Sign In Sign-Up

Welcome!

Close

Would you like to make this site your homepage? It's fast and easy...

Yes, Please make this my home page!

No Thanks

  Don't show this to me again.

Close

"Money" is a myth n nn181

Just as "dollar" was a unit of measure when it had a standard for reference (1/35th of an ounce of gold .999 fine). Without a reference to what Is being measured it is absolutely worthless; without anything anywhere as a standard for reference the "dollar" is impossible to describe.

Using units of measure-if we say a 2 ounce bagel has a value equal to a cupful (8 ounces) of coffee, it would be understandable. If we said 2 - 16 ounce loaves of bread were equal to a ''dollar's" worth of gold (1/35th of an ounce) it would be understandable. But to say 2 loaves of bread are worth a "dollar"-Is like saying a bagel is worth a cup. full-of what?

No one has ever seen a "dollar'' standing alone!

No one has ever seen a cupful standing alone!

Without a reference to something tangible, units of measure are absolutely worthless, they are not things in themselves.

'Money' was no more than a 'slang' word to refer to wealth when some form of wealth was used as a common medium of exchange. Without a wealth form in use as a common medium of exchange we are making, believe it is still there by referring to "it" with the old reference words "money" and its' unit of measure "dollar."

Gold was the common medium of exchange, wealth, we called "money," 1/35th of an ounce was the unit of, measure, we called "dollar.

"Without the tangible substance gold in use anymore-how can we continue to use money" and ''dollar" as realistic terms except in make-believe? We are in effect using an abstract description of something to replace that thing, in our imagination. We are deceiving ourselves by accepting, tangible pieces of paper that look like our old claim checks for wealth, as that wealth itself. We are deceiving ourselves by accepting, copper and nickel tokens, now, as being equal in worth, to the gold and silver coins they replaced.

This clearly defined difference between wealth and "money" has never, in recorded history, been revealed before. If it has I have not heard about the disclosure or ever read any reference to such a disclosure.

Wealth and "money" are as different as any two entities can be, one is tangible and the other is intangible.

The public's freedom or existence under control depends upon the public knowing the difference between wealth and "money."

Five thousand years of chronic monetary chaos and collapse can be finally ended, if the public will protect its' freedom by seeking the knowledge and understanding of natural economic truth.

Armed with the sword of truth the people are invincible.

Anything in use as a commonly accepted purchasing unit must be 100%. redeemable by it's issuer. It does not matter who that issuer may be-it must be 100% redeemable. All personal checks must be 100% redeemable or we arrest and punish the issuer. The same element that makes a check 'bad' makes a fractional reserve currency 'bad'! Anyone issuing a currency with less than 100% redeemability is issuing a 'bad check'! Changing who is doing the issuing is not the answer it is the bad checks that must be stopped. No matter who issued the bad check it is the check that is bad!

When a bank holds gold on deposit at 50% reserve and issues two claim checks on that gold it has created two purchasing units each only 50% redeemable in wealth (the gold on deposit). Each unit has only a 50% store of value through 50% redeemability. Each unit of wealth on deposit has two purchasing units outstanding based on its value stored. One unit of wealth cannot redeem two purchasing units-one of the purchasing units has to be bad!

The bad purchasing unit is inflation per se and causes the inflationary effect (eventual "rising prices") which in reality is the failing 'purchasing unit I parity. It is the creation of the bad purchasing unit that must be stopped. It could not be created if all purchasing units had to be 1001%, backed by wealth on deposit. What that wealth is does not matter as long as it is a good store of value. It is essential that it be a "store of value a purchasing unit must be that value or a claim on 100% of value deposited.

When Lincoln issued the 'green back' it was in payment for goods received. The 'green back' represented a debt owed to the holder for the goods he surrendered to get it. I do not take issue with the government borrowing from the people-there is nothing wrong with that. But there was something terribly wrong with the 'green back'-it was negotiable. If it remained as a note from country to citizen-returnable later as payment of taxes O.K. again-nothing wrong with that. I know that as a note it said the country owed the holder the value of the goods he gave up. If the holder (citizen) exchanged that note with someone else (citizen '2') for some goods-the debt was transferred and it doesn't appear as though there is anything wrong with that. If citizen 'Y received goods from citizen '2' and citizen '2' received the 'green back' from citizen 'I' it was a "fair exchange". Citizen '1' got goods and citizen '2' got the 'green back' he can use for taxes later. But, if the goods received by citizen '1' are used as a medium of exchange to obtain goods from citizen 'Y-then citizen '1' has a purchasing unit (the wealth received and used as a medium of exchange), and citizen '2' has a purchasing unit (the 'green back' and we are back to having two purchasing units backed by the same unit of wealth. There is no way that a negotiable IOU can be used that it is not Inflation.

Perhaps it will be easier to see if we refine a little more what an exchange really is-basically. There are only three categories of things on our earth;. Resources-Man-& Wealth.

Resources: All things in the universe outside of man and his products. Man: Humans.

Wealth: All things produced by man having exchange value. Exchange Value: The ability to satisfy human desires.

Value: The amount of human satisfaction that can be derived from the use or consumption of any thing.

Service: The human energy expended in satisfying human desire that does not result in a

product.

There are several kinds of exchanges; Wealth for Wealth, wealth for a service, service for wealth, and service for service. What is important to see is that whatever kind of an exchange takes place-basically it is an exchange of human energy expended for human energy expended. Whether there was a product or a service on both sides or a product or a service on one side the exchange was an exchange of human energy expended. The 'expended' is the important word; by its use we mean used, already performed, completed, accomplished-not promised! An exchange is an exchange when there is a receiver and a giver on both sides each freely agreeing to the terms of the transaction. If one side receives but does not give we usually refer to it as a 'hold-up', fraud, extortion or expropriation. Therefore if wealth (some product) is exchanged for a service (a performance of labor not resulting in a product) it is imperative that-the service be already accomplished or it is not an exchange until the service is performed. Unless the energy has been expended on both sides the exchange would involve the 'future' fulfillment of a promise.

Until the agreed upon terms of a transaction are fulfilled it is a negotiation and not an exchange. If during a transaction a token is accepted on one side then the negotiation does not become an exchange until the token is redeemed-if the token is not redeemable the transaction involves fraud-but the token may be involved in many transactions for many years before the fraud is discovered. The token being used as a medium of exchange is never called upon to itself satisfy human desires.

The person receiving a token for wealth passes it on to another for wealth and that wealth appears to fulfill the token's promise. That wealth however, was wealth obtained by 'pseudo exchange' not by redemption. For redemption to take place the token must be redeemed by its issuer. just as in the case of the bad check the token's validity cannot be determined until It is presented for redemption. If the token's issuer will not redeem the token for its' promised quantity and purity of commodity then it constitutes fraud and the issuer should be arrested, convicted and punished just-as is done with bad check writers.

Any token that is not a promise but is issued and used in 'pseudo exchanges' for wealth-is issued purposely to facilitate fraud and as such is COUNTERFEIT. Any and all people that use such tokens to obtain wealth from other people are guilty knowing or unknowing of passing counterfeit. The fact that it is legal counterfeit sanctioned by government is why the people go apparently unpunished. Punishment in the usual sense, arrest, conviction and penalty. The punishment in this case is the deferred suffering that will be suffered when the inflation finally results in deflation. The tokens issued in the U. S. are paper and metal and are twofold in purpose: they appear to represent wealth as 'pseudo claim checks' when in reality they do represent 'imaginary "dollars'' written as numbers in books of account' which are actually the psychologically created ''mediums of exchange" accepted by the people. It is extremely important to understand this dual role the token plays.

When the 'certificates' (real claim checks on specie) were in use it was not the certificates which were the wealth exchanged for wealth-it was the gold or silver coin on deposit which was the actual 'thing' exchanged. The certificate, after it was used could be destroyed because the function for which it had been created was fulfilled. With the present tokens (paper and metal) in use as generally accepted mediums of exchange it is not the tokens which are being accepted for wealth but the imaginary "dollars" they represent. The "dollars" written as numbers are the replacement for the gold or silver coin (specie). By

calling the tokens 'dollars' we tend to accept that they (the tokens) are the 'thing' being exchanged. It is easier to accept that than to realize we are exchanging our wealth for imaginary "dollars" (numbers on paper and ink) that the tokens represent. If at any time we were able to destroy all the paper and metal tokens in so doing we would not have destroyed ANY "dollars".

''Dollars" are created in the mind when the commercial banker writes the numbers and we accept that record as being representative of "dollars" and that if he will transfer that imaginary-magic number to us we will make-believe also and consider it our obligation to return some numbers later to the commercial banker that were accepted by someone else from whom we got them by exchanging goods or services.

Once we have the number in our account we can use it as numbers and pass the numbers about by checks or we can use tokens-which we get by giving up some numbers recorded (deposit credits) in our account. Our giving up number records (''deposit credits") in OUR account in no way destroys the number records as recorded in the books of the commercial banker. The commercial banker records the numbers as we borrow them and his numbers recorded will remain until we --pay back" the loan.

There are several things that must be realized to be able to comprehend the situation. If all loans were paid back there would be ZERO liquidity in the economy. If all the loans were paid back there would not only be ZERO liquidity but all borrowers would still owe the commercial banks all the interest-because the interest had not been created yet! Any individual may make a loan and eventually pay it back plus interest-having obtained the "dollars" with which to pay it from another borrower by the exchange of goods or a service. Any group of individuals or groups of groups may pay back their loans plus interest in the same manner. But all borrowers could not pay back all loans plus interest at any one time because the "dollars" with which to pay the interest have not been created—you cannot pay back more ''dollars" than you borrowed to the only source of "dollars"." It must soon become apparent that on a DEBT-BASED monetary system 'as a whole' borrowers must keep borrowing in order to attempt to pay interest.

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On earthnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnn184

Not knowing that interest cannot be paid-(all "dollars'' borrowed are principal & draw interest) the borrowers dig themselves deeper and deeper into imaginary debt to the commercial bankers. The "Interest" "payments" require that the amount of "dollars" created be ever increasing and that is why the volume of "dollars" continually expands-increasing inflation.

The Lincoln 'green back' did not require the payment of "interest" not to Lincoln or to a banker. It was simply a fiat currency issued in payment for value received. It was, however, a purchasing unit based on debt, because it was negotiable and could be used by it's holder as a medium of exchange in the market, place. Like the Continental which was redeemable in the future for silver coin-the Lincoln greenback was redeemable in the future for the settlement of taxes owed by it's holder. The Continentals and the Lincoln

green backs both were not-claims on any tangible asset on deposit for their redemption. They were both basically notes conveying the belief that they would be redeemed in the future but were useable at that time as mediums of exchange.

All wealth in existence is usable as a medium of exchange at all times-all that is required is someone willing to exchange.

THEN IF ALL WEALTH IS USEABLE AS A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE-AND ALL GREEN BACKS RECEIVED FOR WEALTH ARE USEABLE AS MEDIUMS OF EXCHANGE-THE WEALTH AND THE GREEN BACKS BECOME TWO ENTITIES USEABLE AS MEDIUMS OF EXCHANGE EXISTING WHERE BEFORE ONLY ONE EXISTED (THE WEALTH).

Wealth is at all times capable of being BARTER AND OR A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE and any given exchange involving wealth on both sides is a completed transaction. Lincoln green backs could only be used as mediums of exchange and any given "exchange" involving them was a pseudo exchange until the receiver of the green backs in that. pseudo exchange used them to purchase from someone else and thereby received goods or service comparable to that which he gave up to get the Lincoln green back the 'second' or continuing transactions are required to sustain the credibility of the Lincoln green back's purchasing power.

The wealth purchased by Lincoln with his created green back could always be used as a medium of exchange-suppose he bought gold coins with green backs-the gold coins could be used to purchase goods from anyone-the greenback holder could use them to purchase also, therefore where only the gold coin before was a purchasing unit there was now both the gold coin and the green back-two purchasing units when before the gold was purchased with the green backs there was only one. The same gold was being "used" in two transactions at the same time. The gold is good-it is unredeemable paper and metal tokens that are bad.

Another thought that must be considered is that the green backs being redeemable in the future for future taxes increased the revenue for Lincoln at this time (the time of issue) and the income was necessary to support the war. But, what about the later years when the green backs would be coming in instead of going out? Coming in, in payment of taxes-at that time *according to the plan they would have to be destroyed having completed the function for which they had been created. But, if the ones coming in could not be used to pay government bills (go out again) then what would the nation do for it's necessary income to support government. All the taxes for these years had been spent to support the war and now there was no current taxes due to support the government.

If government cannot support a war out of current income and borrows against the future then the current income of the future cannot pay for both the support of government and the deferred debt of the war. Taxes will have to be increased to pay off the debt and keep government supported at the same time. Increased taxes are harder to come by in peace time than in war time-the increased taxation should be accomplished to pay for the war as you go. But, the cost of wars are prohibitive not only 'In lives but in wealth and no people would willingly support a war if they had to pay for it as you go. Government knows this and invariably modern governments create inflation ("money") with which to expropriate the wealth required to support the war, from the people. People unaware of the nature of "money" accept it and are in effect going-along with a massive "hidden tax'' that will only be exposed at the moment of deflation. At the moment of deflation all savers of recorded "dollars" will lose 90 to 99% of all their savings in payment for the last few wars and all the "foreign aid" to date.

'Pseudo exchanges' (passing counterfeit)nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnn185

It is extremely frustrating to be in a position of being unable to transmit a message and have it received in its entirety undistorted. It is difficult to find the language with which to express a thought and have that language convey the thought undistorted to all listeners and in its' full measure. It is infinitely more difficult when any thought involves the word money." Most people seem to think that "money" is a mysterious thing that is only understood by experts and is better left to them to think about. Proving to people, that the knowledge of how "money" and wealth effect every facet of their daily lives is vital to their well being, is the greatest challenge I have ever faced.

The public is being subjected to language, every day, that is distorted by untruths until they can no longer determine the message the words convey-let's take just one example, the word "dollar" and examine it very carefully.

From the 1792 to 1834, 24-303 grains of gold .999 fine was called a 'dollar'. We do not want to be confused and we are examining the word dollar. It is important to realize that 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine is 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine. If you took away, Just one grain it could no longer be 24-303 grains of gold .999 fine. It would have changed and become 23.303 grains of gold .999 fine. The word 'dollar' was a name applied to that amount of gold, at that point of time, that we are picking up the word 'dollar' for examination.

For forty two years (1792 until 1834) the word 'dollar' was used as a name for a currency standard of 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine. In 1834 the word 'dollar' was defined as being 23.222 grains of gold .999 fine and a new currency standard.

The word 'dollar' was used originally as a name for 24-303 grains of gold .999 fine and now it will henceforth be the name of 23.222 grains of gold .999 fine. What happened? First of all, if the currency had been specified as 'grains of gold .999 fine' then all bookkeeping would have been kept as 'grains of gold deposited,' 'grains of gold withdrawn' and no way in the world to distort the entries. It was the designation of a 'standard' itself that allowed that standard to be changeable. In modern, international parlance, this is called 'fixed' but 'adjustable'-a ridiculous conception!

The word standard has been accepted as meaning the commonly accepted unit of measure, volume, linear, weight etc. When we speak of 'Inches' we are aware that an 'inch' is a 'standard unit of measure'. The reference standard for the 'Inch' is kept as a block of material surrounded by inert gas, in a vault for safe keeping. To be a standard unit of measure it must not change! We recognize this. There are different units of measure for different types of measurement. But the units must remain undisturbed. Inch and grain are units of measure and do not change, they are 'standards' already. A monetary 'system' based on grains of gold accompanied by the specification of purity .999 (999/1000ths pure) would be unpervertable.

By assigning a name to a fixed amount of gold they gave the name the eminence of the gold itself and actually perpetrated a continuance of the belief that a "dollar" was indeed 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine. This allowed the future effort of turning 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine into 23.222 grains of gold .999 fine without anyone realizing that standard had been perverted.

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earthnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn186

It appeared, to all the world, as if only the "price" of gold had been raised, that now instead of one ounce of gold .999 fine being worth 19.75 dollars it was now worth 20.67 dollars and the dollar had remained unchanged.

But 'dollar' is only a word and does not exist in nature in any material state, not even for a billionth of a second. Dollar is only a word. Gold is a material thing. Dollar as a word can have tangible meaning only if it is assigned a relationship with something tangible. For forty two years from 1792 until 1834, 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine was called a dollar. From 1834 till 1934, 100 years, 23.222 grains of gold .999 fine was called a 'dollar'. From 1934 till 1971, 13.714 grains of Sold .999 fine was called a 'dollar'. From this, then, we could attempt to define the word 'dollar' and say that it is a word to describe a temporarily fixed amount of gold. That would be good except that at different times we were on a silver I standard'. At one time 378.0 grains of silver .999 fine was called a 'trade dollar' and there are others that contain 371-25 grains of silver .999 fine that are called 'dollars'. To ever entertain the idea, even for an instant, that a 'dollar' is anything, simply invites confusion. The mind would be subjected to tremendous indecision as to what tangible association could be honestly accepted as a 'dollar' and further subjected to the very basic fact that if at anytime 24-303 grains of gold .999 fine were called anything but 24.303 grains of gold .999 it presents another problem: The mind knows that nothing can be itself and some other thing at the same time. The mind knows that 'dollar' is just a word and cannot be the gold itself. If the dollar were the gold, it could not be the dollar. If the gold were the dollar it could not be the gold.

There is no way in which this concept of the "dollar" being gold can be entered into the mind without a degree of reality having to be expelled.

If it is the bast of the mulberry tree, it is the bast of the mulberry tree and cannot be gold or silver. If it is paper, it is paper and no amount of lettering, in any color, can turn it into gold or silver. Perhaps the only way to 'see' this is to try to describe a 'dollar' without in any way describing anything else.

If we say a 'dollar' is 24.303 grains of gold'.999 fine, it will not be valid, because 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine is 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine and therefore cannot be a dollar.

If we say a dollar is 371.25 grains of silver .999 fine, it will not be valid, because 371.25 grains of silver .999 fine is 371.25 grains of silver .999 fine and therefore cannot be a 'dollar'.

Yet "dollars" are used every day!

If we say 24.303 grains of gold .999 fine equals a dollar then we are again, faced with the problem of what is a -dollar?

If we say 24.303 grains of gold.999 fine is called a 'dollar' then we can say that 'dollar' is a word used as an expression of measure to describe a temporarily fixed amount of gold.

If we say 371.25 grains of silver .999 fine is called a 'dollar' then we can say that dollar is a word used as an expression of measure to describe a temporarily fixed amount of silver.

Can it be both? Is it either?

The 'dollar' is a nothing-just a word used to perpetrate a fiction (hoax). A word to confuse and confound the mind. A word to create an aura of tangibility and to serve as an imaginary medium of exchange, because the public will accept a lie, as a fact, if it is repeated often enough. If what his been written here is the truth, then what are we using every day called 'dollar' and as a bookkeeping unit for the recording of debts and exchanges? What today is the monetary unit of the United States of America?

"Money" (dollar) as a reference to value nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn187

"The monetary unit of the United States - is the make-believe "dollar --paper and ink records of numbers preceded by a 'dollar' sign ($) in bookkeeping entries, accepted by the public as imaginary mediums of exchange whose volume increases daily with official and 'Individual conjurings; are seigniorage, credit, inflation, money and totally intangible, cannot be sighted, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched; can exist in human thought only and are shifted about by check and credit card to 'settle by imagination 95% of all transactions."

To facilitate the use of the monetary unit, 'dollar' there must be some physical form to represent them and nothing is better fitted for the job than the old "bearer certificates" minus any promise of redemption, of course. So we have the paper tokens marked 'one dollar' etc. We also have the cupro-nickel coinage to represent "dollars" during exchanges. There are some U.S. Notes still being used and they are unique. The U.S. Notes were issued by the Federal Treasury and not by the monetary authority. At one time the monetary authority would not accept U.S. Notes as valid units of payment for the National Debt. The U.S. Notes of 1928 issue had printed over the seal the following text: "This note is legal tender at its' face value for all debts public and private except duties on imports and interest on the public debt."

The U.S. Note was a paper token representing a 'dollar' during exchanges. They were used initially as 'Lincoln Greenbacks' to purchase supplies for government, directly, and were to be redeemed later, by government, as valid units in payment of taxes, and as such:

"A U.S. Note is a treasury receipt for prepayment of a possible future tax obligation."

The public also uses paper tokens, to shift about the imaginary "dollar" units, called checks':

"A check is a written order transferring a record of debt, already existing, from one account to another in payment for some goods or service."

All these tokens are used to represent the imaginary "dollar" unit in the market place to facilitate the exchange of the imaginary "dollar" unit for the wealth created by the labor of the public. The public is forced into slavery by the enactment of legal tender laws that force them to give up their wealth for these conjured up "dollars." The most ridiculous of all is the Federal Reserve Note. It isn't a 'Fed' "note" because it is countersigned by U.S. Treasury officials, but is issued by the monetary authority and promises nothing. It is not a I note' redeemable in anything.

"A Federal Reserve "Note" is a paper token as evidence of a created "dollar" of imaginary debt, written as a number on the books of a bank, and accepted by a borrower as his debt to repay; are printed at the Bureau of Printing and Engraving, on orders of the Treasury, countersigned by officials of the Treasury, turned over to the 'Fed' for distribution and accepted by the people as mediums of exchange for wealth that is over a thousand times greater in value than the worth of the "note" itself."

Definition, when it is finally arrived at and is in the form that does not offer a weakness to be challenged, helps us to 'see' the item in a much more realistic perspective. Take the 'credit card' for instance:

"A bank, credit card is a token representing a prearranged agreement for the bank to create dollars of imaginary debt in the card holder's account, if and when the card's option is exercised, combined with the order to transfer that record of imaginary debt to the seller's account in his bank after the sale is recorded."

Surely no one can disagree that the ones who create and issue "dollars," have at their command the power to control and own all that "money" can buy. Surely if a government body was to confiscate all the wealth from the people and then set about redistributing that wealth wherever it was in their best interests to do so; that government would be labeled totalitarian, socialistic, and it would be using that power to perpetuate its' rule! Is there any difference between that and a monetary authority which has the exclusive right to create,issue, and manage the nation's "money" (dollars), the medium by which the nation can be bought and controlled.

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earthnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn188

The public is allowed to play the 'game' and live beyond their means by being offered unlimited "credit" and credit cards without ever really knowing what they are doing. The public for the most part is totally unaware of what they are doing or why the Congress allows it to continue. The people are led to believe they can have it now and pay for it later. But that pay later depends on the continued "madness." Look about you in any direction and you will see the wealth that represents the labor. of humans to construct buildings, machinery, instruments, art and all other forms of wealth created. Humans built it all but it does not belong to the ones who built it. The wealth created belongs to the ones who paid" the salaries and it was paid in make-believe "dollars." The wealth was expropriated by created "dollars."

Just think how much more the people who produced the wealth would have if the expropriation had not been going on, if they had been using wealth exclusively as mediums of exchange. It Is the wealth expropriated (gone) and the "dollars" left to accumulate, in the hands of the 'unknowing', t6r causes the imbalance between the "dollars'' available and the goods available. The solution recommended by the economic advisors is to "increase production!" If you were in a boat that had a hole and your companion kept chopping the hole larger, to let the water out faster, and all the while yelling at you to bail faster; is there any difference? The wealth expropriated is what is draining the economy and they advise faster and more abundant production in the same time and for the same pay.

Increasing production to neutralize the expropriation of wealth is just foolish as bailing faster while your companion pounds the hole larger instead of plugging it! There just isn't any difference.

Unless you come to your senses fast the boat will sink.

Proving that the "dollar" is only a word and not a tangible thing is easy. Proving that the "dollar" is the means whereby all producers are reduced to practical slavery is easy. However, for millions of people in the United States the "dollar" is the only reference to value they have. The massive confusion that exists can be found to have its' basis in this one fact. The "dollar" is worthless and everyone gauges the worth of all things in terms of it.

The "dollar" only appears to have value, because it can be exchanged for the things having practical value by virtue of being able to satisfy the desires of humans. The human satisfaction derived from consuming food and drink, the heat and energy from fuel that makes living more comfortable these are the factors that determine value or worth. But since all these things are reckoned in monetary terms now (dollars) instead of the direct barter terminology of other precious commodities we have lost sight of the facts. Unless an exchange to satisfy another human's desire (demand) is accompanied by means of payment (his supply) an exchange of out supply for his imaginary demand is foolish. The "dollar" is not a commodity that can be eaten or used practically. It is not a commodity that can be efficiently, burned as fuel to create heat or energy. It is not a commodity, therefore it is absolutely ridiculous to use it as a means of determining the value of other things. Value is found by comparing the human satisfaction to be derived from the use of consumption of one thing in relation to the human satisfaction to be derived from the use or consumption of another. The value of any one thing expressed in terms of any other thing is called its' parity.

The difficulty is that we are expressing the value of a commodity in terms of "dollars" that will only have the value-of the commodity we are appraising-if we exchange the commodity for those "dollars."

We are attempting, at all times, to have the "dollar" assume-the value of the commodities it can be exchanged for and use their known parities to the item we are appraising, in order to assign a "dollar" value to our commodity being appraised.

We are using the real value of the commodities that we exchange for "dollars" to convey value to "dollars" and then using the "dollars" to express the value of the commodities.

"Money" (dollar) as a reference to value nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn189

It is a ridiculous exercise and if we could only realize that the "dollar" is a totally unnecessary imaginary entity, a phantom crutch we would be better-off without.

The "dollar" is acquiring the value of the commodities it exchanges for and conveying that value to the commodities at the same time, which is an exercise in sheer nonsense. The dollar cannot receive its' exchange value from the commodity whose only value source is that dollar!

The "dollar" can only appear to have the value of the thing it exchanges for and if it gets its' value from then it (the dollar) cannot be the source of that things value. Nothing on this earth receives its value from being exchangeable for "dollars", it is the other way around. However, to the public at large, things only appear to have value if you can get ''dollars" for them. They know better, but they do not know that they know better.

Nothing was wrong with comparing relative values of all the different commodities with one common standard-such as ounces of silver of specific fineness-or grains of gold of specific fineness. We measure all types of things with the same standards of inches or yards. If a commodity or several commodities are used as standards there will be no conflict at all if it is remembered they are not standards of value but are simply standards of reference to facilitate value comparison. Silver and gold are commodities first, last and always and are themselves subject to changes in relative value both from their use as commodities and as standard reference media.

Gold and silver with continually respond to free market forces on the respective parity with each other due to natural laws, as well as the occasional non-uniform change in parity each separately may have in relation to all other parities.

Enough misery in the world has been caused by lack of Adherance to this simple truth that nothing can have a fixed parity in relation to any other thing. Man cannot legislate natural law-or legislate to circumvent natural law. Any law that can be circumvented is not a natural law. Natural law is invincible.

Trying to use "dollars" to express value requires a complicated mental process, because dollars are twice removed from reality. The value of a ton of coal is that it will heat a home for X number of days. That value expressed in terms of oil would be, one ton of coal Is worth X number of gallons of oil (the number of gallons of oil that would heat that same home for the same number of days the ton of coal would). The value of a ton of coal expressed in terms of oil is once removed from reality but nevertheless valid as a parity. The value of a ton of coal could be expressed in terms of electricity; one ton of coal is worth X number of kilowatts of electricity, again, (the number of kilowatts of electricity it would take to heat the home for the same period a ton of coal would). Again an expression of comparative value that is once removed from reality but is a valid pair of parities: coal expressed in terms of electricity or electricity expressed in terms of coal. But the real value was that either of them would heat a home for X number of days.

Trying to use "dollars" to express value forces us to go another step. To say one ton of coal is worth ten "dollars" does not tell us anything about the real value of a ton of coal. We would have to know how many gallons of oil ten "dollars" will "buy" and how much heat that amount of oil could provide to get any idea of the real value of the coal (if we did not know the real value of a ton of coal directly). That involved two parities and was twice removed from reality. The parity of coal expressed in terms of "dollars" and the parity of "dollars" expressed in terms of oil; because the "dollars" themselves-burned- (ten) would not provide heat comparable to the heat derived from the coal or the oil those ten "dollars" can be exchanged for. Therefore if we are going to have to go two stages removed from reality to use a common medium of exchange such as the "dollar" which is imaginary (a number recorded in a book has no ability for satisfying human desires until it is exchanged for something tangible), why not use something that is real in itself and has the ability to satisfy human desires directly.

If we express the value of a ton of coal in terms of bread we have two comparisons of worth. Saying one ton of coal is equal to thirty loaves of bread, we have a parity.

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earthnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn190

If we know the human satisfaction derived from burning a ton of coal for heat, we can compare that to the human satisfaction derived from eating thirty loaves of bread That would be one worth comparison. If bread happened to be the common medium of exchange then we would have a second comparison of worth-Its exchange value in terms of all other commodities.

Where "dollars" are used there is only one value that can be compared, its' exchanged value or parity in relation to all other commodities, and that is dependent, at all times, on the legal tender law enforcement.

Where any form of wealth is used there are always two values that can be compared, its' exchange value or parity in relation to all other commodities, which requires no legal tender law or enforcement, because of the second comparison value: the fact that the wealth form itself, be it bread, oil or coal has a real value in that it can be used or consumed directly to provide human satisfaction.

Bread may go stale, coal and oil are bulky and messy to store and so the wealth forms of precious metals which are always able to satisfy the almost universal desire to possess them, have always been the naturally chosen mediums of exchange in free markets. This is the fundamental truth that explains how the "dollar" which is pure imagination today, came to be accepted as a medium of exchange in the beginning. "It" was declared to be legal tender and given a parity to the precious metals by man's law.

If we abandon this folly now and adopt a realistic commodity as a common medium of exchange, and only refer to it directly by weight and fineness (no unit name) it can never change and we will have the stability in our economy that will guarantee a free market and free enterprise.

The public today considers inflation to be ''rising prices" and lets it go at that, which obscures the expropriation of wealth that is continually taking place, and the public themselves are helping to perpetuate. Unless the knowledge of what inflation is and how it is produced is understood the public will never realize that the cure must start with them. It is extremely frustrating to reduce a theory to fact, by deductive reasoning, and in so doing discover an obstacle: that the power to correct an injustice rests with the people, gaining less from facets of the injustice than they are losing by it, and are unable to perceive the wisdom of doing away with

Inflation is a non—entity it is money and "money" cannot be seen or touched, it is imagination supported in the U.S. by paper and metal tokens called ''dollars." "Dollars" are not composed of matter, they are numbers written in a book and represented by minute bits of wealth as tokens. The commercial bankers creating "dollars" are in fact extending their legal credit. They have the benefit of the law which makes their created credit legal tender in the U.S. Money, credit, seigniorage and inflation are all words describing the imaginary debts listed on the books of banks and locked within the recorded numbers represented by the token coinage. Monetary authorities and commercial banks create "dollars", out of thin air, and lend them to the public as the borrowers. The public as borrowers accept it and promise to pay it back, plus interest, as a debt. However, since the commercial bankers create the "dollars" at no cost to themselves the debt naturally has to be considered imaginary:

Inflation ..........191

 "By making loans commercial banks increase their liabilities (demand deposits) and assets (loans), and in a sense "create" money. . " Page 3 'Fed' reserve bank review August 1972

... in the practical workings of the banking system the bulk of deposits originates in the granting of loans . . . . and his ability to make loans and investments arises largely from the receipt of his depositors' money."
Page 24 'Fed' reserve system-Board of Governors

"As we realize that banks create their own deposit debts. . we begin to see why these institutions are often referred to as "monetizers of debt" Page 58 The Economics of Money and Banking -Lester V. Chandler

To accept "dollars" created by a commercial banker, out of thin air, and pledge wealth to get "them" anyone would have to believe a debt existed; yet the "dollar" are unredeernable (the bankers will not give anything to redeem them) and not 'claim checks' in any sense (their tokens are not bearer certificates for any commodity).

The commercial bankers make an incredible profit out of this since they have absolutely no cost; everything is paid for with the "dollars" they create and lend out at interest. They have the benefit of the interest on the "money" they create without having to labor or per. form any service to acquire; it is simply their legal prerogative to create "dollars", granted by the U.S. congress, through the U.S. monetary authority (the federal reserve system) they have a legal monopoly to "make money."

"The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing". William Patterson, Int. Banker 1694 (Tragedy & Hope)

"Those who create and issue money and credit direct the policies of government and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people‘‘-Rt. Hon. Reginald McKenna former president of Midland Bank of England-Ex secretary of the Exchequer 1920

Inflation (money) is imaginary demand when used in exchanges of goods and services. Because it is imagination being used as a medium of exchange, it cannot be measured except by relation to its consequences. Inflation is an imaginary entity used to perpetrate mass expropriation of wealth from the public to the monetary authorities and commercial banks, directly manipulating the government of the people.

Inflation cannot be detected in its initial stages by the uninformed, it is hidden from the public by the very fact that they do not know it is imaginary and they do not know, that they do not know. The natural laws of our universe are inviolable; even though the people cannot see or witness the actual first act of inflating, natural law takes over to force the consequences upon us. As each "dollar" represented by token or check enters the economy it exchanges for the production it expropriates and remains to accumulate as the production is used or consumed. Eventually the accumulation results in higher bids for goods and we have the 'failing dollar parity' we call 'rising prices' or "inflation."

In a free market with a pure barter system 100% of all the production, of all the producers, would be the maximum that could be offered in exchange. Where producers are exchanging each other's production; ' at any point in time some commodities might still be I on hand' with their respective producers as inventory, unexchanged, simply because the exchanges of production (wealth) for wealth, adjusts the production rates of the various commodities to compensate for the forces, on the parities of she commodities, of time, location and circumstance. The supply of any commodity in relation to the supply of any other commodity is directly proportional to the return on labor for providing that commodity. Man is continually looking over the shoulder of his fellow man and when he thinks there is more profit in another line of endeavor he may switch. Man seeks to satisfy his desires with the least amount of effort. Because a Free Market adjusts itself as to what will be produced by the freely competitive parities that develop out of exchanges, some of the commodities (production) may be out of stock temporarily during these natural, adjustment, reactions of a free market; but there could never be any falling "dollar" parity because all goods offered for exchange were wealth and no "dollars" (imaginary demand) are involved.

All the exchanges that had been made would have determined the parities for many commodities in relation to many other commodities. The mutually acceptable exchange rate of any commodity to any other commodity is the parity "price," (the value of any material thing expressed in terms of any other material thing).

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earth ..........192

The need, of course, is for some common commodity that is safe against the rigors of time and corrosion to be accepted as a medium of exchange, so that all commodities could be related to this "one" to facilitate the computation of "parity price" of any commodity to any other commodity, at any time by their respective relationships to this one common standard. It matters not what this one commodity is. It matters only, that it is a commodity, a substance, something that can be measured as to volume, density, weight, etc.

Paper may be used as a medium of exchange only if it is a bearer certificate stating the quantity and fineness of the commodity it represents, and who is committed to its delivery.

If anything but a commodity or a direct claim on a commodity is used as a medium of exchange, it is inflation and causes an inflationary effect on the economy, changing the actual parity price agreed upon to effect the exchange.

When wealth is exchanged for wealth, the exchange is of mutual benefit. If the exchange were exactly equal, it would not have materialized. Only when the parties to an exchange are both convinced they are to receive more than they surrender are they freely willing to make the exchange. An exchange should be final when the wealth exchanges hands. Anything that may occur to the wealth exchanged once it has been accepted by its new owner should be the responsibility of the new owner. Most honorable exchanges are completed with a handshake. Only when fraud is involved is there any occasion for recourse on the other party to an exchange.

When an exchange is made that involves anything that is not wealth itself or a direct claim on wealth, fraud is involved, and though it is hidden and unrecognized, it is embezzlement and cheats the receiver out of part of his due payment.

When wealth itself or a direct claim on a set quantity of commodity is received, the commodity already exists. When "money" or any paper token that is not a direct claim on 'existing' wealth is received, then that token is an imagined claim on wealth to be produced sometime in the future.

It is extremely important that this point be fully understood. When a paper token received is a claim on the production of some producer in the future, the token is a promise of payment; it is not the payment itself. The significant thing to consider is the 'time delay' involved. At the time of receipt the paper token may have been "dollars", and because the stated parity of one dollar equals 0.0286 ounce of gold .999 fine, the goods exchanged for "dollars" were really exchanged in the belief that the dollars were in fact the equivalent of the gold they represented, and that eventually they could be exchanged for something equal to that given up, or at least something whose parity to gold would be the same as that originally surrendered to get the "dollars." The "dollars" received were related to gold, and through that relationship to all other commodities. The gold in this case is the common commodity, but "dollars" being unredeemable, any representation of gold is by government edict only and has to be imagined.

''Dollars" are inflation, and as such their parity relationship to gold is not through redeemability by the monetary authorities but only through exchangeability by the public and so is continually in a state of change because of their accumulation, (falling dollar parity). Therefore, by the time the "dollars" are used to complete the transaction that was in progress when they were received, the parity between the gold they "actually" represent, by exchangeability, and the commodity you wish to receive in exchange for them will have changed (the "dollar's" parity will have fallen and you cannot get as much for them). Farmers who take their crop to market at one time and receive "money 11 in exchange and must make it cover their expenses throughout a long period until the next crop, are particularly hard hit by the inflationary effect during the time interval.

What appears to the public as a "rising price level" is in fact the 'falling dollar parity'. As such it robs, all people who save in terms of the "dollar", of some of their purchasing power, as time passes, in addition to the expropriation of wealth that takes place when the imaginary demand units ("dollars") enter the economy.

 'Credit' may never have been fully understood by many of the millions who have helped to perpetuate it through the centuries. It is not for any mortal to say the extension of credit to one person from another is good or bad, but it is Important that we understand Its unintentional effect on others. It appears at first that the creation of an I.O.U. by one individual as a record of debt to another for freely loaned wealth is not the business of anyone else. It appears that it is a purely personal arrangement mutually agreed upon between parties, and as such has no effect on other people. Deeper study, however, reveals that an I. 0. U. or promise of any kind-used in exchange for-or to represent- wealth is inflation, and can cause the inflationary effect.

The relatively stable commodity parities are the true measure of a balanced economy. Wealth is physically produced goods having use value and exchangeability. Services performed are generally traded for wealth at mutually agreed upon exchange rates. Services paid for with wealth are valid components of "supply" after performance. Any I.0.U. ever created denotes "performance promised-- its only excuse for existence is the fact the transaction's completion is deferred. The service to be performed or the wealth to be delivered is to be some time in the future. An I.0.U. promising wealth for services received is not any different than an I. 0. U. promising services for wealth received. In both cases an 1. 0. U. is imaginary demand (lust as though it were "dollars") that causes the inflationary effect, (falling dollar parity) that could not happen otherwise. The dollar's" parity is determined by competitive bidding during exchanges and any exchanges involving imaginary demand that lowers the "dollar's" parity, lowers it for everyone. It is understood that one instance of credit extension between two parties would not lower the ''dollar's" parity noticeably for all. However, it must be acknowledged that the effect of a general practice of credit purchasing will have a highly inflationary effect (hyper falling dollar parity) or the so called 'runaway rising price level'.

It seems only reasonable and fair that if a skilled worker is sick and unable to perform, a druggist may extend him credit for medicine. It seems only reasonable that the worker sign the bill for the drugs and promise to pay when he is again able to work. If the bill is held by the druggist until it is paid there is no inflationary effect but if the bill is in any way negotiable (as an 1. 0. U.) then it must be seen now that it does put a burden on the others participating in the economy. Before the advent of the present fiat money system, people had savings of wealth that could tide them over a short illness. Resorting to credit was not always as "necessary" as it seems to be today. Negotiable credit is inflation-Inflation eats up savings and lack of savings causes reliance on credit. Negotiable credit once established as a way of life perpetuates itself and always ends in the destruction of the economy. A non-negotiable 1. 0. U. issued by a skilled worker is non-inflationary and not immoral or illegal. A negotiable 1. 0. U. created by a skilled worker is inflationary even if marked redeemable in his goods and/or his services to be delivered.

An 1. 0. U. created and issued by a commercial banker as a claim on the goods or services of the HOLDER is both inflation and thievery.

'Time' is the deciding factor in the determination of inflation. Any instrument conveying the right of property in the market place represents property either produced or to be produced. A negotiable instrument representing goods or services to be produced is an imaginary demand medium. A negotiable instrument representing goods already produced, and held on deposit, expressly for its redemption is a non-inflationary "bearer certificate." A balanced economy demands that in any transaction comparable, mutually acceptable supply" (wealth) be exchanged. If one side of an exchange is represented by a promissory note it holds that supply (real demand) on one side was traded for imaginary demand only, on the other side, and supply will be forthcoming, which makes the exchange inflationary. If one side of an exchange is represented by a receipt for goods 'on deposit', it holds that supply (real demand) on one side was traded for supply (real demand) by proxy on the other side and but for considerations of possible counterfeiting the exchange is non-inflationary. Except for counterfeiting considerations the use of bearer certificates as mediums of exchange in the market place would be entirely non-inflationary. In. the absence of central banking any counterfeiting would be disclosed by Gresham's law. Giving up wealth and receiving a bearer certificate on wealth already in existence is not inflationary.

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earth ..........194

People with surpluses of wealth may deposit that wealth in banks for the purpose of earning rent. Banks might borrow it long from its depositors to lend it short to the borrowers, and charge rent for its use. Banks may lend its depositors' wealth, on proper wealth-pledge collateral, and share the rent with its depositors. To accept a modest rent for such use of one's wealth is not immoral or illegal. Rent is a mutually agreed upon, economic good, reflecting true use value in a free market. Using one's wealth to allow others to go into business or to expand their operation is an economic good. Using created credit" causes eventual economic collapse! Credit is only created when supply (wealth) is relinquished in return for an I. 0. U. Sound banking can be conducted only where credit is not created. Only by strictly maintaining "borrowing long" to "lend short" (sound banking princip1es), coupled with only wealth and bearer certificates as mediums of exchange can our economy remain relatively stable forever.

Understanding why there a difference between lending one's wealth on an unbacked note, or on a pledge of wealth, already created is extremely important. It is easy to see why a note is inflationary since it is a promise only, and does not represent an already produced economic good. It may be more difficult to understand the pledge of wealth collateral as being a potential "supply" item. "Supply" accurately defined would have to read: all material things produced by human exertion, having exchange value (wealth). Wealth being: all material things produced by human exertion, having exchange value (supply). Wealth used as a medium of exchange is at all times also supply, a gold coin standing ready at any time to cap a tooth or be turned into jewelry. Services (human exertion not engaged in producing a product) are only exchangeable for wealth after performance-before performance services have only potential value. Pledged wealth then is unconsumed "goods'' already produced and owned, and although not the most convenient "form" of medium of exchange, nevertheless stands ready to serve as supply. Pledged wealth can be accepted as being reserve -supply with potential as a medium of exchange. A house as collateral for a loan of wealth and listed on mortgage papers is reserve supply (reserve potential real demand). An automobile as collateral for a loan, the title pledged, is supply reserved. An automobile pledged as collateral for the very wealth it took to purchase it is still valid. The bank depositor's wealth borrowed and used to purchase a car makes the loan non-inflationary if it is a secured loan with the car as chattel. Both sides of the transaction are covered by supply (wealth-real demand) items; the depositor's wealth on one side, and the car on the other.

The validity to consider all things produced, and not yet consumed, as potential supply is very evident during periods of deflation brought on by the inflation. During the periods of deflationary depression, unemployment is high, incomes are low and people will offer all types of belongings in the market place for exchange, just to get enough medium of exchange to exchange for food. The "dollar" (credit) volume reduced causes lower "dollar'' amounts bid per unit of supply thereby raising the "dollar" parity. The absolute proof of the law of competitive bidding is evident as the supply of people's belongings as consumer's goods, as yet unconsumed, enters the market from privately held sources to bid competitively with the surplus supply inventory brought on by less purchases due to unemployment, and tips the scales in favor of higher "dollar" parity we call lower "prices." It is the combination of the lowering of the quantity of "money"—credit—(imaginary demand) against the increase of supply (real demand) that so readily proves the natural law so invincible. "Credit"-" money" creation alone is 'inflation' and is therefore the cause of the inevitable deflation. With only wealth mediums in use, inflation cannot be present therefore deflation would never be necessary.

Inflation ..........195

It is easy to see now why credit expansion policies are so popular. Living within one's means, cash and carry, will not raise the standard of living as rapidly as creating credit can appear to. This is the accepted belief, although the premise is false! Being able to create purchasing power out of thin air which Is what credit buying is, is a get-rich-quick scheme for the money creators, and an economic "death trap" for all others. Those who extend the negotiable credit commercially reap great immediate profits in interest and charges, but will have to suffer the deflation eventually. Great businesses collapse, and most times the government that permitted it all, collapses also. The people end up with great quantities of worthless paper. The monetary authority and the commercial bank members which created the negotiable credit mediums of exchange ("dollars") ends up with the wealth of the nation.

Our currency today is FIAT money-Webster: U.S. paper currency of government issue which is made legal tender by fiat or law, does not represent, or is not based upon; specie, and contains no promise of redemption.

Our former currency was based upon specie-Webster: coin, usually of gold or silver, and did contain a promise of redemption and were redeemable in the gold and silver coin.

What is the difference between the two entirely different currencies? Why does a nation using wealth redeemable currency flourish and prosper, while a nation using fiat currency flounders and fails? Why is it so difficult to see that it is the fiat currency that is at fault-not who issues the fiat-but the presence of the fiat itself. What is the nature of the fiat currency that makes it BAD-but ever so difficult to discover it inherent fault? It is the fiat currency that is wrong and the following disclosure will prove it.

Our currency today-both coin and bills are fiat money-the Monetary Authority admits it and they are secure in their belief that the public will never discover how that fiat money embezzles their wealth from them. It can only be exposed by investigating 'where it originated' and 'who had it first'.

Our currency (fiat money) today is called "dollars" just as our gold and silver coins and certificates were in the past. In former writings on this subject we covered the technical and specific nature of the "dollar --but-for this exercise we will omit 'reality' and use the terms as understood by the public at large and endeavor to expose the fiat money for what it is: "a great expropriator of the public's wealth."

As of today-when any member of the working public earns a dollar it is done by expending energy-his or hers. It takes labor to get dollars, even speculators put in hours of laboring to plan their speculations. Anyone who receives a dollar has to work to get it, sell something they have to get it or pledge something they have to borrow a dollar. No matter how a member of the public gets a dollar it costs them something to get it. It is perfectly natural for anyone who obtained a dollar, by sacrificing something to get it, to feel that it

worth what they gave up to get it! Perfectly natural for them to expect anyone else to look upon the dollar as being worth exchanging for something they have and so dollars are used as mediums of exchange and no one can see anything wrong in that! The common phrase is: "the dollar is only a medium of exchange." The belief is that the dollar need not be of any "intrinsic value" to function as a medium of exchange-it does just fine and everyone is happy-except me!

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earth ..........196

I ask myself what does having a dollar really mean? It means I gave up something in exchange for it or I worked for it, or I borrowed it. Then I realize 'that' is true no matter what member of the public holds a dollar in his or her possession. It means that no matter who holds a dollar it was obtained from someone else and this leads to wondering: ''who had it first?" This leads to the question: "where do dollars come from?" Dollars come from commercial banks. They are created by writing numbers on books of account and are borrowed by the public to use as mediums of exchange. We used to get dollars by sending gold dust and silver bullion to a "free coinage mint" where it was fashioned. Into coins (according to the constitution) and then by depositing coins in the bank we received certificates of deposit which allowed us to reclaim on demand our gold and silver coin by surrendering the certificate. The certificate bore the legend: "payable to the bearer on demand." We used the 'claim checks' for our coins (certificates) as mediums of exchange and they were acting by proxy for wealth. They did not have "Intrinsic worth" but they were claims on wealth (our gold and silver coins).

Now we borrow dollars from the commercial banker which he creates by writing numbers on the books of account with ink. Dollars are paper and ink records of numbers we agree to borrow and place a $ (dollar sign) alongside. If we deposit our check (paper and ink numbers with the $ alongside) they will issue us "Federal Reserve Notes" which are pieces of paper which imitate to a degree the old certificates we used to have and we use them as mediums of exchange. These pieces of paper are not claim checks on gold or silver coins and there are no gold or silver coins on deposit 'payable to the bearer on demand'! These pieces of paper are fabricated at the bureau of printing and engraving on orders of the treasury and given to the Monetary Authority for distribution upon deposit of the paper and ink numbers created by the Monetary Authority and the commercial banks.

By means of the INTEREST EARNED on these numbers loaned-the commercial banker 'buys up' the nation on the open market. Here is how it works today.

A man in business uses title to his business as collateral to borrow dollars from the commercial bank. The bank holds title to the business for the numbers he lends. An individual borrowing dollars from the commercial bank must pledge wealth also to obtain the borrowed numbers. If a given community is worth 150 million dollars and the outstanding loans of that community's bank is at 100 million dollars then the commercial banker holds title to 66 percent of the community's total worth and he got it for nothing. Repeat for nothing . because even the paper and ink he used was paid for with interest earned on the numbers loaned. The commercial banker only spends the interest earned on the numbers created out of nothing.

The interest earned' is a very important phrase to understand-what does it amount to? It amounts to a fantastic and unbelievable truth that cannot be denied or defended. The reserve requirement on certificates of deposit (CD's) is variable and ranges mostly between 3% and 5%. A 20,000 dollar CD deposit at 596 reserve requirement allows the commercial bank to lend 400,000 dollars at say 8% interest. The interest earned would be 32,000 dollars annually not counting compounding. A 20,000 dollar CD deposit at 3% reserve requirement allows the commercial banker to lend 660,000 dollars worth of numbers at 8% interest. The interest earned would be 52,800 dollars annually. Of course 'we have to deduct the interest earned by the depositor which is the amount he gets for "buying" the 'CD' lets see 20,000 dollars at 8% = 1,600 dollars as the depositor's share allowing the bank to net 51,200 dollars or 32 times what the depositor of the numbers gets. Perhaps that is fair since the commercial banker created and loaned all the numbers in the first place.

You cannot figure that the commercial banker only makes 3,200% profit because even the part of the interest earned that the depositor receives was not paid by the banker-he gets all the numbers he creates free. All interest earned is pure profit on an "Investment" of nothing and the percentage of profit is infinite.

On checking and savings accounts the reserve requirement is much higher but the infinite percentage of profit remains the same-it cannot be calculated.

The people who own and control the Monetary Authority and the commercial banks create dollars out of nothing-lend them to the public and purchase ownership of all the wealth the public produces on the open market with the interest earned! Interest earned on dollars which they create without expending any of their "human'' energy. All the salaries and expenses of their 'operation' is paid for out of the interest earned on dollars created out of nothing.

 THIS IS NOT A SITUATION TO BE LAUGHED AT- IT IS A TRAGEDY!

We must return, by whatever practical means, and as soon as is practical to a system minus any form of created dollars (numbers alongside a $ sign) as an accepted medium of exchange. There must be no tokens allowed that are not 100% redeemable in wealth already produced and set aside for the redemption of the paper or metal token used to represent that wealth during transactions.

"Those who create and issue money and credit direct the policies of government and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people."
Rt. Hon. Reginald McKenna former pres. of Midland Bank of England-Ex Secretary of the British Exchequer 1920.

Slavery was outlawed in the United States some years back. The idea that one individual could purchase another and forever hold title to the production of the 'slave' was disagreeable. We as a people believe that all humans should be free to exercise the God given right to pursue happiness in anyway they choose; as long as, it does not infringe upon the rights of others.

Prior to 1933 all U.S. citizens could, through personal effort, or investment acquire wealth in any form, including the form generally accepted as mediums of exchange, gold. and silver coin.

The public owned the United States and its wealth; it belonged to them. The public carried the nation's purchasing media around, on their persons, with which to conduct daily transactions in the nation's economy. That which was not carried about was stored in reserve to honor the paper claims and pass books they did possess, that proved their ownership of the wealth stored in banks and the official treasury. Today the actual gold and silver specie redemption has been taken from us by executive orders and the public no longer has the right to demand specie redemption. The public's constitution recognized and guaranteed the right of private property ownership; it has since been removed by executive orders of elected officials, in violation of their sworn oaths to support and defend the people's constitution. What seems so impossible to believe is that the public traded one kind of limited slavery for total public slavery.

With the creation of a monetary authority by the congress of the U.S. came the removal of the right to make contracts payable in specie; the public must use legal tender; only monetary authorities may settle debts with gold. When the public controlled and owned the wealth of the nation, the nation belonged to the public. The public hired, by election people to occupy offices in government, which "guaranteed" 'that the laws set forth in the constitution and the bill of rights would be carried out. By an act of congress a monetary authority was created and now the wealth of the nation is owned by the monetary authority which simply created the legal tender and through the use of the legal tender purchased the country from the public on the open market.

It is the great mass of the public that does not realize yet that they have been completely robbed of their nation. The public does not realize that the "dollars" already created and listed on the books of banks as belonging to the holders of pass books and check books are recycled imaginary debt. Every "dollar" created, whether represented by physical token (metal or paper) in the hands of the public, or not, is still a "dollar" created by and loaned by the monetary authority (the federal reserve system). All "dollars" "exist'' on the books and remain, on the books, regardless of what befalls the tokens. The "dollars-- all "dollars" ever created were created by the monetary authority or the commercial banks members and as such were loaned into the public sector. Therefore, all "dollars" are owed back to the 'monetary authority commercial bank member' from which it came originally, by someone who borrowed it. There are no freely held "dollars" anywhere in the world.

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earth .........198

If an individual holds a 'dollar bill token' it may or may not be evidence of that individual's obligation to return it to the bank. If the holder was the borrower, then it is evidence of the holder's obligation to return it to the bank from which it was borrowed. If however, the holder is not the borrower then it is simply a token representing the fact that somewhere there is someone that is obligated to return a "dollar" to a bank. The holder may have obtained it from the original borrower by giving up wealth, or he may be the sixth, tenth, or the millionth 'trader' removed from the borrower; but no matter how many 'holders' removed from the original borrower it (the 'dollar bill token') is evidence, representing the fact that somewhere, 'back there', no matter how many transactions removed is a borrower with an obligation to return one "dollar" to a federal reserve member commercial bank.

No matter how many of the individuals that make up the public, hold claims on "dollars" and no matter in what form the claim exists: Bonds, Stocks, Bank Pass Books, Certificates or Checking Account Receipts, it does not matter which, they are still not claims on wealth promised for their redemption. The --dollars" are records of imaginary debt owed to the monetary authority commercial bank member which created the fantasy "dollar" by writing a number in a book. No matter how long the individuals that make up the public uses "them" as mediums of exchange to facilitate the exchange of production, they are subject to recall by the lending institution that loaned them-and then subject to recall from, the lending institution that loaned them, to the lending institution that created them (the monetary authority commercial bank member), unless, of course, in some cases the lending institution that loaned them may also be, the institution that created the "dollars" originally.

The volume of "dollars" created to date is in excess of five trillion five hundred fifty billion estimated; there is no way to know exactly. The federal government is presently going into debt at the rate of two million "dollars" an hour and the public at the rate of one million "dollars" every hour. But, the volume already there is almost twice the total worth, in "dollars," of the entire United States and all its possessions and resources known to exist at this time.

Every single "dollar" ever created on the books was created as an imaginary debt owed by the borrower to the issuer of the "dollar" and is subject to recall PLUS INTEREST. There is no way on earth that this "debt" can be settled should the monetary authorities through their commercial bank members decide to FORECLOSE!

Try to comprehend what you have just read, read it over one hundred times if necessary until you understand the truth or can deny the statements (if you can argue against the above to your own satisfaction then please contact and subject yourself to debate with me-M.M.EJ.)

There are of course, a few million U.S. Notes that are among the tokens in the hands of the public, that are not interest bearing. All the borrowers could not pay back all the "dollars" borrowed, plus all the interest due and the only individuals of the public sector that could possibly remain solvent following such a foreclosure would be those that had exchanged their "dollars" for wealth and could "buy" themselves free of "dollar" indebtedness. All those who could not get, or did not have the "dollars" of principal and interest to repay would suffer the foreclosure of the wealth they pledged to obtain the "dollars" borrowed and would be completely upon the mercy of the monetary authority commercial bank members. The only individuals left with any degree of freedom at all would be those who had shed their "dollars" and resorted to wealth early enough.

Although it is hard to believe, and denied by most, when mentioned, if some group of international bankers, way back there in time, had wanted to conquer the world by economic means, they could not have designed a better scheme than our own federal reserve system, and the international monetary fund.

'Legal' tender-" money" causes slavery ..........199

The United States public individuals are indeed slaves to the "almighty dollar", whether they are bought in the body as the slaves in past history, and all production becomes the property of the purchaser of the 'body'; or whether they THINK THEY ARE FREE but all their production is purchased with imaginary "dollars", the sole right Of the monetary authorities commercial bank members to create; it doesn't seem to make much difference to me.

The creators of the "dollars" were able to devour up the wealth of the world's public so successfully (from the viewpoint of the creators) that the rest of the world's central banks are toying with the idea of trying it on the grand scale by replacing the "dollar" with the S.D.R. and making the public individuals of the world all slaves. Since the private ownership of wealth is the only defense against being committed to this form of slavery, every effort will be made to retain the legal tender provisions of the law that prohibits the use of wealth as a medium of exchange. Great effort will be made to destroy private means of earning a living. Business will be saddled with law after law, restriction after restriction, until all ambitious people capitulate.

When the monetary authority which regulates the member commercial banks finally have the entire world's public using-their imaginary medium of exchange, they will indeed have reduced all of the public to being their slaves.

GOVERNMENT CONTROLS ON THE USE OF WEALTH INHIBIT FREE ENTERPRISE AND CAUSE ECONOMIC DECLINE!

CONSPIRACY TO EXPROPRIATE WEALTH WITH "MONEY" ASSURES THE EVENTUAL DESTRUCTION OF THE CONSPIRACY!

THE MAIN ECONOMIC FUNCTION OF ''MONEY'' IS THE EXPROPRIATION OF WEALTH!

TAKE AWAY ALL THAT A HUMAN EARNS AND HE STOPS WORKING!

A FRACTIONAL RESERVE MONETARY SYSTEM EMBEZZLES PRODUCTION WITHIN ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.

"Those who create and issue money and credit direct the policies of government and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people." Rt. Hon. Reginald McKenna former pres. of Midland Bank of England-Ex Secretary of the British Exchequer 1920.

 The United States dollar is no longer redeemable. It has not been redeemable in gold since 1933. It has not been redeemable in silver since 1969, by the coinage act of 1965, which gave the secretary of the treasury the right to take 97% seigniorage. Without the discipline that is the natural result of redeemability the dollar volume increases beyond reason. Once a nation embarks on a fiat currency system it has accepted use of 'imagination' as legal tender (see previous chapters) and the volumes created cannot be controlled.

Great volumes of dollars are created, just by writing numbers on the ledgers of the banking system. With only paper and ink, dollars are created, but it takes labor and time to produce the goods and perform the services that are purchased -with dollars. It is not difficult to understand that dollars can be and are created faster than the goods they are used to purchase. Since dollars are used as mediums of exchange and are never consumed the volume accumulates at an accelerating rate. With this ever expanding accumulation it becomes necessary for the excess dollars created, over the goods created and consumed, to be foundered in some way.

"Money" The Greatest Hoax On Earth ..........200

 When dollars were redeemable and a bank created too many, the excess would occasionally be found out and the bank would 'fail'. It was a simple thing really. It seems that most people are satisfied to exchange the numbers created by banks called dollars, by writing numbers themselves on 'pieces of paper transferring records of debts from account to account by these written 'Instructions' called 'checks'. Only approximately ten percent of the dollars created were ever needed as coinage with which to redeem 'bearer certificates' and checks presented at the banks for 'hard' cash. The 'hard' cash was the controlling device, as long as no more than ten times the amount of 'hard' cash on hand, was ever created as dollars, to be 'demand' upon it, the banks would seldom get into trouble.

When we had individual banks issuing bank notes this was a problem for them. Whenever an individual bank created too many dollars and a demand for redemption occurred, for which they did not have enough coinage they would be 'found out', the bank would 'fail' and the banker would be severely punished. With the charter of the federal reserve system and its function as a central bank it was possible to greatly reduce this problem. With all banks connected, the difficulty any one bank might get into could be diminished by any number of the others coming to its aid with 'federal' money. The system as a whole though, was still 'governed' by the dollar redemption for specie requirement and could not exceed the 'ten times' discipline or the whole system would fail.

It is the creation of dollars, that are in excess of the amount that can be redeemed with specie, that is 'inflation'. Bearer certificates for which there is coinage (gold and silver usually) on hand to redeem, act by proxy in the market place for that coinage (wealth) and are not inflation. All excess dollars for which there is no wealth on deposit to redeem are 'money'. 'Inflation' is 'money'!

"Whatever during an exchange is accepted, in lieu of wealth, is imaginary demand, money, inflation and credit." Jenkins. The accumulation of dollars created from 1913 to 1933 was so great that the gold redemption was repudiated by executive order of President Roosevelt. By 1965 the dollar accumulation had increased to such an enormous amount the silver redemption was repudiated by the administration of President Johnson. The United States is now on total fiat; all dollars created are totally non-redeemable. Comparing the volume of dollars created in relation to the gold reported to be on hand, it would be found that 'ten times' had been exceeded and at present the U.S. Dollars created are in excess over 200 times. We are more than 20,000 percent inflated.

It can be understood how we arrived in this condition. Dollars are used as mediums of exchange and although not redeemable they are exchangeable for goods and so it was easy for the monetary authorities to say that the dollar is no longer backed by gold and silver; it is now backed by the gross national product (G.N.P.). This, of course, means that the concept that the production of the people is the wealth to be purchased with dollars and the wealth that backs those dollars at the same time, must be accepted. This is a mind twister and extremely difficult to perceive.

All dollars are exchangeable for production.

All production is exchangeable for dollars.

All dollars held are backed by the production sold;

All dollar holders sold the backing for the dollars they hold. Then:

A farmer sells a watermelon for a dollar;

The farmer holds the dollar backed by the watermelon he sold;

If the melon he sold gets eaten the dollar he holds is no longer backed!(continue)