BABYLON IS FALLEN

[paul's got wright 607]

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/grossly-incompetent-libor-scandal-banker-hands-50000-to-tory-party-10157558.html

you sure it's not called facism johnny?

I agree Paul I hate these swindling bank bastards too

 

The bankers simply did what they had a duty to do - work towards enhancing shareholder values.

 

The problem arose because Gordon Brown removed the regulation provided by the B o E and didn't replace it with anything else that was fit for purpose thereby allowing things to be done to enhance shareholder value that the B o E regulation would have prohibited.

 

The ROOT cause is probably the repeal of banking legislation in the US that allowed junk mortgages be issued and a good place to look to see the in's and out's of that starts with the repeal of the Glass - Steagall by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act. Trading in junk took on a life of its own until -----

 

The bankers were just the scorpions on the back of the frog in Aesop's fable.

 

and the gold x

[paul's got wright 607]

it seems down at iceland they think they can actually print money and use it for the greater good, i wonder what planet they are on? x

[gerrydandridge 570]

 

Banks don't "lend money" they facilitate YOUR credit..

 

Perhaps china will enlighten us all in his money thread about how banks never had the funds in the first place to be a true "lender", perhaps he should add that the creation of money starts with the signature on the agreement...

fuck off you are a total moron

 

Sorry Johnny if you ever had a mortgage then you are the true creditor, not the bank, this is the deception, all people that ever had a mortgage have had the wool pulled over their eyes.

In short the money is created by your signature of which is securitised in a financial instrument, you will know it as your mortgage agreement, they lead you to believe that they lend you money that they had prior to the agreement (fraud by deception), sorry they never had it, however they get you to pay back 3x the amount over 25 years of your slogging and hard work, you are the mug in this scenario I’m afraid...

 

They don't loan you anything, they are not the lender, they just facilitate a service, nothing more, they have no right to charge interest, perhaps a small admin charge at best.

 

I have empirical evidence of this, in an ongoing investigation; I am not talking shite...

 

Think loan or mortgage...think fraud!

[paul's got wright 607]

http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/04/04/vikings-revenge-iceland-takes-back-power-to-create-its-own-money/

[Gladys 6,264]

 

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/grossly-incompetent-libor-scandal-banker-hands-50000-to-tory-party-10157558.html

you sure it's not called facism johnny?

I agree Paul I hate these swindling bank bastards too

The bankers simply did what they had a duty to do - work towards enhancing shareholder values.

 

The problem arose because Gordon Brown removed the regulation provided by the B o E and didn't replace it with anything else that was fit for purpose thereby allowing things to be done to enhance shareholder value that the B o E regulation would have prohibited.

 

The ROOT cause is probably the repeal of banking legislation in the US that allowed junk mortgages be issued and a good place to look to see the in's and out's of that starts with the repeal of the Glass - Steagall by the GrammLeachBliley Act. Trading in junk took on a life of its own until -----

 

The bankers were just the scorpions on the back of the frog in Aesop's fable.

It was more complex than that Spook, but horrifying in the simplicity. The world's financial sector believed it could make money out of deals, no matter what sense the deals made, it was about turning deals, creating transactions.

 

Read The Big Short, the deals were underwritten and quickly became a gamble on the underwriting not the underlying transaction.

[Slim 1,355]

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-03-20/bank-england-admits-loans-come-first-…-and-deposits-follow

from the horses mouth johnny x

 

There's no secret or conspiracy here. This is how our economy works. It's based on the risk of the loans not being paid back. If you calculate that 90% of a loan will be paid, then you only need to hold the 10% for the ones that won't.

 

This isn't the same as 'creating money out of thin air'. Facilitating those loans isn't free, the banks have to hold expensive reserves, obtain licenses, satisfy regulators, employ staff, cover the risks of loan and find borrowers and depositors. This all comes at a cost.

 

Note that there are no bitcoin banks, you can't lend bitcoin as it cannot be leveraged in this way, and this is a problem. The economy wouldn't be able to operate without the liquidity this creates, this is what enables trade.

[Slim 1,355]

Sorry Johnny if you ever had a mortgage then you are the true creditor, not the bank, this is the deception, all people that ever had a mortgage have had the wool pulled over their eyes.

Where is the deception? Show it, show me where anyone has lied about how this works?

 

In short the money is created by your signature of which is securitised in a financial instrument, you will know it as your mortgage agreement, they lead you to believe that they lend you money that they had prior to the agreement (fraud by deception), sorry they never had it, however they get you to pay back 3x the amount over 25 years of your slogging and hard work, you are the mug in this scenario I’m afraid...

There is no deception here, as pauls link shows. That's a video from the Bank of England that explains how deposits aren't lent 1:1. This is the very basics of banking, there's no secret, the ratios of capital requirements are publicly available for you to read in the banking regulations. There is no secret, no conspiracy, no lie. This is simply how banking works, and it's open and transparent and not a fraud.

 

They don't loan you anything, they are not the lender, they just facilitate a service, nothing more, they have no right to charge interest, perhaps a small admin charge at best.

Nonsense. They loan you the cash you need to buy the house. That they didn't necessarily have all of it is immaterial. They have the means to cover the loan, and that's what matters. Money is trust, the house vendor got paid, the bank trusts in the value of the house to pay if the new owner can't. The banks shareholders trust in it's ability to recover the debt, so are satisfied with the amount of risk on the balance sheet.

 

Sometimes this goes out of wack, most notably in the early part of the century when securitised debt got out of hand. The regulations have changed and the captial requirements are greater, the risk is less.

 

None of this has anything to do with your signature, or your NAME. This is all to do with the risk of the value that's held in a property.

 

I have empirical evidence of this, in an ongoing investigation; I am not talking shite...

You are not talking shite, some of it is shite and some of it is true but not a secret and not a problem.

 

Think loan or mortgage...think fraud!

That's incorrect, unless you have proof.

[tameelf 112]

no body owns anything because every thing is registered

registration = fully surrendering that which is registered to another your kids your car your house and because you were also registered at birth you do not own your body slavery never ended

licence= permission to do something ilegal this makes all licence holders liesentious=intent to comit ilegal acts on a daily basis

since you were not given full disclosure at the moment you registered anything it becomes pro nunc tunc = null and void

 

registration of birth is the origional fraud you enter a bank with your fraudulent birth cert to obtain a fraudulent lone banks are not duped banks are in on the fraud in fact banks run the goverment

 

all use of anothers copywriten documentation WITHOUT PERMISSION is fraud thats the trap

[Mr. Sausages 6,362]

Don't you think it's pretty ironic that you want the protection of copyright and fraud laws?

[spook 1,340]

no body owns anything because every thing is registered

registration = fully surrendering that which is registered to another your kids your car your house and because you were also registered at birth you do not own your body slavery never ended

licence= permission to do something ilegal this makes all licence holders liesentious=intent to comit ilegal acts on a daily basis

since you were not given full disclosure at the moment you registered anything it becomes pro nunc tunc = null and void

 

registration of birth is the origional fraud you enter a bank with your fraudulent birth cert to obtain a fraudulent lone banks are not duped banks are in on the fraud in fact banks run the goverment

 

all use of anothers copywriten documentation WITHOUT PERMISSION is fraud thats the trap

 

 

Interesting to plug the word 'paranoia' into a search engine.

[guilty 64]

Not 'everything' is registered. I register some things so that I have proof they belong to me - e.g. house, car, children, firearms. Society provides me with an official guarantor to those registrations - the government - so that my ownership can be demonstrated with evidence. It's my security against being deprived of my lawful rights or property.

 

A licence is permission to do something that, without a licence, would be unlawful. Holding a licence is your defence against committing what would otherwise be illegal. Holding a licence is the exact opposite to 'intent to commit illegal acts on a daily basis' and it shows, in many cases, that you are trained, experienced and responsible. Would you wish to be treated by an unlicensed doctor, get a tattoo in an unlicensed tattoo parlour, travel with an unlicensed airline, have nuclear waste disposed of by an unlicensed waste company?

 

What copyrighted document are we using without permission?

[Slim 1,355]

all use of anothers copywriten documentation WITHOUT PERMISSION is fraud thats the trap

Not unless you can prove it. This is where your entire argument falls down. It's all based on this erroneous belief that hasn't yet been proven and has been debunked multiple times. Unless you can come up with some proof that this statement is true, then everything else you write is meaningless.

[paul's got wright 607]

 

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-03-20/bank-england-admits-loans-come-first-…-and-deposits-follow

from the horses mouth johnny x

 

There's no secret or conspiracy here. This is how our economy works. It's based on the risk of the loans not being paid back. If you calculate that 90% of a loan will be paid, then you only need to hold the 10% for the ones that won't.

 

This isn't the same as 'creating money out of thin air'. Facilitating those loans isn't free, the banks have to hold expensive reserves, obtain licenses, satisfy regulators, employ staff, cover the risks of loan and find borrowers and depositors. This all comes at a cost.

 

Note that there are no bitcoin banks, you can't lend bitcoin as it cannot be leveraged in this way, and this is a problem. The economy wouldn't be able to operate without the liquidity this creates, this is what enables trade.

 

whoa! information overload slim!. i know how scams work and why all the lawsuits against said scammers, are currently under way. why are you defending conspiracy to gamble and quoting my post? who mentioned bit coin!!?

my post was just evidence of what gerry had already said, that banks create money. please make your excuses for the rigged game elswhere x

Edited April 7, 2015 by paul's got wright

[paul's got wright 607]

sorry gladys x

[Slim 1,355]

whoa! information overload slim!. i know how scams work and why all the lawsuits against said scammers, are currently under way. why are you defending conspiracy to gamble and quoting my post? who mentioned bit coin!!?

There is no conspiracy, there is no scam unless you have evidence of such. I mentioned bitcoin as an example of what happens when you cannot leverage a currency. It doesn't work you see, the current system operates this way out of necessity and is well proven.

 

my post was just evidence of what gerry had already said, that banks create money. please make your excuses for the rigged game elswhere x

I'll post where I like thanks. Gerry said:

 

Banks don't "lend money" they facilitate YOUR credit..

Perhaps china will enlighten us all in his money thread about how banks never had the funds in the first place to be a true "lender", perhaps he should add that the creation of money starts with the signature on the agreement...

Your Bank of England response doesnt' address this at all. There is no mention of signatures. It is true that banks create money, but there's no conspiracy about this and it's all perfectly legit. You don't understand it, that's clear, but I think there's lots of things you don't understand.