The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: Who writes the contract fine print?

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: See my below comments... (see in situ)

Who writes the contract fine print?

Banks have always enjoyed a privileged position because they were capable of accepting deposits and loaning them to Kings and other royalty.

Go back to the beginning of banking when early bankers were goldsmiths who warehoused gold for people and issued warehouse receipts to the owners. As the system developed, these receipts were exchanged between people rather than the actual gold being exchanged. At some point in history some King wanted to wage a war for which he needed gold and since he made laws by edict, he made a law that it was legal for goldsmiths to create receipts for gold they didn't have, and loan them out. This was the origin of fractional reserve banking because the reserve held as gold was only a fraction of the receipts that claimed the gold. You don't need a central bank to have a fractional reserve banking system, although it makes it function more smoothly when multiple banks are involved; what makes it a fractional reserve system is that there are more claims outstanding that the reserve to be claimed.

Essentially the collusion between the King and the bankers was a fraud committed on the original owners of the gold. Today, this fraud continues to be legalized, and people who out of necessity to operate must have bank accounts have no other choice but to be exposed to this fraud, else they can't practically operate either a business or their personal lives. The fact that they use bank accounts because they really don't have a choice as government and bankers continue to agree on this system of mutual convenience does not change the criminal nature of the system.

It is an absurdity mental contortion to say it is not a fraud since people "freely" enter into contracts with banks.

And how do you explain in moral terms, the consequences of this system to innocent bystanders who suffer the consequences of price changes, boom and bust that the system produces? Are they not deprived of some of their wealth as a consequences of economic effect on prices and booms and busts that come from expansion and contraction of bank credit. Isn't the reality that this fractional reserve system exists for the benefit of bankers who collect interest and spendthrift rulers, governments, and politicians who use bank credit to fund all sorts of foolishness that taxpayers naturally would rebel against were they taxed directly instead of indirectly from inflation of credit.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.