The Gold Solution is a Lie, IMPORTANT video by Bill Still

[Dachsie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojkr0u7p5iA


The Gold Solution is a Lie, #1457
The Still Report
The Still Report
86,497
903 views
Published on Jan 27, 2017

In my report yesterday, “The Fed Declares War on Trump”, #1454, a lot of misguided gold money lovers jumped in to Comment.
One of the stories they listed was that Ron Paul predicts economic collapse is imminent – meaning sometime in the next 2 years - and Trump will get the blame instead of the Fed.
The idea of these Ron Paul stories is like one huge rolling infomercial; run and buy some more gold so I can sell you some of mine that I bought when the price was really low.

_________________

The more I listen to Bill Still, the more I see him as the E. Michael Jones of Money and Finance and Economy matters. Libertarianism and Gold as money is USURY.

____________

I have posted here somewhere a long time ago that the original libertarian philosophy creators were all Jews over two hundred years to now.

Here are the names of the people who founded and promoted and supported the Austrian School of economics throughout its history.I would bet on about 99 percent of these people are atheist Jews.

Carl Menger,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, and
Friedrich Freiherr von Wieser.
Later Austrian School devotees include…
Ludwig von Mises,
Friedrich Hayek,
Joseph Schumpeter.
Murray Rothbard,
Israel Krizner,
Ludwig Lachmann,
Peter J. Boettke, and
Peter Schiff.


The bible verses that condemn usury are
Psalm 15, Exodus 22:24, Leviticus 25:36-27, Deuteronomy 23:20
G. K. Chesterton said usury devours and destroys: “It is a gigantic heap of debt, like a heap of dirt. It is a heap of debts hoarded until they have gone bad. It is now a heap of bad debts which a little more bad debt will send toppling into the mire.”

_____________

I called in to the Kiely show on Logos Radio Network about two years ago to ask Ellen Brown, the biggest supporter of public banking and the Bank of North Dakota. It may still be in their archived shows. I do not know.

I asked her if the kind of state banks that she supports do fractional reserve banking and she kind of pooh poohed my question and said something like "of course, that is the way banks have to issue credit to each other" or something like that. To me that proves what Bill Still says in this video. We must END all fractional reserve banking - period.

[cheka.]

still, i think, promotes nationalizing the central bank. i would support that to the max - just like i do import tariff. national bank would be a MASSIVE improvement to what we have now.

[Dachsie]

I think Still supports government issued something like JFK and other assassinated presidents tried to do which were "U S notes." I think JFK money was back by silver but do not know for sure if it was actually circulated. The Constitution says the government has the authority to issue its own money. It must be an important solution or the bankster elites would not murder every president who tried to circumvent the private banks like the Federal Reserve.

Abraham Lincoln (the 16th President), James A. Garfield (the 20th President), William McKinley (the 25th President) and John F. Kennedy (the 35th President).

[cheka.]

I think Still supports government issued something like JFK and other assassinated presidents tried to do which were "U S notes." I think JFK money was back by silver but do not know for sure if it was actually circulated. The Constitution says the government has the authority to issue its own money. It must be an important solution or the bankster elites would not murder every president who tried to circumvent the private banks like the Federal Reserve.

Abraham Lincoln (the 16th President), James A. Garfield (the 20th President), William McKinley (the 25th President) and John F. Kennedy (the 35th President).

correct. still wants to make the bank of issue a part of the US treasury dept instead of part of dual citizen nyc privately owned dumpster fire snake pit we have now. the snake pit serves itself first, second, third, fourth, fifth...before giving the leftovers to US treasury. this is regularly tens of billions

imagine using the frbny's awesome power to seek profit for the US treasury -- instead of seeking skype bankster HOLIDAY bonus pools and pushing the myriad of degenerate skype agendas

the hundreds of billions in national bank profit (maybe even trillions) could be used to reduce/eliminate a lot of the income tax burden on WAGES

boom

[Horn]

The silver solution was of course buried as it is truth and still buried by Still today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_of_Gold_speech

[cheka.]

The silver solution was of course buried as it is truth and still buried by Still today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_of_Gold_speech

the cowardly lion eh? i would enthusiastically support that too. there are several options better than the disgusting skype pit we have now

[Dachsie]

I do not completely understand this but as I understand it, the dollars issued by the Treasury really do not have to be backed by any metal, but just backed by the full faith and credit of the USA, and I guess that means the taxing authority of the government. Still stressed U S Treasury issued notes and said nothing about advocating for silver backed notes. Not sure if Still cares one way or the other if the notes are backed solely by silver.

Still what J P Morgan and other banksters said about wanting the gold standard seems logical to me: They want to grab it all up.

What I really do not understand about metals is that to spend them you have to convert them to what is the standard medium of money exchange in existence, the legal "dollars", and therefore "somebody" sets the value of the metal in dollars.. I realize metals are a permanent store of value and as long as you keep the precious metal coins in your possession, you defintitely are not holding something that is worthless - it WILL always hold SOME value. But if it comes time to have to spend the silver eagle coin, I sure do not want to give me goods and services based on the coin being worth "one dollar" when the loaf of bread I am trying to purchase may be $75.00.

_______________

This is a bit off topic but if a person has $10,000, or even like $50,000 in savings in a bank and they go try to withdraw their money in cash, no bank in the USA will give the customer their cash. The bank will agree to TRANSFER the funds digitally to another bank, but they will not give the person their money in cash.

What is so ironic to me is that banks are supposed to be safe places to hold your money for you so that it cannot be stolen from your home or person - "You can bank on that." But the banks are actually stealing and confiscating our money making us convert our FRNs into digital cash that only works as digital cash from then on.

That is why I keep a bare minimum in my bank, which is actually a credit union.

______________

Back to original topic of this posting. If USA started its own currency ONLY, then that would make the banksters' digital notes and FRNs worthless and make them instant paupers. Not clear how the transition to new currency would work and what would become of the FRNs and digital deposits. Nice thought, anyway.

[cheka.]

I do not completely understand this but as I understand it, the dollars issued by the Treasury really do not have to be backed by any metal, but just backed by the full faith and credit of the USA, and I guess that means the taxing authority of the government. Still stressed U S Treasury issued notes and said nothing about advocating for silver backed notes. Not sure if Still cares one way or the other if the notes are backed solely by silver.

that is correct. make the US treasury the bank of issue, where they issue debt free money, as opposed to having to borrow it at interest from skype

Still what J P Morgan and other banksters said about wanting the gold standard seems logical to me: They want to grab it all up.

What I really do not understand about metals is that to spend them you have to convert them to what is the standard medium of money exchange in existence, the legal "dollars", and therefore "somebody" sets the value of the metal in dollars.. I realize metals are a permanent store of value and as long as you keep the precious metal coins in your possession, you defintitely are not holding something that is worthless - it WILL always hold SOME value. But if it comes time to have to spend the silver eagle coin, I sure do not want to give me goods and services based on the coin being worth "one dollar" when the loaf of bread I am trying to purchase may be $75.00.

the metal carries its value with it in the metal, not in face value. everyone with an emergency fund would be better off storing that money in metal, not frn

_______________

This is a bit off topic but if a person has $10,000, or even like $50,000 in savings in a bank and they go try to withdraw their money in cash, no bank in the USA will give the customer their cash. The bank will agree to TRANSFER the funds digitally to another bank, but they will not give the person their money in cash.

What is so ironic to me is that banks are supposed to be safe places to hold your money for you so that it cannot be stolen from your home or person - "You can bank on that." But the banks are actually stealing and confiscating our money making us convert our FRNs into digital cash that only works as digital cash from then on.

That is why I keep a bare minimum in my bank, which is actually a credit union.

______________

Back to original topic of this posting. If USA started its own currency ONLY, then that would make the banksters' digital notes and FRNs worthless and make them instant paupers. Not clear how the transition to new currency would work and what would become of the FRNs and digital deposits. Nice thought, anyway.

comments embedded

[Dachsie]

Thanks for discussing this with me.

The only thing you wrote that I do not think I agree with is

"*the metal carries its value with it in the metal, not in face value. everyone with an emergency fund would be better off storing that money in metal, not frn*

The value you get is what the receiver will pay for it, what the receiver of the metal coin will give you in return for the coin. That does not necessarily mean "face value." As long as we have the Federal Reserve and the Wall Street gang messing with values of everything including precious metals, we have no guarantee whatsover that when it comes time that we may have to spend our silver coins, we will get what we think we ought to get for them in exchange. In fact we also have a bunch of lawmaker crooks making the laws and a bunch of armed officers of the "law" who can come confiscate our store of wealth, silver and gold coins legal tender, almost at any time they want. That is what happened to the people of India recently. The banksters and crooked government just confiscated every citizen's gold.

There is a book called "Barren Metal" by E. Michael Jones and he makes the point that gold and silver are barren, they do not produce. It is only to be hoarded. Frederick Bastiat who wrote the famous book, The Law, said that real wealth is in production.

I lately have been spending a lot of time on youtube channel videos of people who are moving to the homesteading and prepping lifestyle. I would think more of them would realize that productive land with people, a community of people, on it with skills to develop and use the land for continuing production is where it is at as far as a better more secure, independent and free life and future, but there are still a lot of them saying buy silver and gold coins.

I think food and water are best barter items as well as cases of fifths of hard liquor.

I live in a situation where I need to hire people to do some work for me at my house. I will pay well but there are no people who want to come and do the work. I adverstiise for help and A few people with Hispanic names say they will come and give me an estimate but when I message them that I ask that they be U S citizens or documented workers, I never hear from them again.

No amount of money can hire honest reliable skilled people these days. Guess I got off on a tangent. It is very early in the morning and I have already typed several rants to people. Maybe had too much coffee.

[Horn]

There is a book called "Barren Metal" by E. Michael Jones and he makes the point that gold and silver are barren, they do not produce.

Both metals produce, silver more so. Europe keeps the USA and world from silver backing on anything to control it.

Metal backing a currency in denomination of precious as was done in the recent past, keeps the paper notes from runaway printing and is a proper guide balance/alarm to know when too much paper has been printed. If the value of copper in pennies and silver in dimes exceeds their cost to produce the sovereign should heed and stop printing.

Bill Still would want to remove any checks on money lending to U.S. Remove any anchor and allow it to work for the society. While sounding good and doable... in any political system and especially in U.S. divided system one regime would run out the guns before the next regime took office and leave them penniless with a fiat that is flat spent out.

Checks and balances would need constant oversight and subject to change by whatever political party in control.

It is probably impossible to back the dollar with tri-metallism at this point its too far gone, imo

[Dachsie]

Sounds reasonable. Runaway printing can happen even in a new system and there has to be an anchor value to keep that from happening.

I just do not know enough to know exactly what would motivate or set off runaway printing in a new system. I think I have a pretty good idea what kinds of bad things printing our own money prevents, but it just seems to me that bad people with bad goals and much power can get in and subvert the new system no matter what kind of checks and balances exist.

Look how bad and out of balance the checks and balances system of the our tripartate Constitutional Republic went haywire in the last couple of decades.

One thing I have noticed that the people who want to run the world and enslave us all on the surface look like liberals and liberals seem to adhere to the philosophy that people are basically good, but these "neocon" types are really totalitarian brutal fascists on the inside.

I believe that there is "not one good, no not one." We all have a strong tendency to go with the world, the flesh and the devil and that is what these evil rulers capitalize upon to take over the world, and there but for the grace of God go I.

[Dachsie]

I am afraid I have to stop listening to Bill Still.

I just listed to this video in which he said

"As a Christian, I have to support Israel."

As a Christian we are in no way, shape or form obligated to support any particular country on this earth.

Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world."

No patch of real estate on this earth is given special place to followers of Jesus Christ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gYqn0Lvux0

Apparently he was getting a lot of Jew and Israel bashing in his video comments and many of them were profane, racist and anti-simitic and certainly those things are not Christian and I can understand him wanting to keep his channel clean, but as for his quoted statement above, He could not be more wrong in defining what is and is not Christian. It is highly possible that those trolling his comments section are "Israel" as they must suppress non-fake news and commentary.

[crimethink]

If Americans were ever to take control of the US Treasury once again, a combination of United States Notes, gold, and silver would have to be used, with emphasis on the former, since (((they))) own/control most of the physical gold.

Fiat money is not the best, but it would be the only real solution until a commodities-based (not limited only to PMs) economy could be built. At least with United States Notes, there would be no interest and no foreign control.

And God knows that under Trump, Rothschild Holdings USA dba Goldman Sachs/The "Federal" Reserve ain't going to change a thing. (((Mnuchin))) will assure that.

[cheka.]

If Americans were ever to take control of the US Treasury once again, a combination of United States Notes, gold, and silver would have to be used, with emphasis on the former, since (((they))) own/control most of the physical gold.

Fiat money is not the best, but it would be the only real solution until a commodities-based (not limited only to PMs) economy could be built. At least with United States Notes, there would be no interest and no foreign control.

And God knows that under Trump, Rothschild Holdings USA dba Goldman Sachs/The "Federal" Reserve ain't going to change a thing. (((Mnuchin))) will assure that.

like andy gause says - would have to raid the thing all at once. no warning, bust through the doors and take it over

[cheka.]

Sounds reasonable. Runaway printing can happen even in a new system and there has to be an anchor value to keep that from happening.

I just do not know enough to know exactly what would motivate or set off runaway printing in a new system. I think I have a pretty good idea what kinds of bad things printing our own money prevents, but it just seems to me that bad people with bad goals and much power can get in and subvert the new system no matter what kind of checks and balances exist.

Look how bad and out of balance the checks and balances system of the our tripartate Constitutional Republic went haywire in the last couple of decades.

One thing I have noticed that the people who want to run the world and enslave us all on the surface look like liberals and liberals seem to adhere to the philosophy that people are basically good, but these "neocon" types are really totalitarian brutal fascists on the inside.

I believe that there is "not one good, no not one." We all have a strong tendency to go with the world, the flesh and the devil and that is what these evil rulers capitalize upon to take over the world, and there but for the grace of God go I.

china's meteoric rise has been fueled by their state-owned central bank. would be an interesting case study if this movement ever becomes a real issue

I wouldn't discount it becoming a real issue. I thought tariffs were long buried under Skype propaganda - but trump and modern media brought it back into play

so now the Skype are howling all kinds of crazy claims about tariff:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/media-corporations-promote-hysteria-over-possibility-of-tariffs-predict-end-of-world/5571377

Media, Corporations Promote Hysteria over Possibility of Tariffs; Predict End of World

As of yet, the tariff has not been set in stone but both the mainstream and the alternative media are now on fire with debates surrounding the efficacy, dangers, or benefits of protective tariffs and “protectionism.” Yet much of the hysteria over tariffs coming from both mainstream and alternative media outlets is nothing more than the propaganda of globalization and “Free Trade” that has been drilled into the heads of Americans for years by government, international corporations, Wall Street, the mainstream media, and a host of questionable “think tanks” and organizations so that they will accept lower living standards, lower wages, and the domination of society by corporate oligarchs.

While the question of illegal immigration and border walls are an important one – it is also important to maintain a proper understanding of tariffs, protectionism, Free Trade, and the risks and benefits of these policies in the real world.

The truth is that America desperately needs a shift away from globalization and Free Trade in favor of Protectionism and a real national economy based on high wages, high-skills, and production. The hysteria from both the alternative and mainstream media is thus greatly misplaced and based on misinformation.

The anti-Tariff argument generally goes something like this: If the U.S. imposes a tariff on imports coming from Mexico, then the companies making those products will have to raise prices of the goods they are selling inside the U.S. to pay for the tariff. This, opponents argue, is actually a form of taxation on the American people since they will have to pay more for goods shipped from Mexico.

Most of the individuals arguing against the proposed Mexico tariff, however, oppose all tariffs, suggesting that protectionism and tariffs are dangerous to economies and have a history of being so. Yet this is not an argument so much against the new tariff, it is an ideology and one that has been promoted by finance oligarchs for quite a long time, particularly over the last forty years. Indeed, even going back to the 1500’s, the question of establishing a world hegemonic order based on Free Trade was discussed at the highest level of British aristocracy.

Yet, one need only look around the world today to see the results of Free Trade and globalization. The Western world, once the standard bearer for living standards, labor standards, and quality of life is now a shell of itself, with unemployment numbers the highest since the great depression, low wages all around, increasingly poor working conditions, and the general decline in the standard of living. The third world has absorbed these jobs but they fill their employment roles with slave labor, virtual slave labor, and bare subsistence living. In fact, living standards are no better than they were before and, in many cases, they are worse due to the fact that people are now worked to death as well as being subject to the pollution of the companies that have sought out their country for the lack of regulation.

In short, we have an example of economics based on low or no tariffs and, if tariff opponents are suggesting that Free Trade and globalization are the way to go, they need to be laughed out of the building. Forty years of their economic strategy has turned a country of high wages and the biggest middle class in world history into a nation of unemployed, struggling workers competing for minimum wage jobs amid a collapsing infrastructure, lower living standards, poorer health, and a food supply that scarcely resembles actual food. In other words, anti-tariff activists have their own results readily available to disprove anything they have to say.

Tariffs have always been generally positive and beneficial to national economies going all the way back to the English Corn Laws, the removal of which cause massive social upheaval and agricultural collapse and, conveniently, a flight to the cities where thousands and thousands of destitute, broke, and starving people had no choice but to compete for work in abysmal factories for extremely low wages and an early death. It was, no doubt, a nightmare for the vast majority of British people but it was also a Free Trader’s paradise.

Likewise, America’s economic glory days – the 1950s to the early 1960s – were based on a system of tariffs and protectionism, among other factors now considered taboo by Free Trade fetishists. In fact, it was the systematic dismantling of tariffs that gradually reduced the American work force over the ensuing decades before the “giant sucking sound” of NAFTA turned the job exodus up several notches. Indeed, the subsequent trade deals like CAFTA and the various bilateral deals with China and other “developing” countries have exacerbated the problem that much more, even making NAFTA pale in comparison.[1]

Tariffs are a necessary part of a healthy national economy and must be revived if anything resembling reasonable living standards are ever going to return to America.

So Trump’s plan to place Tariff’s on products coming in to the United States is a positive one. However, it is also much too small to effectively revive the American economy by itself. With so many interweaving trade pacts having been signed over the last three decades, a 20% tariff on goods coming in from Mexico might not necessarily bring jobs back to the U.S. In fact, it might only make these companies shift production from Mexico to some other South American sweatshop country. The reality is that the Trump administration needs to implement a much larger tariff that will affect more countries than Mexico. We need an across-the-board tariff that applies to all imports, with the exception of goods that cannot be produced adequately at home. 20% is a good starting point and could be adjusted up or down depending on specific goods.

Either way, the United States has to make it clear that it is going to be vastly more expensive for companies to produce items outside the country and ship it in than it is for them to produce the same material inside America’s borders.

But anti-protectionists doth always protest too much. They respond by arguing that producing goods in the United States will drive costs of those products up and actually make a bad situation worse for most Americans. Being completely honest, we must admit that their fears are not completely without merit. Labor costs and regulations are higher in the United States for sure. That is part of the reason that major corporations have been moving overseas for years – i.e. to take advantage of legalized rape and pillage of the environment and workers in less developed nations. For that reason, an argument for further globalization and Free Trade is essentially an argument supporting the exploitation of the poor and working class. One can hide the fact in political language or dress it up as anarchy or based on the concept of freedom and choice all he likes, but it is still clear support of exploitation nonetheless.

To the question of higher prices, it is important to point out that the predictions of scorched fields and cities full of despondent shoppers hopelessly looking through storefront windows at plastic gadgets they can no longer afford to buy is nothing more than a scare tactic. Before the concept of Free Trade took was forced down America’s throat (despite the opposition of the American people), America produced its own goods in America and everything was just fine. In fact, they were much better economically speaking than they are today. We did it once so why can’t we do it again?

Arguing that prices must go up is also disingenuous. Corporate boards and CEOs always have the option of making $8 million a year as opposed to $9 million. Of course, we must allow reality to set in and realize that, for corporate fat cats and Wall Street, making less is never an option. This is precisely why tariffs are indispensable.

To be clear, the imposition of protective tariffs must not only be across- the-board, it should be accompanied by other policies designed to raise the standard of living such as increasing the abysmally low minimum wage to that of a living wage. A nation of full of minimum wage jobs is not the version of the American economy that anyone other than corporate overlords want to see. Americans need higher wages and greater skills, many of which have dissipated after nearly three decades of bouncing from one retail and service job to another.

The U.S. Federal government, through a nationalized (or at least partially nationalized) Federal Reserve offering credit stimulus and no-interest loans, must begin retraining and preparing a new generation of Americans to get back to work and get the economy going again, this time in a more environmentally friendly manner with new technology and greater awareness of dangers posed to the environment, animals, and human health. The minimum wage must be raised.

America’s economic glory years were built by a policy of high wages, high skills, and protectionism. Abandoning those policies was an act of foolishness by some and an act of treachery and treason by others. It is high time we began to reverse the policy of shipping American jobs overseas so that they can be manned by impoverished peasants. Decades of globalism and Free Trade have collapsed the Western world from within, America in particular, and has wasted the lives of millions of people in the developing world. Let the corporations and bankers scream as loud as they want. Let mainstream and yes, even alternative media outlets predict the end of the world. But Free Trade has had its time and that time needs to end now.

[PatColo]

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QYJR-_ZxOao/hqdefault.jpg?custom=true&w=336&h=188&stc=true&jpg444=true&jpgq=90&sp=68&sigh=SQa_WZINEGLRbaycOlWBPWgS3Tg
28:14 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYJR-_ZxOao)
Exclusive: Ron Paul Says Trump Is Trying To Stop Global Collapse (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYJR-_ZxOao)The Alex Jones Channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel)


3 days ago
301,424 views


Alex Jones talks with Ron Paul about how he feels about Donald Trump and what he's accomplished so far as President of the ...


New

[Horn]

What would have happened naturally due to Fed policy is laid at the foot and result of Trump's decisions.

Like hoarder has noted, setup to make white men look foolish.