IMPORTANT NOTICE

If you are viewing this page using Internet Explorer,
the page will likely not appear as designed,
nor function as intended.
Please view this site on ANY other browser.


From the author of: The Survival Guide For The One Percent



Novel title image


From the Silk Road to the Central Bank, Chapter Five.

Genetic Predisposition Syndrome


From the Silk Road to the Central Bank.




When is it time to stop paying off our national debt?


Please do not simply assume that an article about this sort of topic will be the rantings of an anti-federal government, anti- Federal Reserve anarchist type. What this is meant to be is a request to consider something that during the late 1970's, when a new round of monetary policies were being implemented, would have been considered absurd, ridiculous, and even worse. It would have been considered unpatriotic.

During the mid to late 1970's, many households had members that were still aware, through personal experience, of the 1929 crash, and the subsequent prolonged depression. These people possessed two personality traits. They were financially conservative, and although hateful of banks, they remained fearful of them. They saw how people lost their homes to banks, and strangely, the fear they possessed of the banks made them more willing to accept a bank's demands for their version of fiscal responsibility. You were required to show them respect. Appearing at any bank required the proper attire, and an accompanying display of humility. A failure to repay a debt to them stigmatized you as a irresponsible person. Many other words were used, as well. The words used to describe that sort of person related to their lack of Respect for Authority. A banker getting away with regarding themselves as the authority is both disgusting, and, unfortunately, quite accurate.

It was a remarkably effective con job by the banks. Banks were, as we all saw, going to become far worse.

Banker board meetings of that era, and, of course, the local Chamber of Commerce meetings, which were obligatory for bankers to attend, included the Pledge of Allegiance, prior to the opening of each meeting. We were living in the era of anti-communism, and anyone suggesting that capitalism wasn't an ideal philosophy was immediately branded a communist. Capitalism required discipline, with no free lunches, nor hand outs. Belief in it was obligatory.

Please don't get me wrong. I do not condone communism. I have never seen a functional communistic society. The Soviet Union wasn't, because its leaders were totalitarian dictators, sheltered behind the concept. I have seen one that came close, but as usual, the committee assigned to manage distribution of assets, and work were nepotistic. Those not in favor suffered. The small commune was an indian tribe in western British Columbia. The greater the percentage of tribal DNA, the higher their rank.

Back to the mid 1970's...

Only now have we begun to see the consequences of the prevailing attitudes of the mid to late 1970's. Do we recognize what policies brought us to this point? Since we have been provided little to no help from the Federal Government to protect us from the people, and corporations that put our entire country's future in jeopardy, I propose a potential solution. It will rock most people's sense of justice, but it is nothing in comparison to how it has been rocked, when we saw no prosecutions of banks, or people, for their involvement in the 2008 crash.

The link from "The myth, dogma, and methods of international central banking for controlling the supply of currencies." starts here.

I am old enough to have seen what I believe were these transitional years. The term "Austerity" was being force fed to cities across the United States, starting about 1975. Austerity programs have recently begun a new cycle, after the European Union, and more specifically Germany, forced Greece into a new rounds of it that will include breaking promises to its citizens, stealing their money, and engaging in breach of contract. It will create a repeat of what started to happen here, in the United States, in the mid-70's.

For those that are old enough to remember, during this country's post WWII economically prosperous days, our cities were a totally different scene, from those of today. I lived near San Francisco, so I would, with friends, or family, go to Golden Gate Park. I was in the age range of eight years, and up to my early teens. It was always thrilling for me. The park was clean, extremely well maintained, full of attractions, such as large public aquariums, Arboretums, baseball diamonds. They were safe enough for young kids to roam about. But that started to change in the mid 70's. I ended up choosing to go to college at San Francisco State University. As a result, I was watching the city change radically over the course of about twenty years.

New York City, I have read, and been told, by those who lived there, that the same existed there. NYC also provided numerous colleges, with no tuitions paid by students.

Lessons might be at the core of my proposal. These prosperous years demonstrated what our country could be like, but for some reason, conservatives found these days to be an affront.



It was in the early 70's, when some cities started operating in the red. New York City came under the greatest scrutiny, and with banks headquartered there, the scrutiny was intense. They went all the way to the White House, and to Congress to influence policy. They employed President Ford to deliver a message. The banks cut off the city, and when NYC went to the federal government to request loan guarantees to the banks, he refused. He demanded the city display a series of Austerity measures.

Costs of municipal employee pay rates, especially police, and fire, along with the colleges, and parks were growing beyond revenues from income taxes. Programs that gave far better city living conditions were under scrutiny, and attack, by those seeking reductions in expenditures. Banks had begun a new round of austerity, budget cuts, reductions of services, and pensions.***

There had also been a new round of calling for lower tax rates for the wealthy. The wealthy denied that eliminating the programs that provided the middle class a better life would impact any more than those fewer fire fighters, and police officers. Parks, and free colleges were totally unnecessary expenditures, and had to be eliminated.

They foolishly believed their lives would be improved by paying lower taxes. How, after all, could there be any deleterious impact upon them, when they seldom used these services?

They were terribly wrong, but too stupid to see it. Less police meant greater crime rates, not only in the inner cities, but throughout the five boroughs. Property values plummeted, and the investment havens of apartment buildings became disasters. I think it is safe to say that every investment made, within the city's five boroughs, was injured.

The middle class fled to the suburbs, and the immobile poor were injured even more significantly. Fewer police, and firefighters left the inner cities to become local war zones. It always amazed me that the conservatives didn't get why inner city residents turned to drugs. If you lived here, and had no money, or opportunity to get out, would you, at least, consider taking a mental vacation from it? I think that was the driving force for the increase in drug additions, within the inner cities.


Image Credit: Eddie Hausner/The New York Times, August 1979

The image above tells it all. The wealthy wanted to force the concept of austerity, and lost access to an urban economy that provided stable investments. They ended up paying lower taxes, but it wasn't directly from lower tax rates. It was massive capital gains losses.

The banks blamed all of it on whatever rationalizations they could dream up. They still wheeled enormous influence, because, at that time, they were the only source of investment capital, for the middle class, and most business loans. Their influence upon a small business owner, and middle class homeowner was far greater than any elected legislator, county commissioner, city council member, and even mayors. Strangely, we never stopped to consider their influence over a United States citizen, within a society protected by a constitution.




That is where the rub starts.

A non-elected entity was capable of overruling the voters, and most certainly possessed the capability to influence government policy, beyond that of any individual citizen. (This, of course, grew to what we have today, after the Supreme Court's decision on Citizens United.)

I had thought that the proposal I intend to describe soon, did not contain, or require, a specific time frame. Citizens United changed that, and only at the end of October, 2015, did the media begin to describe what they are now referring to as the "Shadow Banking System". It used to be referred to as the "Secondary Market", but because wealth has become concentrated more into a smaller number of people, these entities are presenting themselves as a source of capital, and as direct competitors to the main stream big banks.

The following is why this is a potential problem, and suggests there might be less time to implement my proposed solution.

Following 2008, and the fall of the Bernie Madoffs, a period of reduced return on investment capital began. Madoff made people think that a 10% return was attainable, and with little to no risk. Soon thereafter, 6% was considered a high return. Private closed membership hedge funds became more common, and the amount of money wielded by these funds grew exponentially.

Smaller community banks seldom keep there own home mortgage loans. They process the loans, but the sell the notes to others. Most often, and for many decades, they sold them to the large banks. The pre-2008 mortgage boom was an example of that system going wild. Mortgage brokerages sold loans as bundles, and the practice helped them hide the ridiculous No Doc loans, prevalent to the late 90's, and early 2000's. Many of the players in this game, such as Country Wide, disappeared, or were swallowed up.

In recent years, the Shadow Banking system has jumped into this market. That seems relatively innocuous, but there is an enormous difference. Banks have always known that money was nothing more than a commodity, through which the bank had a purpose to exist. The bank executives, however, are like those that place their own money into a hedge fund. To them the money is not a commodity, at all. It is the blood supporting their lavish lives. If the dollar falls in value, the loss is far more than the strategic problem faced by the bank board. They have a direct, and sudden drop in personal wealth. These people regard the value, and more so, the stability of the dollar as vital. The One Percent would have to weigh in against any challenge to our existing financial service industry methodologies.

Citizens United is the result, and so is a U.S. Supreme Court, that defends them against the interests of the remaining 99% of the citizens of the United States. Supreme Court Justice Robert's verbal attack upon President Obama, during his State of the Union address suggests two things. Robert's fails to understand that this is a democracy, and that he considers his vote to be open for influence, if the dollar figure is high enough.

So, what is my proposal ? Do you recall the tale of: The Emperor Has No Clothes ? How is your plan implemented ? It is to remove the ability of any lender of money to utilize money to elevate themselves above any citizen.




U.S. President Richard Nixon ended international convertibility of the U.S. dollar to gold on August 15, 1971.




If the international central bank system is lending money, and it has no value greater than their demands, isn't it time to determine if they have any international laws protecting them. Are any such laws enforceable, within the boundaries of the United States?

  • Isn't it about time to quietly inform some of our lenders that we do not intend to repay the loans, and that payments on principal, and interest will cease immediately?

  • What did the Unites States provide as collateral, other than tax collection rates, against the money borrowed?

  • What reaction would be made by the Bank for International Settlements, in retaliation?

  • Would the goals possessed by those in "Shadow Banking" be injured so dramatically that they would be forced to jump in defensively?

  • Would denying the authority of the BIS, and its world wide system, become an asset to "Shadow Banking" ?



*** There are some disturbing contradictions that were created by public employees, during the 1970's, that are difficult to ignore. As good as they had it in both cities, the municipal employees still required more. Police, and fire went on illegal strikes. In SF, the Mayor's home was seriously vandalized, and a sign was left that read, "Don't threaten us". It was believed to have been left by members of the SF police force. Soon thereafter, the city capitulated to the demands of the police, and fire departments. I was in college, at San Francisco State University, at that time, and remember it well. It was not long after, when some Vietnam war protesting students had been very badly beaten by police, and blown off a very high library wall, with fire hoses, by the fire department.

NYC had similar incidents. These might be examples that destroy this concept. Most to all of them have retired by now, and lessons learned by those replacing them might be mitigating.

If we stopped paying interest on as large a portion of our national debt as possible, and put it back into our own economy, within cities, and nation wide infrastructure repair, and maintenance, would similar demands spiral out of control?

The answer is
probably. Should we stop examining a solution, because some conservative banking executive, or lobby loving politician said, (as in the first paragraph): "It is absurd, ridiculous, and even worse, its unpatriotic?

Not a chance...





Please click on the text images below to go to:

From the Silk Road to the Central Bank, Chapter Six. Nixon-shock.

David Murray






To return to the previous page, just click on the Close Window button, at the top, and the base of this page. If you came to this page from a search engine, and want to go to the website for the novel, click on this next logo.