Hungary orders rotschild/IMF central bank out.

DamagedTrax

dunno if you guys have seen this yet? i cant find any trace in mainstream media but if its true its a huige step forward!

but will the 'freedom bombs' be making their way towards hungary now?

alastair

Ehh, Hungary just finished repaying their IMF bailout. It's not exactly momentous news - we'll be in the same boat in the next few months.

The scary Jew's-under-the-bed stuff is an extra-special touch all the same - but to be expected, considering the source.

DamagedTrax

Ehh, Hungary just finished repaying their IMF bailout. It's not exactly momentous news - we'll be in the same boat in the next few months.

I think you're misreading. the article is about hungary ending the charter of their private central reserve bank and returning to a public central bank and the right to print their own money without having to be slaves to a fractional reserve banking system. Now, if they print money, they dont owe interest on it and private sector banks can no longer lend out over their reserves in hand. This means that inflation is in the control of the government, rather than at the whim of corporations who care little about economic impact on the people.

The comment about their bailout being paid back early was an aside in the article, not the point of it.

The scary Jew's-under-the-bed stuff is an extra-special touch all the same - but to be expected, considering the source.

Did you read the article? the word 'Jew' doesnt appear once in it. The reference to 30's Germany is in relation to the sustained economic recovery that they enjoyed after the hardships post WW1. this is a legitimate point to bring up as they too had recently absolved their private central banking system.

And if it had been anti-semitic i wouldnt have posted it. Im certainly not one to believe the Jews are the source of all the world's evil... not all of the jewish faith hold zionist ideals.

Torakx

Last time I looked which was maybe 2 years ago. The fractional reserve was at around 10%.
Meaning the banks could lend out the other 90% of any money people had in their system(including loans people got from the same bank iirc), only having to hold on to 10% for "security".
With a country being able to set that fraction much higher, it should allow them to kerb over inflation quite a lot, while still keeping a fractional reserve system in use.
I asked around in the economics forum on fractional reserves, but couldn't find out for the life of me why the banks where running on 10%.
I guess it's just capitalism at work there.

DamagedTrax

Last time I looked which was maybe 2 years ago. The fractional reserve was at around 10%.
Meaning the banks could lend out the other 90% of any money people had in their system(including loans people got from the same bank iirc), only having to hold on to 10% for "security".
With a country being able to set that fraction much higher, it should allow them to kerb over inflation quite a lot, while still keeping a fractional reserve system in use.

Exactly! At least a public run fractional reserve system doesnt enslave a nation's economy.. even if it is a questionable practice at best.

I asked around in the economics forum on fractional reserves, but couldn't find out for the life of me why the banks where running on 10%.
I guess it's just capitalism at work there.

The number has sat in and around 10% since the inception of fractional reserve banking. i cant remember why they choose that nuimber but ive definitely read it before so if i remember where ill post the info.

alastair

DamagedTrax wrote: »

I think you're misreading. the article is about hungary ending the charter of their private central reserve bank and returning to a public central bank and the right to print their own money without having to be slaves to a fractional reserve banking system. Now, if they print money, they dont owe interest on it and private sector banks can no longer lend out over their reserves in hand. This means that inflation is in the control of the government, rather than at the whim of corporations who care little about economic impact on the people.

The comment about their bailout being paid back early was an aside in the article, not the point of it.

I read the snippet you posted - which only references their leaving IMF debt (that's the 'Rothschild proxy' they reference) - I won't give American Free Press or Willis Carto the satisfaction of my hits. They're dyed in the wool anti-Semites with a hard-on for old-timey fascism.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

Did you read the article? the word 'Jew' doesnt appear once in it. The reference to 30's Germany is in relation to the sustained economic recovery that they enjoyed after the hardships post WW1. this is a legitimate point to bring up as they too had recently absolved their private central banking system.

And if it had been anti-semitic i wouldnt have posted it. Im certainly not one to believe the Jews are the source of all the world's evil... not all of the jewish faith hold zionist ideals.

You need to open your eyes then. The previous Hungarian government was 'Riddled with Israelis in high places'? Flag waving for the Nazi economic miracle, 'Nationalist Patriots'. They're straight up Jew-hating fascists.

DamagedTrax

alastair wrote: »

You need to open your eyes then. The previous Hungarian government was 'Riddled with Israelis in high places'? Flag waving for the Nazi economic miracle, 'Nationalist Patriots'. They're straight up Jew-hating fascists.

So we shouldnt be allowed to mention a person's place of birth for fear of being anti-semitic? if their government was riddled with israelis then thats what they were. its not bringing faith into the argument, just stating facts.

i cant comment on the rest of their writings as a lot of CTs drive me nuts. But economic stuff interests me and this is a real tangible action thats hugely important considering the financial restraints that the world is in.

alastair

DamagedTrax wrote: »

So we shouldnt be allowed to mention a person's place of birth for fear of being anti-semitic? if their government was riddled with israelis then thats what they were. its not bringing faith into the argument, just stating facts.

This is your response!? The previous government wasn't 'riddled with Israelis, at all. It had one or two Hungarian ministers who were Jewish (and who don't have Israeli nationality). The statement was just standard anti-semitism, far from 'stating facts'.

DamagedTrax

alastair wrote: »

This is your response!? The previous government wasn't 'riddled with Israelis, at all. It had one or two Hungarian ministers who were Jewish (and who don't have Israeli nationality). The statement was just standard anti-semitism, far from 'stating facts'.

Like i said, i dont know the website but the tone of the article is really of little importance to me. Im used to wading thru a sea of not so subtle anti-semitism. The positive from this is the abolishment of private centralised banking in Hungary. it doesnt matter what way the article is written, the story is what matters.

Kiltennel

DamagedTrax wrote: »

Like i said, i dont know the website but the tone of the article is really of little importance to me. Im used to wading thru a sea of not so subtle anti-semitism. The positive from this is the abolishment of private centralised banking in Hungary. it doesnt matter what way the article is written, the story is what matters.

The AFP is considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Centre. Take whatever you read from there with a strong dose of scepticism.

TheBrewMeister

Torakx wrote: »

Last time I looked which was maybe 2 years ago. The fractional reserve was at around 10%.
Meaning the banks could lend out the other 90% of any money people had in their system(including loans people got from the same bank iirc), only having to hold on to 10% for "security".
With a country being able to set that fraction much higher, it should allow them to kerb over inflation quite a lot, while still keeping a fractional reserve system in use.
I asked around in the economics forum on fractional reserves, but couldn't find out for the life of me why the banks where running on 10%.
I guess it's just capitalism at work there.

That's not Capitalism, per se - it's Keynesian Economics.

The Fractional Reserve system is a debt-based system. Money is created and backed by promissory notes instead of something of physical value (traditionally gold).

It's a 9-1 system. Hence the 10% reserves. This allows a bank to loan out 9 times the amount of money it has in reserves. The money is then printed out of thin-air by a privately owned central bank; loaned to the loaning bank and then loaned to the person who created it - the person who signed the promissory note - at a determined level of interest.

The money in this case does not exist until the note is signed. A new account is created - known as a credit account - and the person begins to "repay" the money he/she created with interest.

The benefit of this system from an economic standpoint is that there is no physical limit to how much you can "grow" the economy. Govts can print money, sell bonds, wage war with "fake money" etc...

The problem with the system - and this is what we're seeing all over the world today - is, the system needs continuous debt in order to function. This is why we hear constant debates about "raising the debt ceiling, "fiscal cliffs," and all that bullsiht. Plus, govt can wage limitless wars they cant afford simply by printing more money and selling the bonds. Also, this is a system that moves true wealth up the ladder and trades it for inflation. Fiat or "printed" money is great for the first person who spends it, but the more it travels thru the economy the less value it has.

Keynesian economics is the idea that the govt or a central bank can create and/or control demand. An idea that high taxes and more govt spending stimulates the economy. When, in reality, what we are seeing is that this system doesn't really work, and requires a lot of "band aids" and "bail outs." This is happening in the US pretty bad. They keep trying to stimulate the economy with stimulus checks (free money to citizens) and super low interest rates to encourage more creation of debt.

This always backfires. Injecting money creates inflation, making the money worth less and less. Low interest rates encourage people to take on more debt and create bubbles in markets. - like the housing bubble we had.

Record mortgages were created and builders started building houses like mad to meet the demand of these new potential "home owners". People were buying and selling houses, making hand over fist - the prices went thru the roof, then all the sudden, we hit the ceiling and they tried raising interest rates - and that's when the market tried to correct itself. You had millions of people trying to sell their houses and no one buying. The money coming into the system stalled and then the foreclosures started. The banks - who caused the problem - went to the govt and demanded their money back, stating that if they failed the whole country would cave on itself. The govt gave them taxpayer money to "save" them from their bad bet, and the taxpayers lost their homes.

TheBrewMeister

Heres a really awesome cartoon explaining the whole thing in a fun and interesting way...

http://youtu.be/k6zpfE7WjHI