In reference to your column “Defaulting on Personal Responsibility,” by Tom Purcell, Times Record, 6/19- 6/21 2015, do review and study the following point of view, which may pull back the curtain on some of the long time held illusions we all have been subject to about our current, usurious, debt-based monetary system.
Money, representing real value, loaned by one person to another is based on good faith and the responsibility one person has to the other to repay the loan. This is not the case when a bank lends money. Instead, bank loans are not loans of actual money based on real value, but of credit based on ones’ future ability to pay, and banks charge interest for this. According to the Bank of England’s Spring 2014 report, Modern Money Creation, the bank DOES NOT loan any money that most of us believe they lend, but actually extends credit (NEW MONEY) into the monetary system through an accounting entry, and then makes the so-called borrower sign a so-called obligatory loan with interest. The so called borrower is not aware of this, instead believing that actual money based on real value is loaned. Some claim this is an illegal contract based on deception and fraud.
Furthermore, it is through borrowing that creates and places new money into circulation in the economy, and when loans are repaid, this destroys the money created. In effect, money that is paid back in student loans and mortgages as principal and interest destroys the amount of money in circulation. This results in the the poverty, the loan defaults, the foreclosures and the bankruptcies we witness today.
Furthermore, there is never enough money created in the aggregate to pay the loans and the interest unless there is MORE borrowing, thus resulting in an unsustainable monetary system.
A solution is for banks to be truthful about what they are actually doing, and ideally for we the people to issue credit without interest for what we want to create and what our capacities warrant.
David Snieckus Orr’s Island
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less