythology, is how we can get out of the current bankers trap.

Banks must be government controlled, not corporations who operate on a revolving door basis with Wall Street and British Loyalist banks, such as Goldman Sachs and the Jacob Rothschild Inter Alpha group of banking terrorists, who operate to create a One World Government of plutocrats and oligarchs who intend to reduce global population to maintain their obsession with power and control--psychopaths: See How does it feel knowing that psychopaths are doing "surgery" on your brain every day with the Collaborative Governance / Fascist / Marxist ideology?

Let's get back to being able to think historically, without the usual sophistry and logical fallacy, and learn to save our own butts. Also recommended is the American Inflation Association video series, particularly the latest, The End of Liberty.

Get ready by learning to grow your own food: Over 8 million died during the banker-caused depression when most were farmers who could grow their own food. Now, in idiotville and yuppieville, most Americans don't know how to plant a seed, let alone think their way out of a paper bag. Wake up and smell the fascism--there are ways out of mass chaos, inflation, etc. if enough people learn to THINK AGAIN. Remember, there is a difference between facts and opinions.... The former can help you make good decisions, the latter can get you in the gulag...

No more logical fallacy indeed. Time to educate ourselves out of slavery.

Heisenberg
Heisenberg
13 years ago

@ COOL E BEANS
Zero sum banking hmmm. Very interesting idea. Nice to see some forward thinking for once. Any thoughts on how we could implement it? Of course we would have to wake people out of the monetary trance they've been put under. That's a given.
I live in Denmark and there are a lot of changes happening in the next few years. Alternative energy is really taking a foothold and in 2012, we'll be going towards E-governance, which will be more of a participatory democracy instead of a representative one. Zero sum banking could be a nice addition to our advancements.
Last year, our government made a bail out of 12 billion dollars from our national bank. It may not sound like a lot, but with a population of only 6.5 million, it's extensive. But our national bank had to get money from somewhere.... that's right.... J.P. Morgen, Citigroup, Bank of America Merrill Lynch in exchange for CP's (Commercial papers). So maybe sometime in the future, banks will be buying up countries and literally ruling the world. Something has to happen.

Daniel
Daniel
13 years ago

Video has been removed :(

The Scarlet Onion
The Scarlet Onion
13 years ago

No, the elected members of the Federal Reserve are not the right people to have in charge but more than that, nobody should have the power to sell their own nation into slavery through debt without facing dire consequances for their lack of responsability in their power to do so. The only way to stop this from ever happening again without tearing down the whole financial system is to get off the gold standard completley and hold all elected officials responsable for their actions, both government and private sector.

The Scarlet Onion
The Scarlet Onion
13 years ago

I agree that this documentry should be a part of every childes education and that it should be part of the standard educational system. To wit, I propose that standard dictionary deffinitions should also be updated. My suggestions for the following word deffinition updates would be as follows.

Capitalist: N/ Person that votes for a government that opperates on less than 10% of the workers/citizens paychecks per week(Other forms of government revenue aside).

Socialist: N/ Person that votes for a goverment that opperates on less than 35% of the workers/citizens paychecks per week.(Other forms of government revenue aside).

Communist: N/ Person that votes for a government that opperates on less than 90% of the workers/citizens paycheck per week.(Other forms of government revenue aside).

All of these systems of government are tried and true. Their only faults are to be found in the people that run them. They all have the same problem. The problem with governing the people is the "people". No, Stalin was not the right guy to have in charge of the first Communist country, nor was Hittler the best guy to have in charge of the first Sociaist country but he did cut the Kings/Emperors taxes in half and freed many people from the slavery of surfdome. Let's not beat around the bush. Educate the children and allow them to change the world with their votes. Get this documentry to all of the schools and let freedom reign?

Sporky
Sporky
13 years ago

"... obscured the original symbology" 0_o?

It's symbolism, numbnuts.

Failure, on basis of poor copy-editing.

angeo
angeo
13 years ago

Awesome documentary. Wonderful historical journey through our financial history as a nation, and what is the root cause of our financial struggles. Thanks, and keep up the good work.

The Scarlet Onion
The Scarlet Onion
13 years ago

@skeptic_darwinian
You should re read Darwins Theory of Evolution. Homosapien/the Wise one was the only one who could overcome the "law of the Jungle" ie. "Only the fittest of the fittest shall survive". He could plan for the future and overcome any physical inability by doing so.
@all
Government issued none debt bearing money can be held responsable to the people that issue it. 7 governers of the Federal Reserve are suposed to be held resonsable but at the height of the "Recession!" there were only 5 who chose to throw "Bernie Madeoff" at the unknowing public. The fact that they have not been held responsable for "Madeoffs" offences tells me that they have failed in their jobs and should be fired. No confidence in a system that has no body held responsable is a direct consiquence of their actions.
Bin Laden has cornerd the Gold Market? Through proxies etc. and that is why we can't catch him. We sold that gold to him and over valued it for our own greed. We must bring back the "Green Back", cut the value of gold in half and force Bin Ladens' proxies to hand him over.
There is not enough gold in the world to back the worlds current population demand? It is overvalued. Even bankers can understand this simple supply and demand economics.
Just as the Romans did years ago, all countries by necessity must return to "Fiat" monetary sytems in which the elected officials are held resonsable for the issueing of said monies. This is common sence economics.
Let's get it done, never again should mankind be chained to a commdity of such limited supply.

Krista
Krista
13 years ago

@ skeptic_darwinian :
You sound like a typical ignorant American who thinks their society is the only working society (I have no problem with Americans, just those that are completely ignorant). I bet you even believed the media when they told you the current economic downfall was over.. lol....

Your dismissal of this video without even backing up ur ideas just proves how irrational you are. If you had a mind of your own u would have taken a moment too consider the points that are being put forward. You have your own brain.. why do you let the government and media control your ideas?

Our society is NOT perfect and should NOT be left alone! Absolute power corrupts absolute, and if everyone in our community was as passive and uneducated, as u seem too be, we would all be taken advantage of.

Cool E Beans
Cool E Beans
13 years ago

A MESSAGE TO ALL.

The United States Government is doing the only thing that they know how to do right now. Since all money is debt this means that all the money in your wallet and bank are somebody's principle from their loans either business or personal. When you take out a loan, only the principle is created but not the interest. You get the interest to pay back your loan from somebody elses principle making them short. The US Government borrows as much money as they can to create principle that is not being paid back and spending that money into the economy making it possible for more people to pay back their loans to their banks. Some still fall short.

When you buy stuff, that money circulates throughout the economy. When you make a payment to your bank on your loan, that money does not circulate but only retires your loan. At some point you will have paid out of the economy an amount of money equal to the principle amount you borrowed. From that point forward, all payments that you make are sourced from someone elses available principle that is still circulating in the economy. The US Government is not really 12 trillion dollars in debt but closer to 80 trillion if all monies are accounted for.

A real solution, instead of the one proposed by this documentary, is for banking to become automatic in the real sence that nobody owns it and it doesn't make any profits whatsoever. What I mean is that it would be a computer program similar to Quicken or Microsoft Money in that it is only there to calculate the pluses and minuses of everybodies finances.

When you take out a loan for your house, it would be approved based on a percentage of your income available to pay back the loan. The principle and interest would both be created at the same time. The seller would get the principle and the government would get the interest. The government would then have money to spend back into the economy for whatever it spends it on now. All of the money you need to pay back your loan would exist within the economy and if you paid back early, there would be extra money in the economy left unattached. This would also mean that the government wouldn't need any tax dollars from any citizen or business directly, it would all come from the interest created from business and personal loans.

I call this system "Zero Sum Banking". This is also the logical first step towards the Venus Project as those who pay back their loans early would be leaving excess money in the economy, people would eventually realize that they don't need cash. It would become cumbersome to have to use money at all and we could actually go as fully mechanized with our manufacturing as possible. I would like to visit the fully automated restaurant in Germany or just wait until they make them where I live :).

Looking to the future...B

littleplanet
littleplanet
13 years ago

Interesting arguments...
I must admit the doc puts forth some stuff that rekindles a bit of hope for cities, states, regions and countries that literally cannot afford themselves.
(case in point - how many college grads will wind up paying 3 or 4 times more than their degree was actually worth?)
Defaulting along the way not from deadbeat sloth, but from lack of income due to lack of jobs due to lousy planning (or outright conniving and predation by financial "industries")

I imagine there will be considerable hysteria surrounding the painful midwifery required for such a difficult birth as debt-free money creation - lord, just look at what goes on with feeble attempts to embrace some idea of universal healthcare entitlement! Yep - that's the correct e-word. Any society that doesn't consider this an actual human right would no doubt sell granny for dogfood.
But considering that money is more sacred than manna from heaven (more easily manipulated, don'tcha know) we should have a good old-fashioned fundamentalist (emphasis on mental) free-for-all (an ironic term, I know) get the business over with, and see what can be done with the mess of debt the past three decades hath wrought.
good luck to us all.............