So then

So then, the fact of the existence of usury, and the fact that usury can really exist, goes to prove that money is a law of man, to be centrally created and regulated; for if money was anything other than a law of man, then making money from money would not be evil.

So then, today the creation of money and making money from money have been joined into one unit. This fusion by which money is made into a cancerous, life-sucking stream, rather than a blood stream, is made allowable by the government forfeiting its constitutional money-creating and regulating rights to private banks, who issue the bulk of the money supply as an interest-bearing debt.

The creation of the units of debt is the creation of the money. The debt and the money are one. Thus if the debt were paid off using the same debt-money system (which is an impossibility) there would be no money in existence. To be in debt is to be at minus. To pay off the debt is to arrive back at zero. The debt must increase in order for that debt-money system to keep going. To decrease the national debt (using the same system) is to decrease the money supply.

So then, think about what decreasing the money supply in that system would mean. To decrease the money supply in a system in which the money must be ever more increased for that system to sustain itself means not simple decrease, but cataclysmic, unremitting, grinding impoverishment and consequential enslavement. For the debt must ever increase for such a system to keep going, and the money is the debt.

So then, all what the banks need to do is refuse to issue more loans, and you will see who has the power.

So then, this is why there is a national deficit. Thus "fractional reserve lending" is, as Karl Denninger says, kind of a misleading phrase. For what the banks do is outright counterfeiting; something that if you or I tried we would be arrested and jailed.

The only difference, of course, is that simple counterfeiting would only cause simple inflation. What the banks do is counterfeiting as debt.

So then, this right of money creation and regulation is only a sovereign right of a government in the public interest.

So then, the creation of money and regulating the value thereof (controlling the quantity) by the government in the public interest is not something the government can profit from in the sense of usurious gain and consequent enslavement.

So then, taxation is a two-way street: in a system in which the government would be the creator, issuer and regulator of money (and also in which the government was outlawed from borrowing), taxation is a kind of litmus test by which people can immediately gauge how benevolent or how corrupt that government is, and by which the government must deal with the public.

So then, the ultimate sense in which money is to be understood is that it is incentive-forwarding rather than seeing it as value-backed. When people start to seek for ways in which money will be value-backed they are inherently saying that we must serve money, rather than money serving us.

So then, money properly understood is the "life blood" by which we freely get to build and grow an economy - without anyone forcing himself or others.

So then, economic reform is really quite simple, and all the economic gibberish is nothing but highly funded propaganda to keep people confused.

So then, the bogeyman of simple inflation in a debt-free system, which is what we do not have today, would be a hundred times better than what we have today.

So then, simple inflation in a debt-free system is easily and simply avoided by quantity control, as is presently done on the Island of Guernsey. If you can create the money you sure as hell can regulate its quantity.

So then, the present hyper-inflation due to money-as-debt is the example of what happens when you leave the money issue to private institutions.

So then, the gold standard is a planned economy in the worst possible sense of the words; unyielding, yet totally at the whims set by those who own the gold. Government creation of debt-free money and regulating the value thereof is to issue the "life blood" by which people can freely grow an economy according to their greatly varied talents, incentives and so forth, whereas the gold standard is just that - a standard artificially fixed for a planned economy to make richer those who are rich, at the expense of making poorer those who are poor and those who are middle class and even those who are very well-to-do. Absolutely stable for those who are rich, the gold standard is a planned economy of steeply vertical top-down control, and for who the lower class serfs must strenuously and artificially align all their labours and productions according to the value set by rich people on a metal that is dug out of the ground.

So then, people like Alex Jones, Max Keiser, Mike Maloney and so forth are total shills and perfect examples of how you can know and yet not know; of how you can know so much and yet be totally wrong.