Agreed David. When we attempt to make a shift from filling the pockets of the banking cabal then we become a target for all manner of persuading measures including military intervention as necessary.

eg Norman Kirk setting up a citizen’s super scheme where a small percentage of a citizen wage was placed in an account in Govt coffers with a promise to add interest as time passed.
The MSM fought a battle with the idea but it went ahead.
Kirk got sick and died.
Rowling got hell from the MSM with Bob Jones and others attacking him from all quarters.
The next election the CIA designed and sponsored a dancing Cossacks TV add for National and money came into the country to run an overwhelming campaign against Labour.
National got in and eliminated the citizens super scheme.
There was no way the banksters and their comrades in crime, the insurance parasites were going to let a country become solvent and build up equity with citizens money they wanted
If Norman Kirk’s scheme had continued NZ would have been deep in surplus and the Govt a major player in financing, and all citizens better off. No management fees nor losses if finacial crises occurred. It was a Govt backed scheme unlike Kiwisaver in private hands..

“it is the banks that have to be held together to prevent collapse of everything.”
Agreed in the short term if we agree to live under the hegemony of international private bankers.

At some point we have to move away either by incremental change, bloody multinational revolution or a crash so deep that global trade and the financial cabal cannot foster enough support to fight change.

Well in that case you would have to think that the independence of the Reserve Bank is part of the problem. Their primary responsibility will be to the financial system as it stands and runs. It is also very convenient for govts to be able to throw their hands in the air and exclaim that it’s not their call. Govts have the power to bend the RB as they see fit but all are frightened of the resulting squeals. but from what you are saying it appears that with a will the RB could take control of the amount of money created. this still leaves the problem of the need for continuous expansion of GDP. I don’t see how you fix that with debt based money creation exacerbated by interest payments. Surely this is the greatest benefit of the positive money approach. You no longer need infinite expansion or what equates for this in the real world, infinite expansion with discrete packets of massive destruction (wars, depressions, etc).

i have been puzzling about QE money since it was introduced. It was described as Fiat money used to secure the financial system at first, but commentators constantly described the action as saddling the public with the tab.
As Don Brash on Morning Report back in 2009 said, having the RB go to the retail bond market and buy bonds with new money to increase the M1 money supply is something that happens regularly in the normal RB operations. It was just the degree that was unusual then , but also it was unusual (unprecedented in fact) that they also bought Bonds and stocks of major companies to rescue them then to. That part of it soon dropped out of MSM comment about QE.
Buying Govt bonds from the secondary market that the govt had already issued, for the purpose of borrowing for it’s normal business does not increase the public debt that ultimately we owe because it was already borrowed. It just changes who it is owed to. But if the Govt issues bonds specifically to facilitate the creation of that money then the QE saddles the public with the equivalent debt. So rather than alleviating the overall debt mountain it exacerbates it.It just becomes a transfer of debt from insolvent banks and companies to the public . Every improvement makes matters worse.
The trouble is that they have a tiger by the tail. If (when)the banks and overfinancialised companies are left to fail, esp the banks, the money system will fail completely. It’s much easier to identify what’s wrong with the system we have than to invent a new not that will fix them without creating other problems. I think a properly regulated FR system. with a prohibition on banks from engaging in any activity but receiving savings deposits and making loans to the public was workable.
D J S

Just a thought though. In times like these where debt is still huge and limited ability to repay then all that debt is being treated as real money and the RBs of the world are complicit in this in accepting that debt and exchanging it for real money. Now if paying off debt destroys money does QE then destroy money rather than create it? Or do these collateralised debt instruments remain in existence. I was under the impression they are destroyed so how is it that this finacial wizardry is promoted as expansive when if it is a tricky way of paying off debt it should contract money supply?

The bank might well take your cash outside and burn it too as to them it is only worth the paper it is written on. They don’t pay it’s face value to anyone. It must be accounted for somehow in their books but it only costs them the cost of minting it. The foldey is probably less than the coin.
If you visualise the banking system as a whole balancing the loans with the deposits as I described above, largely in the same move but balancing any discrepancy at the end of the day. With any over lending borrowed from the RB, it becomes evident that it is the RB advancing that short term credit , which it does with fiat money, that is actually increasing the overall money supply.
And yes you have it that when everyone (including government) rushes to pay off their debts it collapses the money supply like a mouthful of candy floss. Because it’s nearly all debt to begin with.

D J S

My apologies DJS. You are right. Repaying a loan destroys money in the same way as making a loan creates it. So that would make it appear that the main problems with this system are that the RB has lost control of the money supply and that as Ellen Brown says only the principal is created so that repaying with interest ends up destroying money quite quickly which necessitates an ever increasing debt creation cycle that keeps on feeding itself until it blows up. Surely these boom and bust cycles could be eliminated by spending money into existence from RB to govt. The only other alternatives are loans without interest or debt jubilees. I think Michael Hudson says that debts that cant be paid wont be paid. There needs to be some recognition of this from the banking sector and either some of the extreme profits put aside for this or go for the Chinese system that seems to be very successful. Almost all banking is govt owned and loans are made on whatever criteria maybe social factors of employment or sectors that are being pushed as nationally important but then when the loans go bad not necessarily foreclosing because its only the govt for which other social considerations are just as important. People seem obsessed with the theory of serious shark circling competition being the driving force of successful evolution when any serious study of nature shows time and again the benefits of mutual aid in supporting individuals and giving an edge to the survival of a seemingly weaker species against an apparently individually stronger aggressor. Demanding every pound of flesh is the downfall of the West

Please listen to Ellen Brown in the interview linked below.

Sorry DJS but I have to disagree with you here. John W has got it completely right. The deposit amount that I referred to above is the money loaned created as a deposit into the account of me the borrower. It is this money that is newly created as a debt. The lending bank gets to create the loan money and charge interest!?! John W is right to be horrified and correct when he says that if this money creation scam was made to only be legal for an NZ owned RB we would no longer be suffering from user pays anything. Everything would be affordable and full employment guaranteed

I also fail to see how money used to pay back the loan goes out of existence. What you are saying is akin to saying that if I paid It back each week in cash they would take it out the back and burn it. Cash or digital, this is real money and no one is going to be extinguishing it!

Have a listen to this https://www.globalresearch.ca/universal-basic-income-covid-19-bailout/5708293