Category Archives: Global Economy

Pertinent to global economic issues and events.

The Great Unraveling—Entering Stage Two

There has been very little recognition of the Debt/Growth Imperative that is built into our global system of money, banking, and finance. As I have been preaching for many years, the creation of money as interest-bearing debt requires that indebtedness, in either the private sector or the public sector, must be continually increased at an accelerating rate in order for the system to continue to function. When the private sector is fully “loaned up,” government must step in as “the borrower of last resort.” That was clearly manifested in the latest bubble-bust cycle with the massive bank bailouts and the assumption by governments of enormous amounts of their “toxic debt.”

The aggregate debt burden is destined to ultimately become unbearable, and no amount of government or central bank intervention can save this flawed system (such is the nature of exponential growth). The fiscal crisis that is now confronting national governments around the world signals the imminent collapse. How that will play out is difficult to assess, but it behoove us to use our available resources to enhance the resilience of our communities and build new systems that can be relied on to provide the things we need in order to thrive and build a world that works for all.

One prominent commentator who “gets it” is Chris Martenson. His recent observations (below) are worth considering.—t.h.g.

The Breakdown Draws Near

Tuesday, April 19, 2011, 12:22 pm, by Chris Martenson

Things are certainly speeding up, and it is my conclusion that we are not more than a year away from the next major financial and economic disruption.

Alas, predictions are tricky, especially about the future (credit: Yogi Berra), but here’s why I am convinced that the next big break is drawing near.

In order for the financial system to operate, it needs continual debt expansion and servicing. Both are important. If either is missing, then catastrophe can strike at any time. And by ‘catastrophe’ I mean big institutions and countries transiting from a state of insolvency into outright bankruptcy. [emphasis added]

In a recent article, I noted that the IMF had added up the financing needs of the advanced economies and come to the startling conclusion that the combination of maturing and new debt issuances came to more than a quarter of their combined economies over the next year. A quarter!

I also noted that this was just the sovereign debt, and that state, personal, and corporate debt were additive to the overall amount of financing needed this next year. Adding another dab of color to the picture, the IMF has now added bank refinancing to the tableau, and it’s an unhealthy shade of red: Banks face $3.6 trillion “wall” of maturing debt: IMF

Read the rest of Martenson’s post here.

#     #     #

Money, “Free Trade” and “the China Problem”

Professor Antal Fekete is an expert on the real bills doctrine and the gold standard. He is someone whose knowledge and insights I respect. This article, which appears on the SilverSeek.com website, draws important parallels between the opium wars of the 18th and 19th centuries and the current trade imbalance between the west (especially the US) and China. It’s the same game of looting but with somewhat different details.

While I don’t agree that a new gold standard is the solution, I recommend Prof, Fekete’s article because it provides the kind of historical perspective that is necessary for understanding what is really going on between China and the west. Rather than a gold standard, I think the world needs an objective, non-political standard of value based on a defined assortment of basic commodities. That is something I’ve written about in all of my books.–t.h.g.

Silver and Opium

By: Professor Antal E. Fekete

— Posted 16 February, 2011 Source: SilverSeek.com

The opium wars do not belong to the glorious episodes of Western history. Rather, they were instances of shameful behavior the West still has not lived down. Mercantilist governments resented the perpetual drain of silver from West to East in payment for Oriental goods (tea, silk, porcelain) that were in high demand in the Occident, facing low demand in the Orient for Occidental goods. From the mid-17th century more than 9 billion Troy ounces or 290 thousand metric tons of silver was absorbed by China from European countries in exchange for Chinese goods.

The British introduced opium along with tobacco as an export item to China in order to reduce their trade deficit. Under the disguise of free trade, the British, the Spanish and the French with the tacit approval of the Americans continued sending their contraband to China through legitimate as well as illegitimate trade channels even after the Chinese dynasty put an embargo on opium imports. Because of its strong appeal to the Chinese masses, and because of its highly addictive nature, opium appeared to be the ideal solution to the West’s trade problem. And, indeed, the flow of silver was first stopped, and then reversed. China was forced to pay silver for her addiction to opium smoking that was artificially induced by the pusher: the British.

Thus silver was replaced by opium as the mainstay of Western exports. In 1729 China, recognizing the growing problem of addiction and the debilitating and mind-corrupting nature of the drug, prohibited the sale and smoking of opium; allowing only a small quota of imports for medicinal purposes. The British defied the embargo and ban on opium trade, and encouraged smuggling. As a result, British exports of opium to China grew from an estimated 15 tons to 75 by 1773. This increased further to 900 tons by 1820; and to 1400 tons annually by 1838 — an almost 100-fold increase in 100 years.

Something had to be done. The Chinese government introduced death penalty for drug trafficking, and put British processing and distributing facilities on Chinese soil under siege. Chinese troops boarded British ships in international waters carrying opium to Chinese ports and destroyed their cargo, in addition to the destruction of opium found on Chinese territory. The British accused the Chinese of destroying British property, and sent a large British-Indian army to China in order to exact punishment.

British military superiority was clearly evident in the armed conflict. British warships wreaked havoc on coastal towns. After taking Canton the British sailed up the Yangtze River. They grabbed the tax barges, inflicting a devastating blow on the Chinese as imperial revenues were impossible to collect. In 1842 China sued for peace that was concluded in Nanking and ratified the following year. In the treaty China was forced to pay an indemnity to Britain, open four port cities where British subjects were given extraterritorial privileges, and cede Hong Kong to Britain. In 1844 the United States and France signed similar treaties with China.

These humiliating treaties were criticized in the House of Commons by William E. Gladstone, who later served as Prime Minister. He was wondering “whether there had ever been a war more unjust in its origin, a war more calculated to cover Britain with permanent disgrace.” The Foreign Secretary, Lord Palmerston replied that nobody believed that the Chinese government’s motive was “the promotion of good moral habits”, or that the war was fought to stem China’s balance of trade deficit. The American president John Quincy Adams chimed in during the debate by suggesting that opium was a “mere incident”. According to him “the cause of the war was the arrogant and insupportable pretensions of China that she would hold commercial intercourse with the rest of mankind not upon terms of equal reciprocity, but upon the insulting and degrading forms of the relations between lord and vassal.” These words are echoed, 160 years later, by president Obama’s recent disdainful pronouncements to the effect that China’s exchange-rate policy is unacceptable to the rest of mankind as it pretends that China’s currency is that of the lord, and everybody else’s is that of the vassal.

The peace of Nanking did not last. The Chinese searched a suspicious ship, and the British answered by putting the port city of Canton under siege in 1856, occupying it in 1857. The French also entered the fray. British troops were approaching Beijing and set on to destroy the Summer Palace. China again was forced to sue for peace. In the peace treaty of Tianjin China yielded to the demand to create ten new port cities, and granted foreigners free passage throughout the country. It also agreed to pay an indemnity of five million ounces of silver: three million to Britain and two million to France.

This deliberate humiliation of China by the Western powers contributed greatly to the loosening and ultimate snapping of the internal coherence of the Qing Dynasty, leading to the Taiping Rebellion (1850-1864), the Boxer Uprising (1899-1901) and, ultimately, to the downfall of the Qing Dynasty in 1912.

The present trade dispute between the U.S. and China is reminiscent of the background to the two Opium Wars. Once more, the issue is the humiliation and plunder of China as a “thank you” for China’s favor of having provided consumer goods for which the West was unable to pay in terms of Western goods suitable for Chinese consumption. The only difference is the absence of opium in the dispute.

Oops, I take it back. The role of opium in the current dispute is played by paper. Paper dollars, to be precise. In 1971 an atrocity was made that I call the Nixon-Friedman conspiracy. To cover up the shame and disgrace of the default of the U.S. on its international gold obligations, Milton Friedman (following an earlier failed attempt of John M. Keynes) concocted a spurious and idiotic theory of floating exchange rates. It suggests that falling foreign exchange value of the domestic currency makes it stronger when in actual fact the opposite is true: it is made weaker as the terms of trade of the devaluing country deteriorates and that of its trading partners improves. Nixon was quick to embrace the false theory of Friedman. No public debate of the plan was permitted then, or ever after. Under the new dispensation the irredeemable dollar was to play the role of the ultimate extinguisher of debt, a preposterous idea. The scheme was imposed on the world under duress as part of the “new millennium”, shaking off the “tyranny of gold”, that “barbarous relic”, the last remnant of superstition, the only remaining “anachronism of the Modern Age”. The ploy was played up and celebrated as a great scientific breakthrough, making it possible for man to shape his own destiny rationally, free of superstition, for the first time ever. Yet all it was a cheap trick to elevate the dishonored paper of an insolvent banker (the U.S.) from scum to the holy of holies: international currency. The fact that fiat paper money has a history of 100 percent mortality was neatly side-stepped. Any questioning of the wisdom of experimenting with is in spite of logic and historical evidence was declared foggy-bottom reactionary thinking.

The amazing thing about this episode of the history of human folly was the ease with which it could be pushed down the throat of the rest of the world, including those nations that were directly hurt by it, such as the ones running a trade surplus with the U.S. Their savings went up in smoke. The explanation for this self-destructing behavior is the addictive, debilitating and mind-corrosive nature of paper money, in direct analogy with that of opium. The high caused by administering the opium pipe to the patient (read: administering QE) had to be repeated when the effect faded by a fresh administration of more opium (read: more QE2).

If the patient resists, like China did in 1840, then a holy opium war must be declared on it in the name of the right of others to free trade. 170 years later a New China once more demurred against the paper-torture treatment it was subjected to by the American debt-mongers and opium pushers.

But beware: if the West starts another Opium War, this time it is not China that will be on the losing side.

Reference: Opium Wars, Wikipedia, June 29, 2010.

UN Secretary-General urges sustainable development and equality

UN News Service. 15 February 2011 –Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called for a “revolution” in how the world defines prosperity and relates to nature, based on the twin pillars of a sustainable development that breaks with the profligacy of the past and an equality that embraces empowerment for all.

“We need to reinvent what we mean by progress,” he told students and faculty at the University of San Marcos in Lima, Peru, where he received an honorary doctorate. “For most of the last century, the world burned its way to prosperity. We believed in consumption without consequences.

“Those days are gone. In the 21st century, supplies are running short and the global thermostat is running high. The old models are not just obsolete, they are dangerous.”

In an address that reprised some of the major themes he elaborated in a speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last month, Mr. Ban stressed the global nature of the challenges and the need for a global, multi-national response.

“We are living in an era of transformation, of sweeping changes in the global landscape, with new economic powers emerging, disasters striking with greater force, the impacts of climate change growing ever clearer, drug trafficking and organized crime syndicates that at times seem capable of outgunning legitimate police forces,” he declared.

“Today’s challenges have global reach. No single country or group, however powerful, can deal with them alone. We must work in common cause not just as a matter of pragmatic burden-sharing, though that is reason enough. We must find common solutions because we share a common future.”

He noted that Peru and Latin America as a whole can see the consequences of climate change with Andean glaciers melting and sea levels rising, potentially disrupting the ecosystem of the Galápagos and threatening the very existence of some Caribbean nations. “Climate change leads us down a path that no longer works – a path of the past. We need to build paths to the future. That means de-coupling greenhouse gas emissions from economic growth through energy efficiency,” he said.

But the second pillar of the required revolution is also vital. “We cannot talk about sustainability without talking about equality,” Mr. Ban said, noting that as the fastest growing country in South America Peru has made impressive progress toward such Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as reducing poverty, providing better access to primary education, and making advances in income distribution.

“At the same time, let us remember: inequality is not just a question of how much of the proverbial pie one has; it is about ensuring that all are involved in the baking and all can share in the feast. Participation and social cohesion are crucial parts of the picture.”

That entails empowering farmers’ organizations and civil society groups, consulting indigenous people on land issues, and empowering Latin America’s women, with fighting violence against girls and women a priority, he added.

“At the same time, for vast sectors of the region’s population, especially young people, democratic and macro-economic stability has not translated into tangible improvements in their daily lives,” he stressed. “Social cohesion is firmly on the agenda. But it remains to be seen whether reforms can happen fast enough. “Indeed, we should worry about the slow pace of change. We should all be concerned when people say they would sacrifice democracy for economic and social progress. It is not just possible to have both – in the long run, it is essential.”

At an earlier news conference after talks with President Alan García, Mr. Ban praised Peru’s efforts in trans-Pacific integration, in addressing climate change and in closing the digital divide as “examples that provide lessons for all nations.”

Inflation Will Destroy the Dollar

Porter Stansberry is a noted financial advisor with a very good track record and a substantial worldwide following. The final part of this video is a pitch to subscribe to his advisory service, but the first part comprises an excellent analysis of the current situation and what I think is the most plausible prognosis. His argument is well developed and based on solid facts. I urge you to watch it: http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/WPSIM104/PR

If you close the browser window or tab while it is playing, you’ll have the option to go to the written transcript. In either case, pay close attention to the startling charts that make a strong case that hyper-inflation is looming on the horizon.

Some writers have been arguing that deflation, rather than inflation, is the more likely prospect, but that case us built upon a misapplication of term “deflation” and an incomplete consideration of the pertinent factors. In reality, it is not an either-or situation.

Strictly speaking, both inflation and deflation are monetary phenomena. As I’ve said before, when speaking about inflation, one must distinguish between currency inflation and price inflation. Price inflation or the cost of living can be affected by a number of causes, but the usual and primary cause is currency inflation, that is the debasement of a currency by the monetary authorities by creating money on an unsound basis, notably, the monetization of government debt. Deflation is the opposite of inflation; it is the contraction of the overall money supply by the banking system.

That’s not what we’ve been seeing. The overall money supply has been increasing—inflation. However, the money has not been going to the private productive sector but to the public sector (government) to use for bank bailouts, weapons and wars, expansion of the national security state, and extension of imperial dominance around the world, all of which are wasteful and useless. The bad debts that were created during the latest (real estate) bubble have not been written off, they have for the most part simply been taken over by the government. People who serve within those realms benefit from the inflation, they have plenty of money to spend, but the productive sector is being starved for money and credit.

Businesses often depend upon bank financing for working capital. When banks are unwilling to provide it, they are bankrupted and workers lose their jobs. Hence we have both currency inflation and depression at the same time. It’s as if there were a huge counterfeiting ring using bogus money to gobble up a large proportion of the available goods and services from the market. Counterfeiters only take; they do not put anything of value into the market. Hence, as real value is drained from the economy, sellers raise prices in order to compensate for the increased supply of money. Meanwhile, those who find themselves among the army of the unemployed are willing to take less pay for whatever work they can find in order to acquire basic necessities of life.

As the government and monetary authorities continue with their wrong-headed “stimulus” measures, they simply make matters worse, assuring the eventual destruction of the dollar as a reliable measure of value and US government bonds as a safe store of value.

None of the proposals now on the table in Congress or the financial press will solve the dilemma. As I argued in my recent article, The World’s Ominous Reckoning, that appeared in Reality Sandwich, The problem is structural and systemic. The system is designed to create debt, and ever more of it. Like a pernicious cancer, debt is a parasite that is killing us, and in the end a parasite will die along with its host…. interest must be eliminated from the money system to put an end to the growth imperative.

[For more evidence of inflation and its effects in today’s economy, see also my previous blog post about inflation, Chris Martenson: Inflation Is So Much Worse Than We’re Told].

The World’s Ominous Reckoning

My latest article, The World’s Ominous Reckoning, is featured on Reality Sandwich. It was also excerpted and posted on the P2P Foundation blog.

For your convenience, I also post it here.

The World’s Ominous Reckoning

By Thomas H. Greco

In a recent Washington Post article titled Europe’s ominous reckoning [1], economist Robert Samuelson correctly argued that “Ireland’s economic crisis is … not about Ireland.” What he seems to not recognize is that “Europe’s ominous reckoning” is not about Europe.

The reckoning will be global because the money and banking regime is global — and deeply flawed.

Discussions about possible solutions to the debt crisis tend to degenerate into ideological bickering because ideologies provides an inadequate framework in which to understand the nature of the problem and discover real effective solutions. Fiscal conservatives want to cut social spending so as to avoid raising taxes on the rich and privileged class. Political liberals have largely caved in to the same interests because they think that supporting the privileged class’s agenda is their only hope of gaining power. They will pay lip service to a social agenda and throw a few crumbs to the masses in an attempt to get elected, but they will ultimately advance the same elitist agenda, as have Presidents Clinton and Obama. Progressives argue that budgets can be balanced by cutting the military budget and raising taxes on the rich, but they remain impotent because political power has been so thoroughly centralized that popular progressive agendas have not a prayer of being implemented. Even if they were, they would simply make matters worse because under the present money and banking regime, a balanced government budget is not possible. How can the debate move beyond ideologies, and common ground be found?

Samuelson, like almost all conventionally trained economists, blames the woes of Ireland, and every other country, on failures in policy. He says, “Most European economies suffer from the ill effects of some combination of easy money, unsustainable social spending and big budget deficits,” but he fails to address the deeper questions of why? Why has money been easy? Why is social spending unsustainable? Why have budget deficits been too big?

It is not only a problem of European economies, it is a problem for virtually all national economies. As Samuelson points out, even the most prosperous countries have accumulated enormous debts. The governments of Germany and France, for example, have, respectively, gross debts of 76 percent and 86 percent of GDP (GDP is a measure of total economic output). The debt of the United States government is projected to exceed 100% of GDP within the next couple of years. And this picture does not even include the debts of lower levels of government — states, counties, and municipalities — or all of the private sector debt that burdens companies and individuals.

If the world has become so prosperous and productive, why all this debt, and why does it continue to grow ever more rapidly?

It is not a matter of policy, i.e., how we operate a flawed system. The problem is structural and systemic. The system is designed to create debt, and ever more of it. Like a pernicious cancer, debt is a parasite that is killing us, and in the end a parasite will die along with its host. How much of our well-being shall we sacrifice to keep feeding this cancer? Are we willing to starve ourselves and our children, to endure cuts in spending for education and public services, to sacrifice our hard-won freedoms, in order to sustain a system that despoils the earth, destroys the social fabric,  and creates ever greater economic inequities?

A few have been calling for “debt forgiveness,” a remedy analogous to cancer surgery. That may be a good start, but even that does no go far enough. We can excise the cancer, but if we do not recognize and eliminate its fundamental cause it will simply grow back. We can restart the game of Monopoly, but the outcome of the next round will be very much like that of the previous round unless we change the rules — or choose to play a different game.

The fact is, there is a debt imperative that is built into the global system of money and banking, and debt is eating us alive. As I wrote in my first book more than 20 years ago, our money system, based as it is on banks’ lending money into circulation at compound interest, requires debt to grow with the passage of time. Virtually all of the money today is created when banks make “loans.” The compounding of interest on these loans means that debt must grow as time goes on, not slowly, but at an accelerating rate. Ever greater amounts of money must be borrowed into circulation for this system to continue. When the private sector debt can no longer be expanded, government assumes the role of “borrower of last resort.” That is why government budget deficits have become chronic and continue to grow. In the latest cycle of Bubble and Bust, governments are rescuing the banks by taking “toxic” debt off their hands and giving them government bonds in return. In this way, the system can be sustained a little bit longer, but at costs that have yet to be tallied.

The current global predicament is the late-stage symptom of this fundamental flaw. Every political currency collectivizes credit. It is our credit that supports each national currency. We have allowed the banks to control our credit and we pay them interest for the “privilege” of accessing some of it as bank “loans.”

What must be done? The answer is simple, but few have been willing to hear it: interest must be eliminated from the money system to put an end to the growth imperative. To modern economists, such a proposition is heresy, foolish even, unthinkable! Interest to them is an essential inducement to save and invest and a necessary means of regulating credit and the economy. Nonsense, I say, a gross error and delusion fostered by incessant propaganda, media hype, and financial mumbo-jumbo. In an economy that is free from inflation, preservation of one’s capital is sufficient motivation for saving, and return on productive investments can be had in the form of ownership shares (so-called equity investment) instead of interest on debt. Such equity investments share both the rewards and the risks inherent in a productive enterprise, making the relationship between the user of funds and the provider of funds more harmonious and fair. As for regulating credit, we don’t need interest to do that; we can merely decide to withhold or offer credit, to whom, for what purpose, and in what amounts.

We need to learn to play a different game. We need to organize an entirely new structure of money, banking, and finance, one that is interest-free, decentralized, and controlled, not by banks or central governments, but by businesses and individuals that associate and organize themselves into cashless trading networks. This is a way to reclaim “the credit commons” from monopoly control and create healthy community economies.

In brief, any group of traders can organize to allocate their own collective credit amongst themselves, interest-free. This is merely an extension of the common business practice of selling on open account — “I’ll ship you the goods now and you can pay me later,” except it is organized, not on a bilateral basis, but within a community of many buyers and sellers. Done on a large enough scale that includes a sufficiently broad range of goods and services spanning all levels of the supply chain from retail, to wholesale, to manufacturing, to basic commodities, such systems can avoid the dysfunctions inherent in conventional money and banking and open the way to more harmonious and mutually beneficial trading relationships that enable the emergence of sustainable economies and promote the common good.

This approach is no pie-in-the-sky pipe dream, it is proven and well established. Known as mutual credit clearing, it is a process that is used by scores of commercial “barter” companies around the world to provide cashless trading for their business members. In this process, the things you sell pay for the things you buy without using money as an intermediate exchange medium. It’s as simple as that. According to the International Reciprocal Trade Association (IRTA), a major trade association for the industry, “IRTA Member companies using the “Modern Trade and Barter” process, made it possible for over 400,000 companies World Wide to utilize their excess business capacities and underperforming assets, to earn an estimated $12 billion dollars in previously lost and wasted revenues.”

Perhaps the best example of a credit clearing exchange that has been successful over a long period of time is the WIR Economic Circle Cooperative. Founded in Switzerland as a self-help organization in 1934 in the midst of the Great Depression, WIR provided a means for its business members to trade with one another despite the shortage of official money in circulation. Over three-quarters of a century, in good time and bad, WIR has continued to thrive. Its more than 60,000 members throughout Switzerland trade about $2 billion worth of goods and services annually.

Yes, it is possible to transcend the dysfunctional money and banking system and to take back our power from bankers and politicians who use it to abuse and exploit us. We do it, not by petitioning politicians who are already bought and paid for by an ever more powerful elite group, but by using the power that is already ours to use the resources we have to support each other’s productivity and to give credit where credit is due.

#    #    #

The rise (and fall) of the global elite

Although it misses some of the fundamental phenomena that are at work in the world today, like resource depletion, environmental pollution, climate change, institutional breakdown, and the shift toward a steady-state, no-growth economy, this article from the Atlantic is worth a quick read (The Rise of the New Global Elite).

It highlights the growing gap between the super-rich and everyone else, pointing out the peculiar attitudes and rationalizations of the former and the apparent passivity of the latter.

In my opinion, the oligarchs and their minions give themselves far too much credit for their success. It may be true that they are clever, industrious, and hard-working, but so too are con men, embezzlers, and a goodly number of thieves and other criminals. Is it clever and industrious to appropriate for oneself (by force, intimidation, bribery, or manipulation), resources that are by nature the birthright of all (“the commons”), or to use one’s “insider” position to abuse a public trust? Far too many fortunes have been made that way.

The Atlantic article concludes “The lesson of history is that, in the long run, super-elites have two ways to survive: by suppressing dissent or by sharing their wealth. It is obvious which of these would be the better outcome for America, and the world. Let us hope the plutocrats aren’t already too isolated to recognize this.”

The thing that distinguishes a cancer cell from a normal cell is its alienation from the general body—from the “spirit,” if you will, that gives coherence in a living organism. A plutocracy that is alienated from the spirit of the community, like a cancerous tumor, cannot survive for long, it will eventually perish along with its host. –t.h.g.

Financial terrorism by bankers put Greece in the noose. Who is next?

Max Keiser interviews a Greek economist who explains how an artificial crisis was created  by banks and institutions to force Greece to accept IMF conditions. It is a pattern that is being repeated over and over.

Class war in America: Senator Bernie Sanders tells it as it is.

This is a video that every American must watch. In his amazing and courageous speech on the floor of the US Senate, Vermont senator Bernie Sanders plainly describes the war that is being waged against the middle class by the super-wealthy elite.

And while you’re at it, read his revelation about who got the bailout money: A Real Jaw Dropper at the Federal Reserve. It’s nothing short of wholesale looting of the American people by the banking establishment.

Here are some excerpts:

After years of stonewalling by the Fed, the American people are finally learning the incredible and jaw-dropping details of the Fed’s multi-trillion-dollar bailout of Wall Street and corporate America.

We have learned that the $700 billion Wall Street bailout signed into law by President George W. Bush turned out to be pocket change compared to the trillions and trillions of dollars in near-zero interest loans and other financial arrangements the Federal Reserve doled out to every major financial institution in this country. Among those are Goldman Sachs, which received nearly $600 billion; Morgan Stanley, which received nearly $2 trillion; Citigroup, which received $1.8 trillion; Bear Stearns, which received nearly $1 trillion, and Merrill Lynch, which received some $1.5 trillion in short term loans from the Fed.

Deutsche Bank, a German lender, sold the Fed more than $290 billion worth of mortgage securities. Credit Suisse, a Swiss bank, sold the Fed more than $287 billion in mortgage bonds.

When I first posted this item in December of 2010, I had embedded the video of Senator Sanders’ speech. That video has, for some reason unknown to me, been removed from YouTube. — t.h.g.

The International Commons Conference

The International Commons Conference held in Berlin, Germany, November 1 and 2, 2010 brought together 180 participants from 34 countries. The conference was sponsored by The Heinrich Böll Foundation and the Commons Strategies Group.

You can find a dossier of the conference highlights, including my six-minute speed presentation on Reclaiming the Credit Commons, here. There is also an ICC wiki, here.

For more information about the commons see the On The Commons website.

Coming Soon: World Government and Global Currency

I, along with many others, have been trying to raise awareness about what the global elites have planned for us. The article, A Global Central Bank, Global Currency & World Government, is Andrew Marshall’s recent offering on the subject.